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

[Dirty Dog]

I think there are a lot of nuanced and important topics with consent, gray areas, drinking, false accusations, burdens of proof, believing women, etc.

But I’m not mad enough to discuss them on a hockey forum!

 

[Edgelord]

If I'm in a room with a bunch of naked dudes I'm going straight for the pizza or the exit, IDK what the f*** you're talking about.

My point was, if I walk into a room and everyone is naked, I'm doing a 180 like Abe Simpson
Not sure what you thought I meant.

 

[Ezekial]

My point was, if I walk into a room and everyone is naked, I'm doing a 180 like Abe Simpson
Not sure what you thought I meant.

You said " if I walk into a hotel room and everyone is naked, the last thing on my mind is ohhh Pizza!!"


Actually makes it sound like you're so excited to be there you don't even notice the pizza.

 

[Edgelord]

You said " if I walk into a hotel room and everyone is naked, the last thing on my mind is ohhh Pizza!!"


Actually makes it sound like you're so excited to be there you don't even notice the pizza. You do a really poor job of conveying your points.

I can agree with that, I am horrible at expressing my thoughts in a clear manner. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[Ezekial]

I can agree with that, I am horrible at expressing my thoughts in a clear manner. Sorry for the confusion.

I tried to take the personal attack out i need to stop being so mean.

 

[Dirty Dog]

I can agree with that, I am horrible at expressing my thoughts in a clear manner. Sorry for the confusion.

I thought your post on that was pretty darn clear

 

[Melrose Munch]

I have a problem with this. Why is the public's interest important, or even relevant?

Maybe victims would be more comfortable coming forward if justice wasn't treated as public entertainment.

I should rephrase. I mean the bystanders shouldn't get to hide.

 

[Ezekial]

I thought your post on that was pretty darn clear

Dog brains think alike

 

[Yukon Joe]

This is just a way to rationalize victim blaming/shaming. Again, only .5% of rapes are "false".

So, people have tried many times to quantify what percentage of rape allegations are false. Ultimately though it becomes a fool's errand.

First of all, most rape allegations aren't even reported to police.

Second, just because a rape allegation is decided to be "unfounded" that doesn't mean it was false - there were just problems with the case of one sort or another.

Third - if you only count cases that are definitely proven to be false, you're probably missing some number of false allegations that just couldn't be proven as such.

Fourth - there's a big "so what" factor. Whether it's 10% are false, or 0.5% - each case needs to be investigated on its own merits.

 

[theslatcher]

Heinous actions aside (with lack of consent and some of the "acts" involved), it's really weird to me to be inviting multiple friends to join your one night stand. Is this a sports culture, or frat boy thing?

Just so bizzarre having 6-7 of your friends naked in a room participating in sexual acts. Wild concept to me.

Heinous actions aside, teenage boys are weird. Circle jerks are a real thing. A weird real thing.

 

[Edgelord]

So, people have tried many times to quantify what percentage of rape allegations are false. Ultimately though it becomes a fool's errand.

First of all, most rape allegations aren't even reported to police.

Second, just because a rape allegation is decided to be "unfounded" that doesn't mean it was false - there were just problems with the case of one sort or another.

Third - if you only count cases that are definitely proven to be false, you're probably missing some number of false allegations that just couldn't be proven as such.

Fourth - there's a big "so what" factor. Whether it's 10% are false, or 0.5% - each case needs to be investigated on its own merits.

In this instance, I wonder if this just sucks for E.M. Say she won the civil case and is trying to move on with her life, but the crown is now moving forward and she is dragged back into the worst moment of her life.
Not saying the trial shouldn't go forward, just thinking about it from her perspective. As I understand it she has no say in if the case moves forward or not.

 

[Yukon Joe]

In this instance, I wonder if this just sucks for E.M. Say she won the civil case and is trying to move on with her life, but the crown is now moving forward and she is dragged back into the worst moment of her life.
Not saying the trial shouldn't go forward, just thinking about it from her perspective. As I understand it she has no say in if the case moves forward or not.

Yes and no.

Formally, the victim has no say in whether a case proceeds. It's not unusual for a case to proceed even when the victim is hostile. This is much more common in areas of domestic violence, where it's fairly common for the victim/spouse to not want charges against their abuser/spouse.

Informally however - in my experience it would be quite unusual for the Crown to proceed with a sexual assault case with a reluctant/hostile victim. Such cases are difficult enough with a willing victim.

And you can either take my word for it or not - I can't really provide any other proof.

 

[Edgelord]

Yes and no.

Formally, the victim has no say in whether a case proceeds. It's not unusual for a case to proceed even when the victim is hostile. This is much more common in areas of domestic violence, where it's fairly common for the victim/spouse to not want charges against their abuser/spouse.

Informally however - in my experience it would be quite unusual for the Crown to proceed with a sexual assault case with a reluctant/hostile victim. Such cases are difficult enough with a willing victim.

And you can either take my word for it or not - I can't really provide any other proof.

It's clear you know way way way more than me when it comes to legal stuff, so I do take your posts seriously.
Another hypothetical, to preface, I do think something bad happened, they wouldn't have made the videos if they felt everything was OK.
The hypothetical: If its found to be false allegations, does that mean the judgment/settlement in the civil case gets revisited?

 

[Profet]

Society will never overcome this. There will always be rotten people. The best thing to do is learn to make good decisions to stay safer from those people.

You obviously didn't click the link.

 

[RedWhiteBlackGold]

In this instance, I wonder if this just sucks for E.M. Say she won the civil case and is trying to move on with her life, but the crown is now moving forward and she is dragged back into the worst moment of her life.
Not saying the trial shouldn't go forward, just thinking about it from her perspective. As I understand it she has no say in if the case moves forward or not.

She did receive a settlement from Hockey Canada, lets assume even if it was 1M from the 3M+ she was suing for. If I'm in her shoes and thought that was all she could do and the book was closed, having these people pay for their crimes would reignite some hope.

Like you said tho, who really knows how she feels but herself. Maybe she put this behind her and it's being forced back on her.

 

[Edgelord]

She did receive a settlement from Hockey Canada, lets assume even if it was 1M from the 3M+ she was suing for. If I'm in her shoes and thought that was all she could do and the book was closed, having these people pay for their crimes would reignite some hope.

Like you said tho, who really knows how she feels but herself. Maybe she put this behind her and it's being forced back on her.

Based on what Yukon said earlier, I am now thinking she is seeking justice. He mentioned that the crown usually won't proceed if the victim isn't on board.

 

[GQS]

False accusations do happen, however think of it this way: Falsely accusing someone of rape requires a lot of steps. The initial call to 911, the conversation with the responding officers, the medical exam, the multiple follow-ups by detectives, the paperwork, the lawyers, and on and on. It takes time, perseverance, and an airtight story, with the ongoing risk that a minor inconsistency could bring suspicion onto you.

Does it really though? Maybe if you want to file an official report to police or something, but in this day and age all you really need to do is go online and make a post to social media and whoever is your target their life could be turned upside down in an instant.

Just look at Chris Hardwick who had broken up with her ex-gf and then several years later she went online and made a post that implied that he was abusive to her when they were together. Immediately Hardwick was pulled by AMC from his Talking Dead gig where he was host and a website he created completely scrubbed any mention of him. It took over a month before Hardwick was completely cleared and his career could be resumed and STILL some of the staff of the Talking Dead quit anyways in protest and in support of the supposed victim who refused to provide any evidence or testimony to the people who were investigating these allegations.

In the end Hardwick's life was turned upside down by a person he had broken up with several years prior and all it took was for his ex to make a online post about her supposedly being a victim of domestic abuse and she faced zero consequences from all this. The point is if you want to mess with someone with false allegations to screw them up its really easy to do so these days and whether or not they're true doesn't matter when your target now has to deal with the bomb you just dropped into their lap.

 

[v00d00daddy]

Two witnesses and paper and audio evidence.

Sounds like witness/victim statements.

Let’s see what the lawyers say after they get all of it.

 

[AzHawk]

Hardwick was completely cleared

That didn't happen, but is also off-topic.

 

[Yukon Joe]

The hypothetical: If its found to be false allegations, does that mean the judgment/settlement in the civil case gets revisited?

So it's very hard to prove something is a "false allegation". Even if the case at trial is dismissed as "not guilty", that doesn't mean it's false. In general any settlement assumes what often gets called "litigation risk" - that is the risk you might not win at trial. So the victim probably settled for less than she might have gotten at trial if she had won, and Hockey Canada wound up paying less than they might have had to after trial, because of the risk that the victim might have lost at trial.

And it's double hard to prove a false allegation when the issue is consent. It's a different matter if someone says a rape took place and it's later found that no sexual contact happened at all.

But let's take the extreme hypothetical. Let's say that a video later emerges of the victim where she is telling a friend all about how she made up the story about rape - that she totally wanted to have sex with those five hockey players. Could Hockey Canada then sue to try and get their money back, on the basis that it was obtained by fraud?

As I say - anyone can sue anyone - all it takes is some paperwork and a filing fee at the courthouse. Could they win? I dunno. Hit me up in the DMs, give me a let's say $5000 retainer and I'll do some research. But even then the answer will probably boil down to "maybe".

 

[MXD]

Does it really though? Maybe if you want to file an official report to police or something, but in this day and age all you really need to do is go online and make a post to social media and whoever is your target their life could be turned upside down in an instant.

Just look at Chris Hardwick who had broken up with her ex-gf and then several years later she went online and made a post that implied that he was abusive to her when they were together. Immediately Hardwick was pulled by AMC from his Talking Dead gig where he was host and a website he created completely scrubbed any mention of him. It took over a month before Hardwick was completely cleared and his career could be resumed and STILL some of the staff of the Talking Dead quit anyways in protest and in support of the supposed victim who refused to provide any evidence or testimony to the people who were investigating these allegations.

In the end Hardwick's life was turned upside down by a person he had broken up with several years prior and all it took was for his ex to make a online post about her supposedly being a victim of domestic abuse and she faced zero consequences from all this. The point is if you want to mess with someone with false allegations to screw them up its really easy to do so these days and whether or not they're true doesn't matter when your target now has to deal with the bomb you just dropped into their lap.

... None of this amounts to rape (as far as I know from the case), and none of this amounted to an actual charge.

 

[catnip]

I trust that when we're talking about false accusations we're only referring to cases that have been tested in court and resulted in convictions? It would be a shame if it turns out there's an area of criminal law where the presumption of innocence doesn't apply.

 

[Edgelord]

I trust that when we're talking about false accusations we're only referring to cases that have been tested in court and resulted in convictions? It would be a shame if it turns out there's an area of criminal law where the presumption of innocence doesn't apply.

I think we're seeing a mix of society's current outlook and the legal outlook.
They don't completely jive at the moment.

 

[Ezekial]

Does it really though? Maybe if you want to file an official report to police or something, but in this day and age all you really need to do is go online and make a post to social media and whoever is your target their life could be turned upside down in an instant.

Just look at Chris Hardwick who had broken up with her ex-gf and then several years later she went online and made a post that implied that he was abusive to her when they were together. Immediately Hardwick was pulled by AMC from his Talking Dead gig where he was host and a website he created completely scrubbed any mention of him. It took over a month before Hardwick was completely cleared and his career could be resumed and STILL some of the staff of the Talking Dead quit anyways in protest and in support of the supposed victim who refused to provide any evidence or testimony to the people who were investigating these allegations.

In the end Hardwick's life was turned upside down by a person he had broken up with several years prior and all it took was for his ex to make a online post about her supposedly being a victim of domestic abuse and she faced zero consequences from all this. The point is if you want to mess with someone with false allegations to screw them up its really easy to do so these days and whether or not they're true doesn't matter when your target now has to deal with the bomb you just dropped into their lap.

That truly sucks for Chris Hardwick and Aziz Ansari it's really unfortunate what happened to them.
Chris Hardwick lost his job for 6 weeks while an investigation was done and he was cleared, June 14 2018-July 28 2018
EM and the 2018 WJC team incident happened 3 days later June 17, and we are just now having this conversation.

 

[Yukon Joe]

Sounds like witness/victim statements.

Let’s see what the lawyers say after they get all of it.

Disclosure - where defence is basically given a copy of the Crown's entire file - is sent under an undertaking not to be used for any other purpose except their client's defence, and indeed must be destroyed or returned to the Crown at the close of the case. So defence, after receiving disclosure, cannot go running to the media with copies.

Is that undertaking sometimes violated? Sure. But again this is a high profile case - both for the prosecution and for defence. All sides will make sure they scrupulously follow the rules.