SupremeTeam16
5-14-6-1
The media coverage is already wild and we haven’t even seen a trial date set yet lol. This is gonna be Canada’s version of the OJ trial. It’s gonna be an absolute circus.
The media coverage is already wild and we haven’t even seen a trial date set yet lol. This is gonna be Canada’s version of the OJ trial. It’s gonna be an absolute circus.
Maybe a rhyming catchphrase will come out of it and racial tensions will be exploited. They say history repeats itselfThe media coverage is already wild and we haven’t even seen a trial date set yet lol. This is gonna be Canada’s version of the OJ trial. It’s gonna be an absolute circus.
A lot still would.
Source - Just go browse Facebook comments on any news article
So you'd rather a woman was assaulted than that she wasn't assaulted and made untrue accusations?
I'm pretty sure that the reason sexual assault is judged harshly is because it is extremely painful and damaging to the person it occurred to. I wouldn't want that for anyone.
No Johnny Cochrane to save these boys. Every time I think of the OJ trial I think of this Dave Chappell skit.Maybe a rhyming catchphrase will come out of it and racial tensions will be exploited. They say history repeats itself
I find that the bar for your stats is quite uneven. I seriously doubt that 2-10% of accusations are "proven" false beyond a reasonable doubt, whereas convictions are proven beyond a reasonable doubt.For the idiots who keep repeating this claim as though its disposative, the number of accusations proven false is between 2 and 10%. That figure only includes claims that were clearly proven to be false and not claims which could not be adjudicated either way. Conversely, only between 5 and 10% of accusations result in convictions (I.e., proven to be clearly true). Virtually identical. The great majority are indetermined. That's just the reality because these things tend to happen in private.
The team 100% needs to face a suspension from international competition. Absolutely indefensible behavior from the players, to the adult chaperone (“M.M.”), all the way to the top of the organization.Court filing reveals new details about alleged Hockey Canada group sexual assault
Some sections of the document have been redacted, but it provides the fullest picture to date of what allegedly transpired in the early morning hours of June 19, 2018www.theglobeandmail.com
So what you're saying is that rapists around the world have missed the boat, all they have to do is film 6-second videos coercing the victim to say "it was ok with her" after their deed is done to almost make sure they won't be convicted?The players don't have to reasonably prove that the consent was without coercion.
The burden of proof is on the prosecutors to prove that it was coerced, or prove that she wanted to leave and wasn't allowed.
This is going to be difficult to prove. That was all I was saying.
If I was a betting man, I would bet that this case results in a "not guilty" verdict. And yes, I know that is different than "they are innocent".
We will see.
These are usually the ones that are pictures of their truck with a lift, some weird anime character, or some sort of pseudo-dad humor/cringe saying/photo unfortunately with some fake name/nickname lol
Canadian trials aren't televised.The media coverage is already wild and we haven’t even seen a trial date set yet lol. This is gonna be Canada’s version of the OJ trial. It’s gonna be an absolute circus.
Very true. Unless parties consent and the judge grants access but that rarely happens and surely wouldn’t in the case.Canadian trials aren't televised.
I find that the bar for your stats is quite uneven. I seriously doubt that 2-10% of accusations are "proven" false beyond a reasonable doubt, whereas convictions are proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
In reality, less than 5% of allegations are deemed to be false, with 95% of allegations being true, but only a fraction of them currently overcoming the "beyond a reasonable doubt" part. This means that a vast majority of women who are sexually assaulted never see justice.
linkPictures in Accused Rapist's Camera Provide Chilling Evidence Against Him
Alleged rapist's photos clear woman who was charged with falsely reporting rape.
April 15, 2011 -- A Washington State woman who police charged with filing a false rape report has been vindicated by chilling photos of her ordeal found on an accused serial rapist's camera, law-enforcement officials say.
Marc O'Leary, 32, is currently being held in Jefferson County jail in Colorado on a $5 million cash bond and has been charged with 25 felony counts including rape, burglary and stalking in connection with two rapes in Golden and Westminster, Colo., and an attempted rape in Lakewood, Colo.
<cut>
Detectives testified this week that when they raided O'Leary's home in Lakewood, a Denver suburb, they took a memory card from his camera that showed more than a hundred photos of his sex-assault victims. They identified one of the photos as being of a woman in Lynnwood, Wash., who was 18 when she reported a rape in 2008.
Cops didn't believe her story, and she had to pay a $500 fine for making a false charge. O'Leary lived in nearby Mountlake Terrace, Wash., from 2006 to 2009, police say.
The case has now been reopened, and the Washington victim has had her court costs reimbursed and her record expunged. "She was in fact the victim of a rape," said Cmdr. Steve Rider of the Lynnwood Police Department. "We believe strongly there is a link and Marc O'Leary perpetrated the crime here."
<snip>
As for the victim in Lynnwood, Rider said it has been difficult for her to relive both the rape and the failure of investigators to believe her. But now, he said, "her healing process can begin, and she can get justice."
If someone is hoping the accusations are untrue then that is being skeptical of the victim’s claim. It seems in rape cases there are 2 starting points: the victim is lying, or the victim is to be believed. Everyone who says they want to see it out in court generally show their bias. They will only comment on the people they call the mob but they won’t say “let’s see how it plays out in court” to the people who are skeptical of the victim. I am of the belief that a victim who comes forth should be believed until proven otherwise
That was such a bad moment. He thought he was making a point; but he was just making an excuse.He stepped in when the detective was fielding a question to say that he thinks a problem with sexual assault is the sexualization of women and girls by the media.
The chaperone works for Nike CanadaThe team 100% needs to face a suspension from international competition. Absolutely indefensible behavior from the players, to the adult chaperone (“M.M.”), all the way to the top of the organization.
And one is still playing in the NHL who doesn’t care to comment. That poor girl was unconsciousNah, the circus will be when the 2003 U20 team case gets indictments.
Clock starts now until 18 monthsWhy wasn't they allowed to play until found guilty? Take years to go through courts.
It was a little more then that. Read the 12 second video transcript, and the text messages the next day between the victim and the ring leader.So what you're saying is that rapists around the world have missed the boat, all they have to do is film 6-second videos coercing the victim to say "it was ok with her" after their deed is done to almost make sure they won't be convicted?
Thanks for the correction. I’d be interested to know what exactly his professional role/relationship was to the team.The chaperone works for Nike Canada
I think that’s exactly what happened. But as a general rule for police chiefs, don’t try to appoint, excuse, or appoint blame. Just write down the facts and work from there.I didn’t watch the press conference but to play devils advocate, is it possible he was trying to draw attention towards bigger issues to promote change but he bungled it and put his foot in his mouth?
Probably an unlimited bank account to wine and dine?Thanks for the correction. I’d be interested to know what exactly his professional role/relationship was to the team.
It was brainless, right? Leeway to new situation. But wtf was that diatribe?!?!?It did not seem at all like the right place or time to interject that, especially in that he said he wanted to interject it while the detective was answering another question.