Toggle sidebar

Five members from Canada’s 2018 world junior team (Hart, McLeod, Dube, Foote and Formenton) told to surrender to police, facing sexual assault charges

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
How many pages back do I need to go to find some actual news with a source?
I might as well be scrolling through Twitter comments.
 
roon said:
I'm not suggesting that the legal system doesn't fail people....SA victims or otherwise. I'm saying that it is better that 10 guilty people go free than a single innocent person be locked up. That and to simply wait for the legal system to play out before crucifying anyone.
Click to expand...
You're focusing on false accusations as if they're the main issue of concern here and not SA, women are treated as if their accusations are false 9 times out of 10, you're not a hero for going out of your way to do so
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nut Upstrom, AzHawk, Btas and 1 other person
Ezekial said:
Because referring to them as boys minimizes the severity of their possible criminal act. I already said that, you said I was outraged.
Click to expand...
my bad but I assumed calling them boys was moot in the legal sense since I thought all were 18 or older
 
Yukon Joe said:
The presumption of innocence is a legal fiction. It's an important fiction, don't get me wrong, but it only applies to the courts itself.

In a criminal trial the test is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt". A judge can be 98% sure that the Accused person did the thing, but if they have a 2% doubt they must acquit. (note - no court will ever use numbers in that fashion - used for illustration only).

But that doesn't mean the rest of the world should use that same standard. Hell the courts themselves don't use that same standard! The test in a civil trial is only "proof on a balance of probabilities". So 51% sure / 49% not sure is enough. This is how, famously, OJ Simpson was acquitted at his criminal trial, but held liable on his civil trial.
Click to expand...

The penalties associated with a civil trial and criminal trial vary greatly...thus the discrepancy in the standard of proof required.

One involved the loss of your liberty the other very much doesn't.

The presumption of innocence isn't a legal fiction....it is a fundamental legal protection against abuse of the legal process. It is also why nobody cares what a judge is or isn't sure of - there is a jury of your peer's for a reason.

If stuff like this is the general opinion of those in Canada - quite glad I don't live there.
 
4thline said:
@Yukon Joe @MXD

assuming the the defendants end up on the stand, how much latitude would the Crown get in challenging their claims of getting consent, questioning player 1's reason for being afraid she would go to the police, etc
Click to expand...

I mean - consent is absolutely the heart of the issue. I would imagine the Crown's cross-examination on the issue would be vigorous.

That being said - worth noting no criminal Accused has to take the stand. The presumption of innocence, and the right against self-incrimination, is very precious to the court.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4thline
Yukon Joe said:
No, with respect I don't think so.

Two different things can be true at the same time. "Men should not rape women" and "women should avoid putting themselves in vulnerable situations" can both be true.
Click to expand...
In terms of teaching your kids, absolutely. In the context of an alleged sexual assault after the fact, what purpose does it serve other than to direct responsibility to the victim?

As I stated earlier in the thread, if you go to a gas station and end up getting shot in an attempted robbery, saying you shouldn't have gone to that gas station isn't particularly helpful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JBeast, Nut Upstrom, wraithsonwings and 5 others
Jared Dunn said:
You're focusing on false accusations as if they're the main issue of concern here and not SA, women are treated as if their accusations are false 9 times out of 10, you're not a hero for going out of your way to do so
Click to expand...

Don't want to be a hero - if it seems as though I am focusing on the false accusation angle a bit much, its because that is what was jumped on. I also mentioned that her accusations could be totally valid several times....but people don't get emotional when their bias is confirmed and it doesn't get as many replies.
 
roon said:
Don't want to be a hero - if it seems as though I am focusing on the false accusation angle a bit much, its because that is what was jumped on. I also mentioned that her accusations could be totally valid several times....but people don't get emotional when their bias is confirmed and it doesn't get as many replies.
Click to expand...
Ask yourself why you instinctively gravitate towards false accusation when the overwhelming data from other instances and evidence in this case in particular point towards that not being the case
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nut Upstrom, AzHawk, GeoRox89 and 1 other person
Yukon Joe said:
So look - if you have sex with a woman without consent you are committing rape. 100%. The full moral blameworthiness of that act falls on you.

That being said - if you are a woman, you drink to excess, you don't have other people to look out for you - you are putting yourself in a vulnerable position. That does not mean it's okay for a man to rape you! But if you are a father you should tell your daughter to not drink to excess in a situation that could put you at risk of sexual assault.

I liken it to this - you shouldn't walk down the street in a bad neighbourhood flashing a wallet full of money. If you get robbed the responsibility is 100% on the robber. Morally you've done nothing wrong. But you did put yourself at risk.

It's the reason why cars and houses have locks.
Click to expand...

And nobody, at least reasonable, rational people, is equating drinking to excess as giving a green light for rape.

What is not reasonable is when that assumption is made by any mention of the "risk" element of this story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HBK27
inthewings said:
Mostly Men's Rights Activists
Click to expand...
I don't think its fair to characterize this as good side/ bad side. Everyone is so desperate to find sides that IMO valid points re alcohol, vulnerable situations etc are automatically seen as supporting 1 side when its about discussing ways to avoid something like this in the future
 
Icelevel said:
How many pages back do I need to go to find some actual news with a source?
I might as well be scrolling through Twitter comments.
Click to expand...
Sporadic articles in the thread. The only real news are warrants issued for 5 former 2018 Canada WJC players. Formenton surrenders and is charged. Westhead tweet in regards to varying level of charges may be laid in case including gang rape and forceable confinement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rich Nixon
Ninety7 said:
If you think a girl getting black out drunk is a valid risk factor for her to get raped by a bunch of dudes then you’re all mixed up.
Click to expand...
wait a min, it is a risk factor, rape stats show this to be the case.
Now admitting it is a factor does not mean its a defense or acceptable.
 
Ninety7 said:
If you think a girl getting black out drunk is a valid risk factor for her to get raped by a bunch of dudes then you’re all mixed up.
Click to expand...

What?

A girl getting black out drunk is 100% a risk factor to getting sexually assaulted.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S OKAY TO SEXUALLY ASSAULT A WOMAN WHO IS BLACK OUT DRUNK!

I'm not sure what you're trying to say by putting the word "valid" in there. Is there a difference between a valid risk factor and an invalid risk factor?

In court I often hear the phrase "explanation, not excuse". Something can be an explanation about why a bad thing happened - but it does not excuse the bad thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ginger Papa, sufferer, Felidae and 5 others
Ninety7 said:
imagine thinking that getting drunk at a bar is a risk factor for getting raped

Maybe in the 1940s when you were a teenager
Click to expand...
but when you understand that predators exist and would target those people it seems relevant no?
We live in the world that is, not the one you want it to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Farmboy Patty
Jared Dunn said:
Ask yourself why you instinctively gravitate towards false accusation when the overwhelming data from other instances and evidence in this case in particular point towards that not being the case
Click to expand...

What does overwhelming data from other instances have to do with this case? Also - what evidence? I have seen a couple of articles with tidbits in them....have you seen some evidence that makes you certain beyond a reasonable doubt that these guys are guilty? If so - would love to hear it.

I don't gravitate toward false accusations - I simply presented it as a reason why we shouldn't simply jump to a guilty verdict in the court of public opinion. Why that is a controversial statement I will never know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom