Confirmed with Link: Carter Hart Officially Charged With One Count Of Sexual Assault (Per His Lawyers); Non-roster, salary cap info in OP

[hockeynormy]

So let's just say all parties are found guilty for the sake of this question, is it more likely that the players will be suspended, or terminated from the nhl?

is this a serious question? contracts will be terminated. it's unknown if there will be an nhl ban.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

So let's just say all parties are found guilty for the sake of this question, is it more likely that the players will be suspended, or terminated from the nhl?

Neither.

All of their contracts end at the conclusion of this season. They're not going to have a trial by then so they'll just sit as free agents.

 

[dragonoffrost]

Neither.

All of their contracts end at the conclusion of this season. They're not going to have a trial by then so they'll just sit as free agents.

The NHL can stop teams from signing them until some things are done though.

 

[Kelmitchell2]

Neither.

All of their contracts end at the conclusion of this season. They're not going to have a trial by then so they'll just sit as free agents.

So if innocent do the teams keep the rights on said players?

is this a serious question? contracts will be terminated. it's unknown if there will be an nhl ban.

Yes that was a serious question, other sports have done suspensions for things like this and some have done terminations

 

[BernieParent]

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

So if innocent do the teams keep the rights on said players?


Yes that was a serious question, other sports have done suspensions for things like this and some have done terminations

They won’t have their rights. They’ll just be unrestricted free agents.

The only way they’ll keep their rights is if they’re under contract and I don’t think anyone is offering them anything in the meantime.

 

[BillDineen]

McLeod JD n.1?

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

McLeod JD n.1?

Looks that way.

 

[BackToTheBrierePatch]

There is an astounding amount of lawyers in this thread. But a total lack of dentists.

I’m not a lawyer or a dentist. But I did sleep at a Holiday Express Inn last night

 

[BackToTheBrierePatch]

So let's just say all parties are found guilty for the sake of this question, is it more likely that the players will be suspended, or terminated from the nhl?

They will all have to find work overseas. No team is going to come near them. That is not collusion. That is making a business decision from a family friendly perspective. The backlash would not be pleasant

 

[mercury]

You have repeatedly stated we must presume they are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. What do you think that means? Why are you only applying it to sex criminals?

Where?

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

 

[Magua]

Inherit the Wind has nothing on the wind we’re inheriting in this thread.

 

[BackToTheBrierePatch]

Hypothetically if they are found not guilty the league I suppose could say they can play in the NHL but I seriously doubt any team would come near them. They would sign a similar player instead that doesn’t come with controversy.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

This is taking me back to the glory days of another board, where a poster once threatened to sue himself. Those were good times.

This is not.

 

[Embiid]

I thought the proper "forum" was HFBoards....????

Pfft ...My Cousin Vinny legal team.

 

[mr figgles]

Hypothetically if they are found not guilty the league I suppose could say they can play in the NHL but I seriously doubt any team would come near them. They would sign a similar player instead that doesn’t come with controversy.

None of these guys are really worth the PR nightmare, except Hart, and we have seen how much the guilt has affected his play over the years. Could you imagine how his play will be affected when he’s being jeered for being a rapist? Not to mention these guys aren’t even going to be playing for a while.

Ultimately, the NHL doesn’t even need to ban them. Even if some GM thought about signing them, there’s plenty of owners, presidents, coaches, players, and media people that are going to make sure it doesn’t happen.

 

[TheKingPin]

What are the proper terms you'd like used so that we can suit your needs?

Pretty sure it’s gang rape

 

[Amorgus]

Pretty sure it’s gang rape

Is that what the commoners are calling it?

 

[FlyerNutter]

None of these guys are really worth the PR nightmare, except Hart, and we have seen how much the guilt has affected his play over the years. Could you imagine how his play will be affected when he’s being jeered for being a rapist? Not to mention these guys aren’t even going to be playing for a while.

Ultimately, the NHL doesn’t even need to ban them. Even if some GM thought about signing them, there’s plenty of owners, presidents, coaches, players, and media people that are going to make sure it doesn’t happen.

Comcast, even if bending over to touch their toes for the alumni - won’t allow him to wear the jersey again. Maybe if he comes out with an innocent verdict I guess.

Optics are the primary concern of the Flyer ownership.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

In truth, I'm not sure how they are going to get a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.

It's he-said/she-said.

Unless there is evidence we are unaware of, such as video.

Or if there is damning testimony from a non-charged witness.

Or if the players come off as liars while the victim comes off as extremely credible.

 

[GKJ]

 

[Beef Invictus]

In truth, I'm not sure how they are going to get a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.

It's he-said/she-said.

Unless there is evidence we are unaware of, such as video.

Or if there is damning testimony from a non-charged witness.

Or if the players come off as liars while the victim comes off as extremely credible.

There were more than five players involved; there are witnesses. That's the insane and most damning thing. It's not going to be the usual he-said-she-said.

I've been wondering if everyone is aware of that lately.

 

[flyersnorth]

Part of the article ---

E.M. alleges that she agreed to leave a London bar and have consensual sex with one of the players. She alleges that after they were done, the player secretly texted World Junior teammates and invited them to come to his hotel room to also have sex with her. E.M. alleges that she was then sexually assaulted for hours and that the players forced her to record two cellphone videos saying that she had consented to the sexual activity(opens in a new tab).

The first video is six seconds long and was filmed at 3:25 a.m. during the incident, Kaleigh Davidson, a lawyer working for the players, told TSN in 2022.

In that video, E.M., shown from her neck up, was asked, “You’re okay with this?” by an unidentified man, and she answered, “I’m okay with this.”

In another 12-second video which Davidson said was filmed at 4:26 a.m. after the incident, the woman was shown standing with a towel covering her chest.

“Are you recording me?” she 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.”

The videos are critical evidence, said Andrew Furgiuele, a Toronto defence lawyer who represented former Soo Greyhounds player Andrew Fritsch when he was charged with sexual assault in 2012. (Charges against Fritsch and two other players were dropped before trial.)

“I expect the Crown to argue that the woman was coerced to make the videos,” Furgiuele said. “When you hear her say, ‘I am so sober, that’s why I can’t do this right now,’ that is an odd thing for someone to say and the defence are going to have to address that. The defence will also argue that the video is clear evidence from that moment that shows there was consent.”

According to Canadian law, an unconscious person cannot consent to sexual activity, and neither can someone who is so intoxicated that they are incapable of consenting.

---

I'm guessing the Crown will argue that she was so intoxicated that she could not legally consent? It seems like the case will hinge on whether that consent in both videos is valid or not.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Part of the article ---

E.M. alleges that she agreed to leave a London bar and have consensual sex with one of the players. She alleges that after they were done, the player secretly texted World Junior teammates and invited them to come to his hotel room to also have sex with her. E.M. alleges that she was then sexually assaulted for hours and that the players forced her to record two cellphone videos saying that she had consented to the sexual activity(opens in a new tab).

The first video is six seconds long and was filmed at 3:25 a.m. during the incident, Kaleigh Davidson, a lawyer working for the players, told TSN in 2022.

In that video, E.M., shown from her neck up, was asked, “You’re okay with this?” by an unidentified man, and she answered, “I’m okay with this.”

In another 12-second video which Davidson said was filmed at 4:26 a.m. after the incident, the woman was shown standing with a towel covering her chest.

“Are you recording me?” she 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.”

The videos are critical evidence, said Andrew Furgiuele, a Toronto defence lawyer who represented former Soo Greyhounds player Andrew Fritsch when he was charged with sexual assault in 2012. (Charges against Fritsch and two other players were dropped before trial.)

“I expect the Crown to argue that the woman was coerced to make the videos,” Furgiuele said. “When you hear her say, ‘I am so sober, that’s why I can’t do this right now,’ that is an odd thing for someone to say and the defence are going to have to address that. The defence will also argue that the video is clear evidence from that moment that shows there was consent.”

According to Canadian law, an unconscious person cannot consent to sexual activity, and neither can someone who is so intoxicated that they are incapable of consenting.

---

I'm guessing the Crown will argue that she was so intoxicated that she could not legally consent? It seems like the case will hinge on whether that consent in both videos is valid or not.

Consent can't be coerced, either.