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

[KnightofBoston]

What could that evidence be? All I can think of is someone who was there acts as a witness against their teammates.

this is going to be the main evidence, corroboration between the players and the victim. Especially if one of these witnesses is an accessory and wants to plea out by helping the investigation

 

[4thline]

What could that evidence be? All I can think of is someone who was there acts as a witness against their teammates.

Not a lawyer- but things I can think of that could be used to support her side of the story-

She isn't alleging that they held her down and forced themselves on her- rather a combination of her both being too drunk to consent, and not wanting to consent but being "directed, manipulated and intimidated into remaining,". So what could that evidence be? Anything that corroborates her hesitance/desire to stop and the players recognizing it and pushing her to continue.

The "consent" video itself could speak to her intoxication/capacity at the time, as well potential duress. The very existence of the second video could be used to infer that something happened in that hour that gave the players concern and reason to want it- such as her wanting to stop.

Texts between players showing their observations of her behavior/ their misgivings at the time

Possible videos between the two that are publicly known of

Bartender/Uber driver witness accounts of her level of intoxication

The statements of the players themselves

Security footage of the golf clubs going into the room

Etc etc.

 

[Suntouchable13]

I don’t get this victim blaming stuff. Any woman (as well as any man) is allowed to have sex with anyone they want. It’s up to each and every one of us to be respectful of each other. We have to be kind to ourselves, of course, but also each other.

 

[BMOK33]

What could that evidence be? All I can think of is someone who was there acts as a witness against their teammates.

That’s about the only thing that would be worth a darn at this stage. damming forensic or video/photo evidence would have been available 6 years ago so odds are it’s not that. I’m just surprised someone would be willing to be a “rat” in a situation where there was no solid evidence anyway, so what exactly would you be saving yourself from if there was no real possible charge to get a lighter sentence on

 

[Profet]

That’s about the only thing that would be worth a darn at this stage. damming forensic or video/photo evidence would have been available 6 years ago so odds are it’s not that. I’m just surprised someone would be willing to be a “rat” in a situation where there was no solid evidence anyway, so what exactly would you be saving yourself from if there was no real possible charge to get a lighter sentence on

Being a human being with morality?

 

[MXD]

That’s about the only thing that would be worth a darn at this stage. damming forensic or video/photo evidence would have been available 6 years ago so odds are it’s not that. I’m just surprised someone would be willing to be a “rat” in a situation where there was no solid evidence anyway, so what exactly would you be saving yourself from if there was no real possible charge to get a lighter sentence on

Two things here :
- E.M. may be cooperating more than she was in 2018-2019.
- If there is indeed a "rat", it better not be that guy who couldn't get an NHL offer, because optics that didn't look great are now looking much worse.

 

[BTO]

Z

There are tons of articles naming the players.

Police to hold news conference on probe of 2018 sex assault allegations

London police say they will hold a news conference to update its probe into an alleged sexual assault involving junior hockey players

lfpress.com

Yes, but they are naming players who have been granted leaves of absence from their teams, not the players who have been “invited” to surrender to police. Sure, there may be a link, but there also may not be, and to claim that there indeed is a link is a matter of speculation at this point in time.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

There are tons of articles naming the players.

Police to hold news conference on probe of 2018 sex assault allegations

London police say they will hold a news conference to update its probe into an alleged sexual assault involving junior hockey players

lfpress.com

This article does not directly link the five players to the five as-yet unconfirmed players.

You’re actually making a great point for our policy because you’re proving that people won’t be able to handle the distinction.

You’re even responding to my specific response to this (which is still true in the link you provide here) so I’m not sure what you think is different here.

I’ve read this article two dozen times because people keep sending it to me as “proof” and I’m hoping they added something to the article, but nope. Sane article. Same implied connection but not stated. The article is having you make the conclusion. The article does not present the conclusion.

Stop sending me this same article, folks.

 

[shaner8989]

A second video, 12 seconds long, was filmed at 4:26 am.

“Are you recording me?” E.M. said on the video. “Okay, good. It was all consensual. You are so paranoid. Holy. I enjoyed it. It was fine. It was all consensual

 

[BMOK33]

Being a human being with morality?

Never happens in these cases, if you were gonna do that you’d have done that right away, not years later. It’s possible they used a tactic often used by investigators where they might have scared them into thinking they had evidence they didn’t actually have in order to get a reaction from the suspected party or parties. It’s perfectly legal, at least here in the US to falsely tell a suspect you know something you don’t in order to see if they’ll talk and or change their behaviors indicating they have committed the crime. I’m sure it’ll all come out at some stage

 

[Fatass]

That’s about the only thing that would be worth a darn at this stage. damming forensic or video/photo evidence would have been available 6 years ago so odds are it’s not that. I’m just surprised someone would be willing to be a “rat” in a situation where there was no solid evidence anyway, so what exactly would you be saving yourself from if there was no real possible charge to get a lighter sentence on

Conscience?

 

[4thline]

A second video, 12 seconds long, was filmed at 4:26 am.

“Are you recording me?” E.M. said on the video. “Okay, good. It was all consensual. You are so paranoid. Holy. I enjoyed it. It was fine. It was all consensual. I am so sober, that’s why I can’t do this right now."

Why did you omit the below context, and the bolded word salad?

"In one of the videos, the woman is seen wiping her eyes and slurring her words, the documents said."


The police have the video. At this point it's looking like charges will be laid, either inspite of it- or even partly because of it.

 

[Unbiased Fan]

Of these 5 players let’s say in a hypothetical situation one of them is a élite goalie and the said goalie is not convicted but his name is tarnished would the said goalie still have a future in the NHL or would he get the Voynov treatment?

 

[joestevens29]

This article does not directly link the five players to the five as-yet unconfirmed players.

You’re actually making a great point for our policy because you’re proving that people won’t be able to handle the distinction.

You’re even responding to my specific response to this (which is still true in the link you provide here) so I’m not sure what you think is different here.

I’ve read this article two dozen times because people keep sending it to me as “proof” and I’m hoping they added something to the article, but nope. Sane article. Same implied connection but not stated. The article is having you make the conclusion. The article does not present the conclusion.

Stop sending me this same article, folks.

Fool me once shame on you fool me a dozen times shame on....

 

[Kairi Zaide]

Never happens in these cases, if you were gonna do that you’d have done that right away, not years later. It’s possible they used a tactic often used by investigators where they might have scared them into thinking they had evidence they didn’t actually have in order to get a reaction from the suspected party or parties. It’s perfectly legal, at least here in the US to falsely tell a suspect you know something you don’t in order to see if they’ll talk and or change their behaviors indicating they have committed the crime. I’m sure it’ll all come out at some stage

While what you're saying about the tactics might be correct, people that committed or witnessed a crime and stayed silent only to speak without even any pressure several years later has happened before.

Human psychology is complex, but in these cases, it might be that the feeling of guilt just gets overwhelming. It might be the lack of courage back then. And so on.

 

[mr figgles]

A second video, 12 seconds long, was filmed at 4:26 am.

“Are you recording me?” E.M. said on the video. “Okay, good. It was all consensual. You are so paranoid. Holy. I enjoyed it. It was fine. It was all consensual

The fact that they felt like they needed to make that video should set off alarm bells. Also, what would you expect her to say after just being raped for hours and the only way out is through a room full of men that just raped her?

 

[heynowbababooey]

After skimming through a few pages here I'm surprised this thread hasn't been locked. I've seen threads way less tense and less controversial than this shut down in less than an hour.

 

[Profet]

Of these 5 players let’s say in a hypothetical situation one of them is a élite goalie and the said goalie is not convicted but his name is tarnished would the said goalie still have a future in the NHL or would he get the Voynov treatment?

Even if not convicted, depending on the evidence presented at the trial, teams may find that these players violated the "morality clause" (whatever they call it these days) and find these players unsuitable to be signed.

 

[Reality Czech]

I can't believe this thread is still open.

Anyway, I've been speculating in my head this entire time. Try and stop me

I'm reporting this post

 

[hoglund]

This topic shouldn't be discussed until after the trial. These 5 players are not even convicted yet, it's circumstantial evidence because they left their teams for personal reasons. I'm sure that these are the players in question, but there's no proof and everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

 

[Jugitsu]

There is an inherent dimness kind of baked into them.

If it's only 4... should do

Canada
USA
Scandinavia
Central Europe (Germany, Switzerland, Czechia, Slovakia, etc...)

this is going to be the main evidence, corroboration between the players and the victim. Especially if one of these witnesses is an accessory and wants to plea out by helping the investigation

Not a lawyer- but things I can think of that could be used to support her side of the story-

She isn't alleging that they held her down and forced themselves on her- rather a combination of her both being too drunk to consent, and not wanting to consent but being "directed, manipulated and intimidated into remaining,". So what could that evidence be? Anything that corroborates her hesitance/desire to stop and the players recognizing it and pushing her to continue.

The "consent" video itself could speak to her intoxication/capacity at the time, as well potential duress. The very existence of the second video could be used to infer that something happened in that hour that gave the players concern and reason to want it- such as her wanting to stop.

Texts between players showing their observations of her behavior/ their misgivings at the time

Possible videos between the two that are publicly known of

Bartender/Uber driver witness accounts of her level of intoxication

The statements of the players themselves

Security footage of the golf clubs going into the room

Etc etc.

That’s about the only thing that would be worth a darn at this stage. damming forensic or video/photo evidence would have been available 6 years ago so odds are it’s not that. I’m just surprised someone would be willing to be a “rat” in a situation where there was no solid evidence anyway, so what exactly would you be saving yourself from if there was no real possible charge to get a lighter sentence on

Good points. Will be interesting to see how thing unfold. Because it's hard to believe they are working with the exact same information they had 6 years ago.

Edit: I have no idea how the first 2 quotes were added to this message.

 

[shaner8989]

Would someone really call police back after filing a report to say stop with any proceedings? If you really felt some sort of assault was taken on you there is no way you call them back and say to stop any proceedings. Am I wrong here?

Lots of conflicting stuff. I guess the trial will show what really happened.

 

[Unbiased Fan]

Not a lawyer- but things I can think of that could be used to support her side of the story-

She isn't alleging that they held her down and forced themselves on her- rather a combination of her both being too drunk to consent, and not wanting to consent but being "directed, manipulated and intimidated into remaining,". So what could that evidence be? Anything that corroborates her hesitance/desire to stop and the players recognizing it and pushing her to continue.

The "consent" video itself could speak to her intoxication/capacity at the time, as well potential duress. The very existence of the second video could be used to infer that something happened in that hour that gave the players concern and reason to want it- such as her wanting to stop.

Texts between players showing their observations of her behavior/ their misgivings at the time

Possible videos between the two that are publicly known of

Bartender/Uber driver witness accounts of her level of intoxication

The statements of the players themselves

Security footage of the golf clubs going into the room

Etc etc.

Intoxication isn’t a defence in most cases the exception are being drugged or pressured into drinking.

 

[Strangle]

Even if this was "consensual", you have to be an immense scum bag to want to gang bang some drunk girl.

All these players will be tainted regardless of outcome.

This is the truth right here. The law abiding part of this isn’t exactly objective, as most of it resides in what is in one persons mind.

But morally, these dudes are f***ing scum bags either way

 

[oldunclehue]

Found guilty or not, theese guys should face justice. Not only the 5, but the guys watching too. As a dad of 2 daughters, I`m absolutely not ok with 8 guys taking advantage of 1 girl, no matter how drunk she was and if she said "no" or not. They should all face justice. In 1 way or another...

Agreed, as the father of two sons, I am raising them to treat women as equals in all situations and NEVER EVER take advantage of anyone. Make sure you raise your daughters to never allow themselves to be in a situation where it is her and multiple hockey players....or guys in general where alcohol and hormones' are involved.