Canadian Government Freezing Hockey Canada Funding- (2018 Canada World Jr Team Alleged Sexual Assault)

[Masked]

If the bolded is true then you have a case to be made. I haven't seen a shred of proof that this is the case. Why are you telling me what happened when there's no evidence of this?

I think that poster is just hoping to be sued like Brian Burke did to people who slandered him online back in the day.

Assen na yo!

 

[Skip To My Lou]

Kind of sickening thread. It’s almost like people are dying for the kids to be guilty

Pretty much the world we live in these days.

 

[Cloned]

So there are 9 players who have put out either no statement or vague statements?

Seems odd that the one who may not have been involved hasn’t put out a definitive statement yet.

 

[bert]

If the bolded is true then you have a case to be made. I haven't seen a shred of proof that this is the case. Why are you telling me what happened when there's no evidence of this?

He keeps claiming things happened that have not been confirmed. It's absolutely pathetic. Imagine needing to falsely accuse someone to appease your own moral superiority.

 

[MXD]

Innocent until proven guilty is for the court of law, not the court of public opinion.

And it's only the criminal court of law anyways, and there doesn't seem to be any criminal proceedings on the way.

 

[A1LeafNation]

Sure but how is Dube’s and the group of 6 with the Wasserman Hockey statements any more convincing?

They aren't.

 

[Jeune Poulet]

We are now picking and choosing which vague statements which we believe becuase there have been too many. What an absolute mess some are making becuase they need answers immediately.

I haven't seen people do that.

What I have seen is people read and share different players' statements. They read them carefully to figure out what they mean.

If some of those statements are too vague, it's not on us. And just expressing that the statement is not clear enough in no way indicts a player.

The players are in no way obligated to release these statements, BTW. It's their choice (and their representatives) to share information with the public and their fans or not.

We on the other hand don't have the obligation to take extremely vague statements and find them satisfactory.

 

[SquidNasty]

The first video is six seconds and was filmed at 3:25 a.m. during the incident, Kaleigh Davidson, a lawyer working for the players, said in an interview with TSN on Sunday.

The exchange is as follows:

“You’re okay with this?” an unidentified man asks the woman, who is shown from her neck up in the video.

“I’m okay with this,” she responds.

The second video is 12 seconds and was filmed at 4:26 a.m., after the incident, Davidson said. The woman stands with a towel covering her chest.

“Are you recording me?” the woman said on the video. “Okay, good. It was all consensual. You are so paranoid. Holy. I enjoyed it. It was fine. It was all consensual. I am so sober, that’s why I can’t do this right now.”

What do you guys make of this? hard to get a read on it.


“Did u go to the police after Sunday?” the player wrote at 11:26 a.m.

“I talked to my mom about it and she called I think but I told her not to. I don’t want anything bad to come of it so I told her to stop,” the woman wrote at 11:53 a.m.

“You said you were having fun??” the player wrote at 11:55 a.m.

“I was really drunk, didn’t feel good about it at all after. But I’m not trying to get anyone in trouble, I know I was in the wrong too,” the woman wrote at 11:58 a.m.

“I was ok with going home with you, it was everyone else afterwards that I wasn’t expecting. I just felt like I was being made fun of and taken advantage of,” the woman wrote at 12:04 p.m.

“I understand that you are embarrassed about what happened. But you need to talk to your mother right now and straighten things out with the police before this goes to [sic] far. This is a serious matter that she is mis [sic] representing and could have significant implications for a lot of people including you,” the player wrote at 12:06 p.m.

“What can you do to make this go away?” he wrote at 12:06 p.m.

“Ya I understand that, I’m not trying to push this any farther,” she responded at 12:07 p.m.

“I’m sorry for any trouble it might have already caused,” she wrote at 12:07 p.m.

“Ok so can you please figure out how to make this go away and contact the police,” the player wrote at 12:09 p.m.

After several messages asking if she had gone to police, the player texted again at 2:14 p.m.: “I appreciate that your [sic] going to put an end to this I know this must not be easy for you to have to call the police and say this was a mistake. have you thought about what you are going to say to them?”

“Told them I’m not going to pursue it any father and that it was a mistake. You should be good now so hopefully nothing more comes of it. Sorry again,” the woman wrote at 7:14 p.m.

“I appreciate you telling the truth. Thank you all the best,” the player wrote in his final text message at 7:40 p.m.


This text thread is pretty gross. Having a hard time understanding why they would release it to press when it makes them look even worse then they already do.

 

[PostBradMalone]

It's really something to behold. Some serious moral superiority being pushed.

I generally hope to have greater moral fibre than a rapist or group of rapists, yes. Do you not?

 

[Korpse]

I haven't seen people do that.

What I have seen is people read and share different players' statements. They read them carefully to figure out what they mean.

If some of those statements are too vague, it's not on us. And just expressing that the statement is not clear enough in no way indicts a player.

The players are in no way obligated to release these statements, BTW. It's their choice (and their representatives) to share information with the public and their fans or not.

We on the other hand don't have the obligation to take extremely vague statements and find them satisfactory.

Read the statement from Dube’s representative and Wasserman Hockey and tell me those aren’t vague.

They aren't.

Okay back to the point of people subjectively choosing which statements to believe.

 

[A1LeafNation]

Read the statement from Dube and Wasserman Hockey and tell me those aren’t vague.



Okay back to the point of people subjectively choosing which statements to believe.

Who has taken the Wasserman statements as a denial of the events? It's not subjective at all.

 

[PanniniClaus]

There is one ring leader here.. and a pile of players not covering themselves in glory.

And what a warm and fuzzy feeling we are all left with to know hockey Canada has a fund stashed away for all this. Like the Catholic Church...

 

[pcruz]

Hockey Canada admitting what they did, the Prime Minister and government with holding funds, settlements being paid off...

Think is being kind here.

Jonny Depp nearly lost s career after being s golden boy of Hollywood.

Turns out he wasn't the scumbag in that relationship at all.

There is a reason we don't pre-judge events and/or people. We're likely not privy to the information.

Until someone is convicted, all we have are alleged accusations that didn't even merit the victim or her lawyers going to court in order to have the truth come out - or at least names.

 

[iCanada]

The first video is six seconds and was filmed at 3:25 a.m. during the incident, Kaleigh Davidson, a lawyer working for the players, said in an interview with TSN on Sunday.

The exchange is as follows:

“You’re okay with this?” an unidentified man asks the woman, who is shown from her neck up in the video.

“I’m okay with this,” she responds.

The second video is 12 seconds and was filmed at 4:26 a.m., after the incident, Davidson said. The woman stands with a towel covering her chest.

“Are you recording me?” the woman said on the video. “Okay, good. It was all consensual. You are so paranoid. Holy. I enjoyed it. It was fine. It was all consensual. I am so sober, that’s why I can’t do this right now.”

What do you guys make of this? hard to get a read on it.


“Did u go to the police after Sunday?” the player wrote at 11:26 a.m.

“I talked to my mom about it and she called I think but I told her not to. I don’t want anything bad to come of it so I told her to stop,” the woman wrote at 11:53 a.m.

“You said you were having fun??” the player wrote at 11:55 a.m.

“I was really drunk, didn’t feel good about it at all after. But I’m not trying to get anyone in trouble, I know I was in the wrong too,” the woman wrote at 11:58 a.m.

“I was ok with going home with you, it was everyone else afterwards that I wasn’t expecting. I just felt like I was being made fun of and taken advantage of,” the woman wrote at 12:04 p.m.

“I understand that you are embarrassed about what happened. But you need to talk to your mother right now and straighten things out with the police before this goes to [sic] far. This is a serious matter that she is mis [sic] representing and could have significant implications for a lot of people including you,” the player wrote at 12:06 p.m.

“What can you do to make this go away?” he wrote at 12:06 p.m.

“Ya I understand that, I’m not trying to push this any farther,” she responded at 12:07 p.m.

“I’m sorry for any trouble it might have already caused,” she wrote at 12:07 p.m.

“Ok so can you please figure out how to make this go away and contact the police,” the player wrote at 12:09 p.m.

After several messages asking if she had gone to police, the player texted again at 2:14 p.m.: “I appreciate that your [sic] going to put an end to this I know this must not be easy for you to have to call the police and say this was a mistake. have you thought about what you are going to say to them?”

“Told them I’m not going to pursue it any father and that it was a mistake. You should be good now so hopefully nothing more comes of it. Sorry again,” the woman wrote at 7:14 p.m.

“I appreciate you telling the truth. Thank you all the best,” the player wrote in his final text message at 7:40 p.m.


This text thread is pretty gross. Having a hard time understanding why they would release it to press when it makes them look even worse then they already do.

It's an intimidation tactic.

 

[MBH]

It's really something to behold. Some serious moral superiority being pushed.

That's what hockey fans are now.
They're trained to react to the allegation as if it's true.
The more hideous the more allegation - the less need there is to consider it objectively.
We saw this with DeAngelo.

 

[Jeune Poulet]

He keeps claiming things happened that have not been confirmed. It's absolutely pathetic. Imagine needing to falsely accuse someone to appease your own moral superiority.

I haven't "falsely accused" anyone.

The victim, identified as E.M. made the accusations. Evidence was collected. And ultimately she was generously compensated by Hockey Canada for the pain and suffering she endured. I have no reason to doubt the events as she recounted them. Neither did Hockey Canada. Do you?

Now, since you like to caracterize me in each of your creepy posts, let's turn the tables now.

imagine needing to accuse a victim of lying and needing to constantly pretend nothing happened. You've done that repeatedly. You're certainly not doing that to appease your moral superiority, so why are you doing this? What are your motives? What do you have to gain? Please share that with us why you desperately want victims of sexual abuse to not be heard and believed. While you're at it, please share why you need to belittle people who support said victims.

 

[bert]

I generally hope to have greater moral fibre than a rapist or group of rapists, yes. Do you not?

I choose to see all the facts before I decide who is guilty and who isn't. I won't paint the entire group of people with the same brush until that happens. Implying that I have the moral fiber of a rapist tells me all I need to know about the person you are.

 

[MBH]

I haven't seen people do that.

What I have seen is people read and share different players' statements. They read them carefully to figure out what they mean.

If some of those statements are too vague, it's not on us. And just expressing that the statement is not clear enough in no way indicts a player.

The players are in no way obligated to release these statements, BTW. It's their choice (and their representatives) to share information with the public and their fans or not.

We on the other hand don't have the obligation to take extremely vague statements and find them satisfactory.

You're just making excuses to irresponsibly speculate about someone's innocence or guilt and dressing it up as something more than it is.

 

[Korpse]

Who has taken the Wasserman statements as a denial of the events? It's not subjective at all.

Here is one example. There have been continued attempts to narrow the list to 8 and the players on those lists are constantly evolving. Last night you yourself posted a list of 8 who had not publicly acknowledged the incident or made a statement. I understand that you were specific in stating they had not responded at that point in time and weren't malicious but thats not how it's perceived by everybody. Robert Thomas was on that list. On the last page there was a tweet linked from joe blow with another list of 8. It's commonly a list of 8 and who is on that list has been subjective.

Comtois, Batherson, Formenton, McLeod, and Howden have not replied to any request for comment according to Global News.

There are an additional three players who have given the barest of replies through their agents, none of which are exactly full-throated denials:

-Dube's rep issued a very vague statement about his client being "cleared" of "wrongdoing".
-Katchouk's rep was similarly vague, and said only he "fully cooperated" with the HC investigation.
-Steenbergen's rep flat out said he could "not comment".

What's 5 + 3? Well, you tell me.

 

[PostBradMalone]

I choose to see all the facts before I decide who is guilty and who isn't. I won't paint the entire group of people with the same brush until that happens.

Except you didn’t do that, and instead immediately sided with the accused over accuser. Good try though.

Implying that I have the moral fiber of a rapist tells me all I need to know about the person you are.

I was talking about the alleged crime that took place, but since you took that reading from what I posted, anything you want to confess to the class?

 

[Mobiandi]

I pray for the women in the lives of some of the users in this thread

 

[pcruz]

I haven't "falsely accused" anyone.

The victim, identified as E.M. made the accusations. Evidence was collected. And ultimately she was generously compensated by Hockey Canada for the pain and suffering she endured. I have no reason to doubt the events as she recounted them. Neither did Hockey Canada. Do you?

Now, since you like to caracterize me in each of your creepy posts, let's turn the tables now.

imagine needing to accuse a victim of lying and needing to constantly pretend nothing happened. You've done that repeatedly. You're certainly not doing that to appease your moral superiority, so why are you doing this? What are your motives? What do you have to gain? Please share that with us why you desperately want victims of sexual abuse to not be heard and believed. While you're at it, please share why you need to belittle people who support said victims.

Education on legal matters and precedent.

It's not victim blaming or shaming to wait until a case is resolved by conviction before claiming that the accusation was truthful.

Until then, there is only conjecture and unsubstantiated claims.

I can come here and accuse Trudeau of having fondled me inappropriately 6 years ago, provide no supporting evidence and some would take my accusation as verified fact.

It's not how the legal world works.
It's not how society should work.

Our Charter claims equal treatment under the law for all. It does not have a sub clause for inherent belief in a group over another with regards to any matter.

Our Charter also offers robust protection for individuals from false accusation and or false testimony. It's the basis for perjury.

Charter also lays out that we are all assumed not guilty of an action until proven guilty.
There are varying degrees if guilt needed to satisfy this clause depending on the allegation.

Beyond a reasonable doubt - for most civil cases.
Beyond all doubt - for serious criminal offenses.

 

[The Joker]

I mean. Isn't that what they were supposed to do? Asking for consent? They were and even recorded it. She clearly stated that she agreed to it? I don't understand why this is considered rape then?

If consent isn't enough anymore, what is?

 

[SoundwaveIsCharisma]

I mean. Isn't that what they were supposed to do? Asking for consent? They were and even recorded it. She clearly stated that she agreed to it? I don't understand why this is considered rape then?

If consent isn't enough anymore, what is?

Consent should be obtained before, not after. I’m in health care, if I give someone a pneumothorax by accident and then record them after going “you were good with that right?”…that’s not consent

 

[Korpse]

I mean. Isn't that what they were supposed to do? Asking for consent? They were and even recorded it. She clearly stated that she agreed to it? I don't understand why this is considered rape then?

If consent isn't enough anymore, what is?

Consent can withdrawn and coerced. It's a very thin line but recording a video after the fact isn't enough.