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

[Golden_Jet]

Actually in Canada it will be very easy for such people to end up on a jury.

Unlike in the U.S., there is almost no questioning of potential jurors. The only acceptable questions I've seen are questions about racial prejudice where the accused is non-white. Otherwise, it's pretty much the first 12 names that come out of the drum, that's your jury. A bit simplified, but essentially accurate for 99% of cases in my experience.

In cases of this nature, the judge will frequently ask potential jurors if they feel they can judge a case like this impartially. Very easy for someone who just wants to hang a guy say "yes, your honour". Defence counsel (or Crown) have no ability to ask more questions to test that.

We don't even have peremptory challenges anymore (where counsel basically get to "veto" any juror without giving any reasons) as those were removed after the Gerald Stanley case because --without ever checking the actual composition of his jury -- it was claimed that he was only acquitted because the jury was all white men and apparently this was accomplished through peremptory challenges.

Not when I got called for jury duty, they went through about 60 names before they had their 12 jurors.

 

[ERYX]

Not when I got called for jury duty, they went through about 60 names before they had their 12 jurors.

How long ago what that? Some of the revisions to jury selection I mentioned are relatively recent.

 

[4thline]

you are correct that crying later could nullify previous consent and would certainly have required further "reasonable steps" to a determine whether there was ongoing consent.

Consent can also vitiated if it involves "convincing" (see subsection c below). s. 273.1(2) of the Criminal Code states:

• (c) the accused induces the complainant to engage in the activity by abusing a position of trust, power or authority;

My only (limited) education in law is business/tort, but in my ignorant opinion the very nature of the two bolded sections creates a friction point, especially given the inherent power dynamics of this situation, and really any with a marked difference in physical strength.

Where is the line between "reasonable steps to determine ongoing consent" and "inducing?"

It's very easy to see this playing out with the accused acknowledging that she cried/was upset, claiming that they stopped and didn't continue until she "re-consented." Reasonable or abuse of power? How is a jury to say that she didn't feel threatened?

 

[Gregor Samsa]

Wonder if any of the players try to frame it as a hazing type of incident with peer pressure; not that that makes it okay. Player 1 is almost assuredly f***ed, especially if he was the one who’s phone was used, who’s plan it was in the first place, and if he was the main line of communication

 

[Edgelord]

1 other aspect thats getting missed when I or others mention booze, it solely isn't about her. I would hope that by being sober the guys would never have made the choice that even going to the room was a good idea

 

[Jack Straw]

rephrase
to be fair if we boil the theme down of 99% of the arguments on here, they generally match I fart in your direction lol

Personally, I take some comfort in knowing that although we all come from different places, have different backgrounds, root for different teams, prefer different pizza toppings, we all know "I fart in your general direction."

This is the kind of thing that helps hold our society together.

 

[Martin Skoula]

It almost feels like you're looking for clues in people's posts so you can deduce other facets and then decide who you agree with.

I also don't understand why avoiding risk is such a taboo
We all know men shouldn't rape, we all want it not to happen but it does. So all we can do is teach and minimize risk factors

I have a feeling there’s a big overlap between the people pearl clutching at anyone suggesting situational awareness is a good thing and people who say things like “well of course your car got broken into, you didn’t leave it unlocked and left 30 cents in the cup holder, what did you expect to happen? It’s just property, relax”

 

[ERYX]

My only (limited) education in law is business/tort, but in my ignorant opinion the very nature of the two bolded sections creates a friction point, especially given the inherent power dynamics of this situation, and really any with a marked difference in physical strength.

Where is the line between "reasonable steps to determine ongoing consent" and "inducing?"

It's very easy to see this playing out with the accused acknowledging that she cried/was upset, claiming that they stopped and didn't continue until she "re-consented." Reasonable or abuse of power? How is a jury to say that she didn't feel threatened?

Well, that's why we have trials. So that the trier of fact (be it a judge or a jury) can hear everyone's full story, with all the nuances, tested by opposing counsel, and then weigh it all to determine what evidence they accept, and what that evidence proves.

Also, keep in mind the presumption of innocence. So the question for the jury isn't "how can you say she didn't feel threatened" the question is "does the evidence satisfy you beyond a reasonable doubt that she felt threatened?"

Lots of people bemoan innocence until proven guilty in such cases, but I have not heard of a better system.

 

[Edgelord]

Personally, I take some comfort in knowing that although we all come from different places, have different backgrounds, root for different teams, prefer different pizza toppings, we all know "I fart in your general direction."

This is the kind of thing that helps hold our society together.

I am soo going to use that, if I make a bad trade proposal and am getting roasted, thats gonna be my reply lol

 

[Golden_Jet]

How long ago what that? Some of the revisions to jury selection I mentioned are relatively recent.

Probably about 10 years ago, it was a high profile case as well.

 

[PunchImlach is Alive]

I have a feeling there’s a big overlap between the people pearl clutching at anyone suggesting situational awareness is a good thing and people who say things like “well of course your car got broken into, you didn’t leave it unlocked and left 30 cents in the cup holder, what did you expect to happen? It’s just property, relax”

There's nothing wrong with situational awareness but how would situational awareness have changed what happened after they got in that hotel room? It's what makes this a moot point bringing it up in the context of this case.

 

[Danarqhy]

But what most disgusts me about this thread is how the actual victim is being questioned. For those questioning the victim, she did not bring the charges and had to answer questions about what happened, But here is the question. Hockey Canada was very quick to settle the civil lawsuit in attempt to make this go away. Why? Whatever happened they wanted this to go away fast

And the fact Formenton has turned himself in I believe we can now talk about him? We get to ask more questions. Like he spent a 1.5 years in Europe after coming off an 18 goal season as a 21 year old. This was before the sens were in cap problems. Did the the Sense know and what did they know and when did they know it? Then you have 31 other teams. None wanted a 21 year old 18 goal scorer? None tried to trade for him? Did all 31 nhl teams know this day was coming?

​

I think the answers to your questions are pretty simple and most of them can be explained by the details of the acts, ie a gangbang involving 5 people (and 3 more involved) with a girl that went to the police literally the next day and said it was non consensual. It's not just a simple question of consent between a boy and girl like in the Jake Virtanen case, the optics here are infinitely more disturbing.

The teams in the NHL obviously knew about some sort of accusations against Formenton, they didn't have to know all of the details to know that he was trouble and they better stay away. The report about Hockey Canada's settlement was released in May 2022 and that was Formenton's last season in the NHL too.

I think the real question is whether Ottawa knew about the details of the case and would have kept Formenton had the report about HC's settlement not come out but based on what we've seen it's rumored that the Melnyk girls wanted absolutely nothing to do with Formenton.

 

[ManofSteel55]

Actually in Canada it will be very easy for such people to end up on a jury.

Unlike in the U.S., there is almost no questioning of potential jurors. The only acceptable questions I've seen are questions about racial prejudice where the accused is non-white. Otherwise, it's pretty much the first 12 names that come out of the drum, that's your jury. A bit simplified, but essentially accurate for 99% of cases in my experience.

In cases of this nature, the judge will frequently ask potential jurors if they feel they can judge a case like this impartially. Very easy for someone who just wants to hang a guy say "yes, your honour". Defence counsel (or Crown) have no ability to ask more questions to test that.

We don't even have peremptory challenges anymore (where counsel basically get to "veto" any juror without giving any reasons) as those were removed after the Gerald Stanley case because --without ever checking the actual composition of his jury -- it was claimed that he was only acquitted because the jury was all white men and apparently this was accomplished through peremptory challenges.

I don't think that's true. I know a lot of people who had to go in to interview for jury duty. I don't know a single one who actually had to sit on a jury.

 

[Jack Straw]

I am soo going to use that, if I make a bad trade proposal and am getting roasted, that gonna be my reply lol

You'll get my bill.

 

[Statto]

You don't think that drinking causes people to lose their self control?

It makes the reveal who they are with lowered inhibitions.. the mask drops. I’ve a long history of drinking too much (even in UK terms) and never once behaved remotely in appropriately in a sexual manner, simply because it’s not in me. Me losing self control is thinking I can sing and dance, not thinking I can do what is alleged.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

There's nothing wrong with situational awareness but how would situational awareness have changed what happened after they got in that hotel room? It's what makes this a moot point bringing it up in the context of this case.

Thank you!

And look at how often people keep bringing that up relative to pondering the line of thinking (or whatever you want to call it) that leads a group of young men to think that what is alleged to have happened is completely ok.

 

[ERYX]

Probably about 10 years ago, it was a high profile case as well.

Yeah, there were massive changes to jury selection after the Gerald Stanley acquittal which was in 2018. So my comments were with respect to jury selection within the last 5 years.

 

[M88K]

You don't think that drinking causes people to lose their self control?

No, it just shows the monster behind the mask.

 

[ERYX]

I don't think that's true. I know a lot of people who had to go in to interview for jury duty. I don't know a single one who actually had to sit on a jury.

In 20 years of criminal practice (mix of prosecution and defence) I've never seen/heard of this, but possibly some jurisdictions have their own local practices that are not required under the Code.

 

[roon]

Holy mother of god if you think your incredibly clear biases wouldn't have you thrown off a jury LOL

Which biases might those be?

From what I can tell you have constructed a straw man and are just arguing against it.

 

[Golden_Jet]

that is the problem. The words COVER UP, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE and other things are being suggested. I am the only non-lawyer on the board by the look of it, but I have been through the legal system on a few occasions and I think MANY are getting Canadian Law confused with American law.

But what most disgusts me about this thread is how the actual victim is being questioned. For those questioning the victim, she did not bring the charges and had to answer questions about what happened, But here is the question. Hockey Canada was very quick to settle the civil lawsuit in attempt to make this go away. Why? Whatever happened they wanted this to go away fast

And the fact Formenton has turned himself in I believe we can now talk about him? We get to ask more questions. Like he spent a 1.5 years in Europe after coming off an 18 goal season as a 21 year old. This was before the sens were in cap problems. Did the the Sense know and what did they know and when did they know it? Then you have 31 other teams. None wanted a 21 year old 18 goal scorer? None tried to trade for him? Did all 31 nhl teams know this day was coming?

I have more questions than answers. But one answer I do have is, posters need to get a better grasp of Canadian law over US law on this subject. Many of the legal views I am reading are clearly based upon peoples view of US law and not Canadian law.

​

I think it was more that the others had existing contracts and Formenton didn’t.
So they erred on the side of caution with their WJC player. That’s just a guess.

 

[Edgelord]

Thank you!

And look at how often people keep bringing that up relative to pondering the line of thinking (or whatever you want to call it) that leads a group of young men to think that what is alleged to have happened is completely ok.

I know when I think about the role booze could have played, I think about the whole night as a series of connected events. And when it comes to the guys I feel there were tons of jumping off points that any sane or sober person would have made a better choice.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

No, it just shows the monster behind the mask.

Exactly. If alcohol can bridge the gap into thinking that what is alleged to have happened is ok, then that gap wasn't nearly as big as it should have been even without alcohol.

 

[Gregor Samsa]

Regarding the situational awareness and alcohol argument, I think both are valid. It’s fair to say that many people partake in binge drinking culture and that it is socially acceptable to some extent. When people get involved in that culture, bad things can happen. However, overwhelming majority of men will not rape if they’re drunk. Alcohol can certainly lead to poor judgment and decision making though.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Holy mother of god if you think your incredibly clear biases wouldn't have you thrown off a jury LOL

You presuming guilty before innocence, you would not be chosen to be on the jury.