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

[Nut Upstrom]

Well apparently gangbangs are much more common than we think so it must be normal to tell your mom after one, or at least thats what certain posters in this thread have led me to believe

It really defies common sense but they refuse to see it.
However, if it weren't for "rational" people like them, this topic might have dwindled down to page two. They're disgusting or, more fairly, probably misguided, but they are helping to keep this discussion where it should be - up at the top of page 1.

 

[The Marquis]

Somewhere out there there's 8 hockey players shitting bricks wondering if they'll ever play again.

Somewhere out there is a woman who thought this was all over, only to have it all brought up again 4 years later.

I literally can't think of a winner anywhere in all this.

The winner is Rick Westhead.

 

[DueDiligence]

Obviously not, I only spew awful posts about women I don't know so that I can defend hockey bros that will never notice me!! If it was somebody close to me I'd support them 100%!!


I can't take some of you posters in this thread, it feels like I'm not talking to somebody that lives in the same society as me

Is that society the one that rushes to judgment without hearing all the facts? You can certainly sympathize with the victim and want to bring the guilty parties to justice but at the same time wait for due process before going on a witch hunt.

 

[H3ckt1k]

The winner is Rick Westhead.

The winner is the future would-be victims that hopefully arent victims due to a change in culture that starts with something like this coming to light. Its horrible for the victim to have this brought back into the public eye and have to go through the trauma once more, so at the very least this needs to be a turning point for Hockey Canada and hockey as a whole.

 

[Tyrus]

You're [mod] reaching at anything you can to try to paint this situation in a more positive light for your hockey players.

I don't have much care for those players, what I have is care for neutral due process in criminal proceedings and the way society takes part in it.

It has been four years since the incident. If the victim was into the group sex, gang bang life style the HC lawyers and investigators would have put that out there by now. I am sure they have investigated every corner of her life already.

The original post that lead to the one you quoted was an answer given to a poster who painted gang bangs/group sex as an inherently wrong and abnormal/reprehensible thing.

I'm not being obtuse, I'm stating clearly that :

1. Those things exist and, so long as they are consentual, it shouldn't matter how acceptable or not you personally find them when assessing guilt or innocence.

and

2. So long as concrete evidences aren't presented in a criminal case, the only acceptable position to adopt as a third party is a neutral one. One that is supportive of both side's right to a fair and unbiased trial, while refusing to fall prey to or encourage foregone conclusions.

You really should shut up or find another avenue to prove your boys did nothing wrong.

You should learn to respect others on discussion forums and have a civil discussion like an adult.

For the rest of your sentence, see above.

 

[Dan Patrick]

Neither is an “issue” because both invalidate actual consent. You cannot change the “terms of the deal” without the other party’s consent and you can’t force/coerce/manipulate them into providing it. This isn’t hard, but that so many people (men) here seem confused by this simple concept is frightening.




There is literally no difference.

I agree that both invalidate consent. But the video op posted was an attempt to teach people about consent while not actually teaching them anything that will help them understand this case.

As to the second point I think we can just agree to disagree. I think coercion is more nuanced and social (power structures) in nature while forced would be a more physical act. But again thats splitting hairs and I'm really alright if im proven wrong in my distinction.

 

[MXD]

I don't have much care for those players, what I have is care for neutral due process in criminal proceedings and the way society takes part in it.

We really, but really aren't there yet.

 

[The Marquis]

The winner is the future would-be victims that hopefully arent victims due to a change in culture that starts with something like this coming to light. Its horrible for the victim to have this brought back into the public eye and have to go through the trauma once more, so at the very least this needs to be a turning point for Hockey Canada and hockey as a whole.

If only that were the actual reason. If it were it would be playing out in courts of law rather than the court of public opinion. The victim here, regardless of the truth, certainly didn’t consent to the entirety of North America knowing about her having either had sex with or been raped by 8 dudes.

 

[MXD]

If only that were the actual reason. If it were it would be playing out in courts of law rather than the court of public opinion. The victim here, regardless of the truth, certainly didn’t consent to the entirety of North America knowing about her having either had sex with or been raped by 8 dudes.

Enlighten me as to how that case could've made it to the Courts...

 

[DueDiligence]

Some people will defend anyone or anything if they can rationalize to themselves that they are battling against SJWs or the "woke mob". The blinders these people choose to look through and the ferocity with which they defend disgusting people is really alarming. Its really pointless arguing or debating with them - you may think you are discussing the gang rape in question, but they are waging (in their minds) a far more righteous battle.

So asking for due process to be served and a thorough investigation of the situation before condemning people is now a "disgusting" thing? I want those who are guilty charged just I want those innocent exonerated.
I am surprised at the lynch mob mentality some of you people have.

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

I agree that both invalidate consent. But the video op posted was an attempt to teach people about consent while not actually teaching them anything that will help them understand this case.

As to the second point I think we can just agree to disagree. I think coercion is more nuanced and social (power structures) in nature while forced would be a more physical act. But again thats splitting hairs and I'm really alright if im proven wrong in my distinction.

people don’t understand consent in this thread, straight up.

 

[Tyrus]

We really, but really aren't there yet.

It's not like I don't understand the way they see things either.

Those crimes are heinous and disgusting, so they obviously make people very emotionally involved.

I don't harvest any ill will for those who speak from the heart on those issues, but it's just the sad reality of a fair society that there are times and places where the heart cannot be the sole lense with which to analyse situations.

 

[Evergreen]

So asking for due process to be served and a thorough investigation of the situation before condemning people is now a "disgusting" thing? I want those who are guilty charged just I want those innocent exonerated.
I am surprised at the lynch mob mentality some of you people have.

Nobody here has any desire to punish anyone who was innocent in this situation and nobody is condemning anyone in advance. But—as this case itself proves—sometimes public pressure is necessary to ensure an appropriate investigation is conducted and to achieve the most just result for all involved.

Due process applies to the victim as well. A proper investigation should have been performed years ago but it wasn’t. Only now that public outcry has brought the story to the mainstream is a more thorough investigation taking place. If it weren’t for this public outcry, the perpetrators would have successfully swept this under the rug and the victim would have had no hope for justice.

 

[Slurpeelover27]

The Bible recommends rapists be stoned to death.

These boys got off lightly.

They didn't just get off lightly. So far they got off scott free.

To me, this is the worst of many reprehensible parts. That those that are guilty can walk away with zero repercussions. And likely are emboldened to repeat their actions and allow others to feel they can get away with the same thing.

 

[The Marquis]

Enlighten me as to how that case could've made it to the Courts...

If it didn't make it to the courts, then it's done, right? The victim had the opportunity to by not accepting the settlement. Rick Westhead brought this back up. The victim did not. I'm saying if the victim felt it was resolved, that should have been respected. Sure, there are other things there that don't exactly involve the victim or the perpetrators. The conversation should be focused entirely on Hockey Canada and the CHL than about the victim, but here we are all talking about the resolved (legally) incident. I'm in no position to say what happened that night, but if there was a settlement, there was a settlement. Also, my reply was entirely about who won, and the only person who wins here is Rick Westhead and anybody else who gets paid from the clicks he generates and anybody down river from the story itself. Not to mention... a criminal case won't go to the court which is why the victim chose the civil route (possibly why, at least).

 

[BudBundy]

What an ugly situation. There are many shades of grey in this situation but here is what is absolutely cut and dried: gentlemen do not engage in group sex with a drunk teenage girl regardless of what they think she’s willing to do or wants to do. A girls judgement is highly likely to be impaired and young men need to be smart enough and have the integrity to recognize that and back away instead of taking advantage or, worse yet, actively coercing the victim. I have a young daughter and I pray nothing like this ever happens to her.

I have some sympathy for Hockey Canada. If the police were brought in right away to investigate and all parties, including an apparent victim request, that an out of court settlement is the most appropriate and least harmful, they’d be thugs if they didn’t settle.

What a mess. Young men, take heed.

 

[Sun God Nika]

Who has consensual sex with eight other people and goes home to tell mom in the morning?

It could have been consensual at the time and she regretted it and felt disgusting in the morning.

 

[DaveMatthew]

If it didn't make it to the courts, then it's done, right? The victim had the opportunity to by not accepting the settlement. Rick Westhead brought this back up. The victim did not. I'm saying if the victim felt it was resolved, that should have been respected. Sure, there are other things there that don't exactly involve the victim or the perpetrators. The conversation should be focused entirely on Hockey Canada and the CHL than about the victim, but here we are all talking about the resolved (legally) incident. I'm in no position to say what happened that night, but if there was a settlement, there was a settlement. Also, my reply was entirely about who won, and the only person who wins here is Rick Westhead and anybody else who gets paid from the clicks he generates and anybody down river from the story itself. Not to mention... a criminal case won't go to the court which is why the victim chose the civil route (possibly why, at least).

There are those in this thread who apparently know with absolute certainty what happened, what's best for the victim, and what resolution the victim seeks.

 

[Dan Patrick]

people don’t understand consent in this thread, straight up.

Well yeah, the majority of posters here are probably 40+, white, married, hetero dudes. I guess as far as that is concerned giving them a baseline is important but no one is going to watch that video and have any new insight into this case or why what the guys may or may not have done was inapropriate/wrong/illegal.

For the most part the internet is a vaccum without nuance and the reality of this situation is that (mostly because of missing details) it so far has a ton of nuance. People are going to bring their own judgements and opinions based on the sparce details we have and a lot of them are going to be shit takes. The news is also a bit culpable in this, likely along with some politicians as emotions drive clicks and votes.

Basically all this to say, I hope they either come to the conclusion that no provable wrongdoing took place or that if it is found that wrongdoings took place, the NDA is invalidated, the victim is given the chance to either speak their truth or not (but is left alone if not going public) but also that the perpetrators are named publicly and face severe punishment so that others understand that their actions will have consequences.

 

[Evergreen]

If it didn't make it to the courts, then it's done, right? The victim had the opportunity to by not accepting the settlement. Rick Westhead brought this back up. The victim did not. I'm saying if the victim felt it was resolved, that should have been respected. Sure, there are other things there that don't exactly involve the victim or the perpetrators. The conversation should be focused entirely on Hockey Canada and the CHL than about the victim, but here we are all talking about the resolved (legally) incident. I'm in no position to say what happened that night, but if there was a settlement, there was a settlement. Also, my reply was entirely about who won, and the only person who wins here is Rick Westhead and anybody else who gets paid from the clicks he generates and anybody down river from the story itself. Not to mention... a criminal case won't go to the court which is why the victim chose the civil route (possibly why, at least).

A settlement can only resolve a civil case, not a criminal case. This is because society generally has an interest in seeing criminals punished for their wrongdoing. If the victim chooses not to participate in the criminal investigation, that is her prerogative. And the investigation will likely be inconclusive without her participation. However, the settlement does not preclude her participation in the criminal investigation.

 

[KevinRedkey]

Just so understand the gist of it all...

Seems like she had sex with 1 guy consensually, right?
and then more guys joined in and essentially had a gangbang, and that's what's being contested, right?

Or do I have it wrong?

 

[Off Sides]

I am absolutely certain that even if this did not happen, the idea that it could happen and be covered up by paying out of a "special" fund with a NDA attached means something is very wrong with that even being possible.

 

[I am toxic]

Somewhere out there there's 8 hockey players shitting bricks wondering if they'll ever play again.

Somewhere out there is a woman who thought this was all over, only to have it all brought up again 4 years later.

I literally can't think of a winner anywhere in all this.

The lawyers are chortling.

 

[Craigo85]

Just so understand the gist of it all...

Seems like she had sex with 1 guy consensually, right?
and then more guys joined in and essentially had a gangbang, and that's what's being contested, right?

Or do I have it wrong?

You're correct.

it sounds like things have gone off the rails in this thread about alcohol/inability to consent if her civil filing acknowledged she consented to the first encounter.

 

[Tyrus]

I am absolutely certain that even if this did not happen, the idea that it could happen and be covered up by paying out of a "special" fund with a NDA attached means something is very wrong with that even being possible.

Yep, no amount of taxpayer money should ever be used as hush money to settle potential criminal lawsuits out of court.

In a perfect world, Hockey Canada would be given no further funding until they are prevented from doing so ever again.