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

[RoadWarrior]

Settlements are paid a lot in business disputes where both sides realize there is some ambiguity involved and that it would be expensive and time-consuming to litigate for an uncertain outcome.

Paying out big dollar hush money in response to allegations that an organization believes are senseless is not common.

You're confusing arbitration with settlements.

Arbitration is common in cases of ambiguity. There wasn't much ambiguity here. An incident happened involving 1 girl and 8 players. The video suggests it was consensual although it has no legal validation.

Only after telling her parents did the police get involved. However the police found nothing to justify criminal charges. Apparently the girl told police it was consensual and was consistent in that regard.

Despite that the parents threatened a civil lawsuit. Once civil litigation is threatened the expectation of a settlement is understood by all parties. It's not a business dispute over widgets. It's hush money in exchange for an NDA not because there was a criminal act but to save $$ in litigation and keep it away from online trolls.

 

[Zippy316]

Trying to keep up with the thread but it seems like all the info is moving to fast.

Where is the allegation from that it was consensual between her and one of the players and then multiple players joined in?

 

[Tyrus]

However the police found nothing to justify criminal charges. Apparently the girl told police it was consensual and was consistent in that regard.

That's a pretty major claim to make, do we have any valid source for that information? IE official reports from authorities or other credible neutral sources.

 

[HockeyMomx2]

Could someone give some empirical evidence that women get drunk, consent and then feel regret in the morning and decide to make a rape accusation and involve the police?

This. Does. Not. Happen.

Ridiculous bullshit narrative that needs to die.

It's worse. Usually they don't involve the police. This response above is exactly why. We know we aren't going to be believed before we even open our mouths.

 

[MarkusKetterer]

If the IIHF wasn't spineless, one idea would be that they'd ban Canada from all competitions until this matter is appropriately dealt with. After all, they were quick to kick Russia out for their government's invasion of a neighboring state. That would get the public to demand real action VERY quickly.

I dunno where you live, but here in Canada we already have demanded action.

 

[WarriorofTime]

You're confusing arbitration with settlements.

Arbitration is common in cases of ambiguity. There wasn't much ambiguity here. An incident happened involving 1 girl and 8 players. The video suggests it was consensual although it has no legal validation.

Only after telling her parents did the police get involved. However the police found nothing to justify criminal charges. Apparently the girl told police it was consensual and was consistent in that regard.

Despite that the parents threatened a civil lawsuit. Once civil litigation is threatened the expectation of a settlement is understood by all parties. It's not a business dispute over widgets. It's hush money in exchange for an NDA not because there was a criminal act but to save $$ in litigation and keep it away from online trolls.

Frivolous civil litigation gets tossed out all the time. Companies are not in the habit of settling with anybody who can muster up the paperwork to file a claim, it creates a bad messaging that they are open season for anyone that can remotely string a couple of fake allegations out there. This is the type of thing you deny with all ferocity and commit yourself to fighting if you do not believe it is true. This isn't a question of whether proper performance was delivered under a servicing contract when a customer doesn't pay.

 

[RoadWarrior]

That's a pretty major claim to make, do we have any valid source for that information? IE official reports from authorities or other credible neutral sources.

I've heard that reported verbally. According to sources they're saying she had regrets but acknowledged it was consensual in text messages.

Again regrets does not mean a lack of consent at the time.

I have to give police the benefit of the doubt here although I will acknowledge that they are very capable of bias.

I think her parents and perhaps others are judging the players sexual conduct outside the issue of consent.

If this was a consensual act even if the players were dressed as furries or in space alien costumes speaking in tongues it was not a criminal act.

Crime must include a victim. No victim. No crime. It may be frowned upon but it's not criminal to deviate from societal norms.

 

[Tyrus]

It's worse. Usually they don't involve the police. This response above is exactly why. We know we aren't going to be believed before we even open our mouths.

The role of legal authorities isn't to believe people, it's to investigate the claims of all parties involved with as much neutrality as possible to determine if criminal events took place.

In the case of possibly traumatic events being reported, authorities should put plaintiffs in contact with third party agencies that can offer them all the mental support they might require during and possibly after the proceedings (which, in my opinion, should be free of charge).

It's fairly self-evident why an investigating body cannot pick a side over another in an investigation involving multiple parties.

Justice should be a neutral entity that serves objective truth.

 

[StrictlyCommercial]

So after reading that article it seems so far these players haven’t had any comment yet.

Formenton
Comtois
Batherson
Steenbergen
Mcloed
Howden.

I wouldn't shorten the list that much. Quite a few statements have been pretty ambiguous (e.g. my client did nothing wrong). I would only exclude the outright rejections like Mete, Makar and Gadjovich.

 

[PostBradMalone]

I've heard that reported verbally. According to sources they're saying she had regrets but acknowledged it was consensual in text messages.

Again regrets does not mean a lack of consent at the time.

Again, please post a source that says exactly what you are suggesting. Shouldn't be hard if you're acknowledging them, no?

 

[Tyrus]

I've heard that reported verbally. According to sources they're saying she had regrets but acknowledged it was consensual in text messages.

Again regrets does not mean a lack of consent at the time.

I have to give police the benefit of the doubt here although I will acknowledge that they are very capable of bias.

I think her parents and perhaps others are judging the players sexual conduct outside the issue of consent.

If this was a consensual act even if the players were dressed as furries or in space alien costumes speaking in tongues it was not a criminal act.

Crime must include a victim. No victim. No crime. It may be frowned upon but it's not criminal to deviate from societal norms.

Yeah, unless official police reports or other credible sources are presented (and they should hopefully exist if the police were involved at any point), I think it's better to consider those allegations unfounded.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I've heard that reported verbally. According to sources they're saying she had regrets but acknowledged it was consensual in text messages.

Again regrets does not mean a lack of consent at the time.

I have to give police the benefit of the doubt here although I will acknowledge that they are very capable of bias.

I think her parents and perhaps others are judging the players sexual conduct outside the issue of consent.

If this was a consensual act even if the players were dressed as furries or in space alien costumes speaking in tongues it was not a criminal act.

Crime must include a victim. No victim. No crime. It may be frowned upon but it's not criminal to deviate from societal norms.

Please cite. I have not heard anywhere that the Victim told Police that it was consensual. This is a very serious claim you are making. "I've heard that reported verbally" sounds like something you just made up to me.

 

[HSF]

this seems like a case that will be hard to prove

 

[Paper]

You're confusing arbitration with settlements.

Arbitration is common in cases of ambiguity. There wasn't much ambiguity here. An incident happened involving 1 girl and 8 players. The video suggests it was consensual although it has no legal validation.

Only after telling her parents did the police get involved. However the police found nothing to justify criminal charges. Apparently the girl told police it was consensual and was consistent in that regard.

Despite that the parents threatened a civil lawsuit. Once civil litigation is threatened the expectation of a settlement is understood by all parties. It's not a business dispute over widgets. It's hush money in exchange for an NDA not because there was a criminal act but to save $$ in litigation and keep it away from online trolls.

Man you could have just saved us time by saying you have no idea what you’re talking about at top.

Hockey Canada settled because of the lawsuit the victim filed. Not the parents threatening them with one. I mean the victim was an adult so the parents have nothing to do with this at all other than trying to protect their daughter by going to the police.

 

[DaveMatthew]

Please cite. I have not heard anywhere that the Victim told Police that it was consensual. This is a very serious claim you are making. "I've heard that reported verbally" sounds like something you just made up to me.

From the reports that we have, it doesn't sound like the victim told the police anything. The chain of events that's been reported here indicates:

- The victim told her mom about what took place
- The victim's mom reported it to police
- The player asked the victim whether she had reported it to police
- The victim told the player that it was her mom who went to police, after she told her not to
- The victim told the player that she had contacted police and told them that it was a mistake and she does not want to pursue the matter

The only way to find out exactly what she told her mom, why she then retracted, and if/how the player caught wind of the report, is to interview the victim and players. And that's what the NHL investigators plan to do in the coming days.

Nobody needs to be making assumptions. There could be two very different scenarios, for example, and both are possible:

1) The player proactively reaches out to the victim to ask her if she's going to police in a bid to try and silence her
2) The mom of the victim goes to police, police reach out to Hockey Canada and tell them a complaint was made about an incident at their event that they need to investigate, word trickles down to the player, and the player reaches out and asks why the victim went to police when everyone thought everyone was having "fun".

The first would indicate that the player knew they had committed a crime and were trying to cover their tracks. The second wouldn't.

 

[goonybird]

I wouldn't shorten the list that much. Quite a few statements have been pretty ambiguous (e.g. my client did nothing wrong). I would only exclude the outright rejections like Mete, Makar and Gadjovich.

yea the statement by Dube is worse than saying nothing at all lmao

 

[Paper]

Please cite. I have not heard anywhere that the Victim told Police that it was consensual. This is a very serious claim you are making. "I've heard that reported verbally" sounds like something you just made up to me.

The guy also thinks that parents threatening to sue on behalf of their adult daughter was a thing. He’s clearly not someone who’s informed on anything.

 

[K1984]

The outrage over the liability account is way overblown. Literally every organization this size (and most much smaller) carry uninsured liability funds. It's standard business and they would be stupid not to create and carry one. And no shit it is built from registration fees - skimming off a slice of revenue to set aside is how they are built, can't really think how it could be done otherwise.

The jargon about it being specifically for sexual assault cases is just that - jargon. It's just a fund that is used to pay for liabilities big and small, it isn't a coverup conspiracy that some are trying to make it. Rick Westhead to his credit basically said this on SportsCentre last night, but unfortunately that isn't reflected in the Globe and Mail reporting.

 

[DaveMatthew]

The outrage over the liability account is way overblown. Literally every organization this size (and most much smaller) carry uninsured liability funds. It's standard business and they would be stupid not to carry one.

The jargon about it being specifically for sexual assault cases is just that - jargon. It's just a fund that is used to pay for liabilities big and small, it isn't a coverup conspiracy that some are trying to make it. Rick Westhead to his credit basically said this on SportsCentre last night, but unfortunately that isn't reflected in the Globe and Mail reporting.

It's the most bizarre thing to be outraged about.

The fact that Hockey Canada didn't follow through with a comprehensive investigation after they received the complaint? Absolutely that deserves outrage.

The fact that they didn't take any proactive steps to try and ensure situations like this didn't happen in the future? Outrage, for sure.

But people seem to be so hung up on the fact that there was a liability fund, and want answers about how it was funded? That's odd.

 

[K1984]

It's the most bizarre thing to be outraged about.

The fact that Hockey Canada didn't follow through with a comprehensive investigation after they received the complaint? Absolutely that deserves outrage.

The fact that they didn't take any proactive steps to try and ensure situations like this didn't happen in the future? Outrage, for sure.

But people seem to be so hung up on the fact that there was a liability fund, and want answers about how it was funded? That's odd.

It's because people don't understand that this is standard practice for organizations and they way it was reported made it sound like it was built as a hush fund. Our dumb Prime Minister didn't help yesterday when he threw gas on the flames (in reference to a question about this fund).

I manage a much, much smaller organization than this and even we have a fund built for unforeseen liabilities that arise from time to time that our insurance company won't cover whether it is a sex assault lawsuit settlement or a trip and fall. It's just a thing companies do.

 

[CostPerRebuild]

It's the most bizarre thing to be outraged about.

The fact that Hockey Canada didn't follow through with a comprehensive investigation after they received the complaint? Absolutely that deserves outrage.

The fact that they didn't take any proactive steps to try and ensure situations like this didn't happen in the future? Outrage, for sure.

But people seem to be so hung up on the fact that there was a liability fund, and want answers about how it was funded? That's odd.

Because that implies that it's business as usual, its has its own budget item line just like paper or printer toner.
It takes it up to another level.

 

[DaveMatthew]

Because that implies that it's business as usual, its has its own budget item line just like paper or printer toner.
It takes it up to another level.

Maintaining a general liability fund is "business as usual", just like a line item for paper or printer toner.

That is the case at every organization.

 

[Deuce22]

1. There is a huge difference between what is morally right and what is criminal.
2. An agent putting out a statement of innocence proves nothing, just as a player staying silent proves nothing either.
3. The culture we should be condemning is one of entitlement (whether in hockey or elsewhere).
4. The main question here is how much of a burden of proof should be required in order to assign blame and punishment. Unless one of the players rats the others out, it will be difficult to know what really happened.

 

[red devil]

 

[Tyrus]

4. The main question here is how much of a burden of proof should be required in order to assign blame and punishment. Unless one of the players rats the others out, it will be difficult to know what really happened.

Beyond any reasonable doubt, which in this case likely means the case will go nowhere unless multiple witnesses testify the same incriminating accounts of the events.