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

[ManofSteel55]

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.

You've never heard of people being called for jury duty and not selected to sit on the jury?

 

[Edgelord]

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.

plus when a girl is obviously in a vulnerable situation or condition its the right thing to do to look out for them, it may be misogynistic but if it ever stopped an assault I am 100% ok with it

 

[M88K]

Today I learned, that people don't intentionally dodge Jury duty by interviewing as the most bigoted mofo in the world like I do

 

[ERYX]

You've never heard of people being called for jury duty and not selected to sit on the jury?

I've never heard of people being questioned in the manner that you described.

I've been involved in many jury selections. Not everyone gets chosen, but not as a result of some inquisition. The majority get excused when the judge asks them if there's any reason they can't serve and they voluntarily tell him/her that they can't judge impartially because they have experience with the crime (like a family member was a victim of similar) or because they are the sole income for a family or other hardship.

I've also seen limited questioning about racial bias, but that is pretty quick and to the point. That's about it.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Today I learned, that people don't intentionally dodge Jury duty by interviewing as the most bigoted mofo in the world like I do

I appreciate the chance to get to serve as a juror - I've heard some interesting cases and my company handles it generously. The only downside is that I can't passively read threads on...

...and there's no downside.

 

[Avs44]

Avs44, a world where people, not just women, could live freely and not take conscious awareness of our surroundings seriously, would be a wonderful joy to live in.

Perhaps things may have been relatively safer in the past, but our world to me is becoming more and more dangerous, that wonderful joyous potential world is falling further from our grasp, this is more of a societal topic of discussion, but it is worth mentioning.

For people to always understand the environment that surrounds them, is very important for personal safety. It is one of the very most important self defense tips I can think of. As a man, I do, for not only myself, but for the people who I am with. As a person, I am not angered or upset at people, including myself, being reminded to.

I understand the point that you are getting across. However, if we want to get blasted drunk, I have no idea if she was or not, but if we want to do that, there are serious risks to it, in any setting.

My dude, I appreciate your comment, but I don't see the world with rose-colored glasses -- I'm fully aware of the need for personal safety precautions and as a pretty big dude myself take them all the time if I'm out at night, for instance. I get it.

But the platitudes such as 'parents, tell your daughters to [not get drunk / dress appropriately / stick with friends / etc]' every time women get sexually assaulted just needs to die. You see this sort of crap in all sorts of online comment sections, ranging from here to twitter. Women know all of this. They've heard this messaging for decades, generation after generation. They've heard it at school; they've heard it at university; they've heard it online. I assure you, the vast majority of women have far keener 'alert' senses than most men. The vast majority of women start experiencing sexual harassment as young girls. Anecdotally, some of the women in my family recall getting cat called for the first time around 11-12. You can also read up on studies (linked in the articles such as here and here) that indicate that it's a sobering reality for most girls. Point being, most girls have already started experiencing harassment and begun developing accordant safety and survival mechanisms well before most fathers probably start thinking about having "the talk" with their daughters, as the poster I responded to indicated. And really, most women are going to have heard about and caught on to such necessary realities from their mother / older women in their lives, who've spoken from personal experience, well before their fathers think about it too.

In other words, while I think such advice is often well meaning ("fathers, tell your daughters to...") it's simply exhausted at this point and needs to die out. Women know all of this shit. Women still get sexually assaulted. In this case, if the allegations are true, it's not a case of the woman "consenting" but whoops, actually couldn't consent because she was too drunk. Rather, she agreed to go to the room with "player 1" for a fully consensual hook up that she was fine with and then "player 1," after getting her there, ambushed her by letting a bunch of his male friends into the room. If that's true, this woman could have been the poster woman for sobriety and then there is nothing she could have done. The only thing that could have prevented it from her end would apparently be to never, ever, be alone in a room with a man?

I suppose my broader point is that the messaging around this stuff really needs to change from telling women what to do to fathers understanding that they are role models of their sons and laying the law down about some really basic facts of life. No more "boys will be boys" crap when it comes to this sort of thing. If these allegations are all true, then a bunch of entitled 18-19 year old young men were apparently raised by their fathers to see zero problem with walking in on an unsuspecting young woman, putting her in the exceptionally disadvantaged (impossible) position of being one young woman vs. 5-8 dudes, and then....yeah. The failures of parenting here aren't on the young woman or her father for failing to give her "the talk" about alcohol but rather on the Mom and Dad of every single one of these kids -- and all I'm saying is that it would be nice to see a shift in comments about this sort of thing in line with that.

 

[4thline]

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.

Fair.

I'm doing a poor job articulating it, but I guess my thoughts go beyond the trial application of this case and are more directed at what seems like a structural/conceptual issue with the law itself- to me those two concepts- regaining consent via "reasonable steps" and inducing via abuse of power seem to be almost directly opposed to each other.

But maybe that's projection on my part, if you have to "convince" some one to have sex, whether it's an abuse of power or not, you shouldn't be having that sex

 

[RegDunlop]

I am curious how this all unfolds... 5 are asked to go to London but 8 in the room. 1 has arrived and turned himself in. I get the feeling this will take awhile till someone is found innocent or guilty.

I read an article about 2003 investigation. It referenced the 2018 one and said 6 players on team and 2 others. I will try to dig deeper

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

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.

Agreed. It's why I think focusing on the alcohol ignores the larger factor. As you mention, the overwhelming majority of men will not engage in that behavior. But there are certain toxic environments where problematic mindsets exist before alcohol is ever consumed.

It's not a coincidence that these type of things happen at fraternity parties, or athlete parties. To be insanely clear, obviously not all fraternities, not all athletes, not all men. But various fraternities, for example, have a long history of fostering sexist behavior, hazing, toxic masculinity. They can promote Lord of the Flies behavior in young men. When combined with alcohol it can result in all sorts of abuses, but it's ultimately not the alcohol that's the issue.

As I said in a previous post, if alcohol can bridge the gap into thinking something like that is ok, then the gap was way too narrow to begin with.

 

[daver]

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.

Ok, so for you its thinking you can sing and dance, for some it's thinking that sexual assault is ok. That's the reality.

 

[Edgelord]

Agreed. It's why I think focusing on the alcohol ignores the larger factor. As you mention, the overwhelming majority of men will not engage in that behavior. But there are certain toxic environments where problematic mindsets exist before alcohol is ever consumed.

It's not a coincidence that these type of things happen at fraternity parties, or athlete parties. To be insanely clear, obviously not all fraternities, not all athletes, not all men. But various fraternities, for example, have a long history of fostering sexist behavior, hazing, toxic masculinity. When combined with alcohol it can result in all sorts of abuses, but it's ultimately not the alcohol that's the issue.

As I said in a previous post, if alcohol can bridge the gap into thinking something like that is ok, then the gap was way too narrow to begin with.

oh for sure, there was definitely issues with the fact they thought it was ok to treat her the way they did.
I kind of wonder if even the beginning of the group part was consensual but then the guys started allegedly degrading her, spitting on her etc and then consent was rescinded

 

[daver]

No, it just shows the monster behind the mask.

Which they seemingly can control (the monster) when they aren't drinking since they haven't gotten charged with it before.

 

[Sasha Orlov]

Today I learned, that people don't intentionally dodge Jury duty by interviewing as the most bigoted mofo in the world like I do

Based as hell

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

My dude, I appreciate your comment, but I don't see the world with rose-colored glasses -- I'm fully aware of the need for personal safety precautions and as a pretty big dude myself take them all the time if I'm out at night, for instance. I get it.

But the platitudes such as 'parents, tell your daughters to [not get drunk / dress appropriately / stick with friends / etc]' every time women get sexually assaulted just needs to die. You see this sort of crap in all sorts of online comment sections, ranging from here to twitter. Women know all of this. They've heard this messaging for decades, generation after generation. They've heard it at school; they've heard it at university; they've heard it online. I assure you, the vast majority of women have far keener 'alert' senses than most men. The vast majority of women start experiencing sexual harassment as young girls. Anecdotally, some of the women in my family recall getting cat called for the first time around 11-12. You can also read up on studies (linked in the articles such as here and here) that indicate that it's a sobering reality for most girls. Point being, most girls have already started experiencing harassment and begun developing accordant safety and survival mechanisms well before most fathers probably start thinking about having "the talk" with their daughters, as the poster I responded to indicated. And really, most women are going to have heard about and caught on to such necessary realities from their mother / older women in their lives, who've spoken from personal experience, well before their fathers think about it too.

In other words, while I think such advice is often well meaning ("fathers, tell your daughters to...") it's simply exhausted at this point and needs to die out. Women know all of this shit. Women still get sexually assaulted. In this case, if the allegations are true, it's not a case of the woman "consenting" but whoops, actually couldn't consent because she was too drunk. Rather, she agreed to go to the room with "player 1" for a fully consensual hook up that she was fine with and then "player 1," after getting her there, ambushed her by letting a bunch of his male friends into the room. If that's true, this woman could have been the poster woman for sobriety and then there is nothing she could have done. The only thing that could have prevented it from her end would apparently be to never, ever, be alone in a room with a man?

I suppose my broader point is that the messaging around this stuff really needs to change from telling women what to do to fathers understanding that they are role models of their sons and laying the law down about some really basic facts of life. No more "boys will be boys" crap when it comes to this sort of thing. If these allegations are all true, then a bunch of entitled 18-19 year old young men were apparently raised by their fathers to see zero problem with walking in on an unsuspecting young woman, putting her in the exceptionally disadvantaged (impossible) position of being one young woman vs. 5-8 dudes, and then....yeah. The failures of parenting here aren't on the young woman or her father for failing to give her "the talk" about alcohol but rather on the Mom and Dad of every single one of these kids -- and all I'm saying is that it would be nice to see a shift in comments about this sort of thing in line with that.

Fantastic post. I think instead of my trying to articulate it for the hundredth time in this thread (an mostly failing) I'm just going to link to your post.

 

[ManofSteel55]

I've never heard of people being questioned in the manner that you described.

I've been involved in many jury selections. Not everyone gets chosen, but not as a result of some inquisition. The majority get excused when the judge asks them if there's any reason they can't serve and they voluntarily tell him/her that they can't judge impartially because they have experience with the crime (like a family member was a victim of similar) or because they are the sole income for a family or other hardship.

I've also seen limited questioning about racial bias, but that is pretty quick and to the point. That's about it.

I didn't really describe anything, I just used the word interview, my apologies though, I've never actually been called in myself. I assumed they would ask a few questions of candidates before deciding to keep them or turn them away. I do stand by my statement that I have known a lot of people who have been called in for jury duty, and I don't think any of them actually served. And it certainly is not all scumbags and ex-cons I am referring to, ha ha.

 

[roon]

Multiple articles available through a simple google search...

Direct quote to a crying young woman: "Say it."

If the conclusion you draw from this, having truly scoured all the publicly available evidence, is that the police and hockey Canada thoroughly investigated this and found the evidence wanting, I don't know what to say. The incident was reported to police within hours of it happening, and there has clearly been an effort to protect these players from facing full consequences. We know about Hockey Canada's "slush fund" to pay off sexual assault victims, and it has only been due to the public outcry that the police have finally begun to treat this incident as seriously as it deserved to be treated from day 1.

There is no question at all that this is not a "wild night someone regrets" kind of situation - it's a gang rape that was immediately reported to police after the victim's parents found her shaking uncontrollably and barely coherent in a deeply traumatized state that was then ignored by the authorities until some good journalism unearthed and publicized the facts.

How do we know she was crying? Have you seen the video?

I have no doubts that the Old boys club that is Hockey Canada was trying hard to protect these boys - but that doesn't mean the boys committed a gang rape. Thats why we have a legal process.

An alternative reading of how this went down would be - London Police review evidence and determine there is no grounds to move forward. A report publicizes these allegations and the public at large calls for heads to roll. Under immense public pressure the police re-open the case and decide to give the public the blood it so badly desires.

If it went down as she describes - bury them under the prison. If it didn't - let those boys get on with their lives.

 

[Gregor Samsa]

Agreed. It's why I think focusing on the alcohol ignores the larger factor. As you mention, the overwhelming majority of men will not engage in that behavior. But there are certain toxic environments where problematic mindsets exist before alcohol is ever consumed.

It's not a coincidence that these type of things happen at fraternity parties, or athlete parties. To be insanely clear, obviously not all fraternities, not all athletes, not all men. But various fraternities, for example, have a long history of fostering sexist behavior, hazing, toxic masculinity. They can promote Lord of the Flies behavior in young men. When combined with alcohol it can result in all sorts of abuses, but it's ultimately not the alcohol that's the issue.

As I said in a previous post, if alcohol can bridge the gap into thinking something like that is ok, then the gap was way too narrow to begin with.

Yeah. I think it’s one of those things where a few bad apples spoil the bunch. These environments are ripe for bad apples though. One can probably go a step deeper and say the way men view sex is a societal contributing issue as men and women view sex as wildly different. For men, especially as youth, it’s a bragging right and a way of pride in manhood, or something of the sort.

 

[Rich Nixon]

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.

In reference to another player who took leave the same week that this news broke, there were numerous offseason personnel decisions that seemed to indicate the franchise he played for was treating the position he played as an area of need, when it had long been viewed as a position of strength (and is the position you need the least players at). That franchise also reportedly tried to trade the player to no avail, and during this season had no discussion with the player about a potential extension to his expiring contract.

 

[Three On Zero]

I appreciate the chance to get to serve as a juror - I've heard some interesting cases and my company handles it generously. The only downside is that I can't passively read threads on...

...and there's no downside.

I kind of feel bad that I laughed at this, but it is what it is

 

[PunchImlach is Alive]

My dude, I appreciate your comment, but I don't see the world with rose-colored glasses -- I'm fully aware of the need for personal safety precautions and as a pretty big dude myself take them all the time if I'm out at night, for instance. I get it.

But the platitudes such as 'parents, tell your daughters to [not get drunk / dress appropriately / stick with friends / etc]' every time women get sexually assaulted just needs to die. You see this sort of crap in all sorts of online comment sections, ranging from here to twitter. Women know all of this. They've heard this messaging for decades, generation after generation. They've heard it at school; they've heard it at university; they've heard it online. I assure you, the vast majority of women have far keener 'alert' senses than most men. The vast majority of women start experiencing sexual harassment as young girls. Anecdotally, some of the women in my family recall getting cat called for the first time around 11-12. You can also read up on studies (linked in the articles such as here and here) that indicate that it's a sobering reality for most girls. Point being, most girls have already started experiencing harassment and begun developing accordant safety and survival mechanisms well before most fathers probably start thinking about having "the talk" with their daughters, as the poster I responded to indicated. And really, most women are going to have heard about and caught on to such necessary realities from their mother / older women in their lives, who've spoken from personal experience, well before their fathers think about it too.

In other words, while I think such advice is often well meaning ("fathers, tell your daughters to...") it's simply exhausted at this point and needs to die out. Women know all of this shit. Women still get sexually assaulted. In this case, if the allegations are true, it's not a case of the woman "consenting" but whoops, actually couldn't consent because she was too drunk. Rather, she agreed to go to the room with "player 1" for a fully consensual hook up that she was fine with and then "player 1," after getting her there, ambushed her by letting a bunch of his male friends into the room. If that's true, this woman could have been the poster woman for sobriety and then there is nothing she could have done. The only thing that could have prevented it from her end would apparently be to never, ever, be alone in a room with a man?

I suppose my broader point is that the messaging around this stuff really needs to change from telling women what to do to fathers understanding that they are role models of their sons and laying the law down about some really basic facts of life. No more "boys will be boys" crap when it comes to this sort of thing. If these allegations are all true, then a bunch of entitled 18-19 year old young men were apparently raised by their fathers to see zero problem with walking in on an unsuspecting young woman, putting her in the exceptionally disadvantaged (impossible) position of being one young woman vs. 5-8 dudes, and then....yeah. The failures of parenting here aren't on the young woman or her father for failing to give her "the talk" about alcohol but rather on the Mom and Dad of every single one of these kids -- and all I'm saying is that it would be nice to see a shift in comments about this sort of thing in line with that.

Perfectly said

 

[Korpse]

How do we know she was crying? Have you seen the video?

The video has been reported on.

 

[Moon Man]

This is well written and an excellent, fair point imo.

I liked the post you replied to and agreed with that their point was, but this is a good side point imo.

The bolded is EXACTLY why I straight up will just never take substances in public that far. Ever. It's flat out not worth the risks imo and I say that as a man. I heavily encourage the people around me to take the same precautions and will actively keep an eye out for them if they do take it too far.

People are just too f***ed up to trust the gen pop like that imo.

All that said, it's still 100% the transgressor's fault.

Yeah, I fully agree with you. Cheers.

 

[duckpuck]

You wrote a hell of a lot of boilerplate "let's not rush to judgement!" pablum just to try to slide your real grievance in there. And it's a dumb one.

It's dumb in light of the very reason that mods here are skittish about us using names (because we're children and can't be trusted to accurately portray information without them maybe getting sued). Print journalism is held to a high standard, and you will get precisely-contextualized and legally accurate information more often in a newspaper than you will get on a cable broadcast or a social feed. In an era of unreliable sources, it's probably the most reliable.

It's especially funny in this case, because the Globe and Mail article being discussed is based on a court filing. So it's not as if there's some "sources say!" business where you can just all-knowingly cast aside the veracity of "sources." They're just writing about a piece of paper, that verifiably exists and verifiably says those things, and doing it for the general public because our lazy asses aren't going to wander down to that courthouse and request to see it ourselves.

Let's say you f***ed up your pipes or toilet or some shit doing whatever. You call up a plumber. He gives you an estimate and the price is high, and he tells you that you shouldn't be doing whatever you did that blew up your toilet. When you ask an expert, sometimes you're not gonna like what you hear. But your response should not be: "f*** all plumbers you can't trust plumbers plumbing is a lie!"

You're characterization of this is naive, if not uninformed. Court filings present one side of a story. To this point, the legal filings have been made only by the government - so we have ONLY one side of the story.

Newspaper articles - which despite your suggestion are not necessarily reliable or accurate - are based only on the evidence available to the reporters. At this point, the only evidence available is the government's allegations - the reporters are essentially repeating only one side of the story. We have little to no understanding of what allegations the defendants will make. Yet here you are putting credence in the "print newspapers" you find so reliable. I can cite you to hundreds of print newspaper reports that have proven false and/or misleading.

Huh? Please explain how taking any hypothetical deal would end their careers...?

If they plead, it seems nearly certain no NHL team is going to take a chance on any of these players. They aren't good enough players to justify the blowback. Virtanen is a great example - and he was found not guilty. Voynov is another example of a guy who pled out and can't get back to the NHL.

The Duke Lacrosse comparison has already been invoked and shredded multiple times in this thread. I'm begging people to actually read the available information about this case before convincing themselves that they are about to introduce a totally groundbreaking wrinkle that no one else has considered.

The duke lacrosse episode is a cautionary tale against jumping to conclusions based on the prosecutor's initial filings and newspaper's reports. It is necessary to wait for the full evidence. It is an apt comparison for that reason and your pointing us to prosecution filings and newspaper reports doesn't really change that.

 

[GeoRox89]

I appreciate the chance to get to serve as a juror - I've heard some interesting cases and my company handles it generously. The only downside is that I can't passively read threads on...

...and there's no downside.

Finally, a kindred spirit on this issue. I’d love to get jury duty. Employer pays our full salary for it so just getting paid to watch a trial instead of working, sounds like an amazing gig to me

 

[Bear of Bad News]

I kind of feel bad that I laughed at this, but it is what it is

It's sort of like how everyone says that they'd love being an ice cream taste tester as their full-time job.

What if it was every day, eight hours per day? What if it was not just rocky road and mint chip, but experimental stuff like dill pickle crunch or cinnamon egg?

I'm not saying that this is the dill pickle crunch of the HFBoards world.

Finally, a kindred spirit on this issue. I’d love to get jury duty. Employer pays our full salary for it so just getting paid to watch a trial instead of working, sounds like an amazing gig to me

I might be a little biased because long ago I worked IT for a county courthouse (nowhere near where I live now) and being in that environment on a daily basis, you learn a lot about why it's important to serve.