Habs VP of Communications defends Mailloux

[spintheblackcircle]

Mailloux committed a crime and was justly punished. Either stick to the facts or don't comment.

Your first point is correct, he committed a crime

Your second point is 100% opinion and not fact.

Perhaps you should take your own advice.

 

[The Grim Reaper]

I feel like I have no idea what this threads about. I must have missed something.

 

[Lshap]

Your first point is correct, he committed a crime

Your second point is 100% opinion and not fact.

Perhaps you should take your own advice.

The law is not 'my opinion'. Mailloux's specific indictment and conviction are not 'my opinion'. These are very specific outcomes adhering to very specific legal definitions. Disagree? Go yell at Sweden's legal system.

Real sex crimes are extremely serious. The term should not be used casually and incorrectly.

 

[MadeUpName]

Law is semantics. So of course Chantale is using semantics.

Lots of people are being really selective in what they're fighting against.

They are deliberately obfuscating the point by turning it into an argument over legal terminology. Which has nothing to do with general sentiment - the whole point of the matter.

General sentiment doesn't want to be involved with groomers OR individuals who don't understand sexual consent. Both are abhorrent. Arguing the legal semantics is a diversion.

"My pervert is less legally perverted than your pervert! Checkmate!"

Isn't the strong argument they think it is.

 

[Albatros]

Just like stealing money from your pants can be part of a sexual act. Or blackmailing you after sex is part of the sexual act. These aren't sex crimes, even though sex is part of the story.

Please don't confuse this issue with incorrect and misleading legal definitions. Mailloux committed a crime and was justly punished. Either stick to the facts or don't comment.

Theft and blackmail generally have other, non-sexual motives. It's safe to say that Mailloux did not take the pictures because of his strong interest in photography, however.

 

[Lshap]

Theft and blackmail generally have other, non-sexual motives. It's safe to say that Mailloux did not take the pictures because of his strong interest in photography, however.

Agreed. His motives were probably bragging or a similarly dumb teenaged thing. What he did was a crime and deserved punishment, however it's not a sex crime; we should at least try to be more responsible when it comes to using that term.

 

[Scandale du Jour]

Sure, obviously it involved sex. However, the reason it wasn't a sex crime is because sex crimes carry much more severe punishments, as well as permanent social stigmas – as they should. Calling something a 'sex crime' and Mailloux a 'sex offender' is not only factually wrong, it dilutes real sex crimes, it lumps him in with real sex offenders, and it lowers the bar even further (if that's possible) on social media chatter.

Fair enough.

Then, I'll make my moral judgement using other words.

Logan Mailloux is a piece of shit who did not have any respect for the girl he engaged in sexual encounters with. He is the product of a toxic culture that encourages young men to view women as trophies to be collected. The entire response around his action AND the other scandals of sexual nature around hockey are proof of that sick culture. Behavior like his is not acceptable and should not be reduced to "boys will be boys".

 

[Pink Mist]

It is not sexual misconduct. Mailloux was charged and convicted under an entirely different section of Sweden's Criminal Code – the equivalent of defamation or invasion of privacy. You can't just say, "That's semantics". Law is built on semantics. Sex crimes are a very specific branch of law that carry very specific consequences. Inventing our own definitions confuses the story and creates the misinformed conversations we see on social media.

For context: If you have sex with someone and they steal your wallet, it's theft. If you have sex with someone and they threaten to tell your wife unless you pay them money, it's extortion.

Both involve sex. Neither is a sex crime.

Mailloux isnt getting charged with his crime here unless there was a sexual element. This is absolutely a charge of sexual misconduct and your defense here using theft is moronic

 

[Lshap]

Fair enough.

Then, I'll make my moral judgement using other words.

Logan Mailloux is a piece of shit who did not have any respect for the girl he engaged in sexual encounters with. He is the product of a toxic culture that encourages young men to view women as trophies to be collected. The entire response around his action AND the other scandals of sexual nature around hockey are proof of that sick culture. Behavior like his is not acceptable and should not be reduced to "boys will be boys".

I agree with the root of this problem – kids who are living in a bubble without the checks and balances of parents and normal social environments.

The other part of this problem is the dehumanizing aspect of social media. That's what makes boys and girls believe they can post pics, cyberbully, catfish, whatever, without consequences. Because it's indirect and doesn't involve physical contact kids thoughtlessly post some seriously hurtful, damaging shit. My opinion - I'd place Mailloux's actions into that category.

 

[Lshap]

Mailloux isnt getting charged with his crime here unless there was a sexual element. This is absolutely a charge of sexual misconduct and your defense here using theft is moronic

Get a grip and read again. I didn't post a 'defence'. I shared the actual facts. You're welcome to share your opinion, but don't twist reality to feed your feelings.

 

[Pink Mist]

Get a grip and read again. I didn't post a 'defence'. I shared the actual facts. You're welcome to share your opinion, but don't twist reality to feed your feelings.

Those weren't "facts" those were your opinions.

Maybe take your own advice. Read up on the law he was charged with for offensive photography. The law entered the Swedish criminal code in the early 2010s in response to the phenomenon of people taking sexual and nude photos of others without their consent.

So yeah, I would says its a fact to call it a sexual misconduct crime since this is exactly what the law was designed to criminalize

 

[abo9]

For context, this is the tweet she was responding to.

She’s not defending his actions but rather clarifying what he was convicted for in Sweden.

generally i love the Habs and everything that they do,, but stuff like this is embarasing

especially on a day where Ian Cole is accused of terrible things, the Oilers fire a minor league coach for having charges related to assaulting minors, and with all of the hockey canada sexual assault things going on

she quickly deleted her tweet but here it is

In what way did she "defend" him

For context, this is the tweet she was responding to.

She’s not defending his actions but rather clarifying what he was convicted for in Sweden.

What a weird case to compare this new one to. The Mailloux crime has already been settled and Mailloux paid his dues no?

Like, the victim already came forward, the trial already happened, Mailloux was already found guilty, and he already experienced whatever punishment was handed in Sweden.

Isn't the Mailloux case one that was successfully handled by the judicial system? It wasn't hidden for years, as far as I'm aware the victim wasn't coerced to silence, Mailloux didn't go unpunished etc etc.

 

[Lshap]

Those weren't "facts" those were your opinions.

Maybe take your own advice. Read up on the law he was charged with for offensive photography. The law entered the Swedish criminal code in the early 2010s in response to the phenomenon of people taking sexual and nude photos of others without their consent.

So yeah, I would says its a fact to call it a sexual misconduct crime since this is exactly what the law was designed to criminalize

He was charged in Section 4 of Sweden's criminal code – an entirely different section than their sexual crimes, which is Section 6. Disagree? Take it up with the Swedish courts.

So yes, those were facts. Either accept them or keep your misinformed statements to yourself.

Want my personal feelings? Ask me. But the legal rulings won't change, no matter how either of us feel.

 

[Romang67]

The Habs VP of Communications is gonna be mighty upset when she finds out how many Swedish newspapers are referring to Mailloux's crime as a sex crime.

Rookie mistake on those newspapers. Setting themselves up for defamation lawsuits like that. Or sexual misconduct is a broad term. Who knows, really. Other than the Habs VP of Communications.

 

[Scandale du Jour]

I agree with the root of this problem – kids who are living in a bubble without the checks and balances of parents and normal social environments.

The other part of this problem is the dehumanizing aspect of social media. That's what makes boys and girls believe they can post pics, cyberbully, catfish, whatever, without consequences. Because it's indirect and doesn't involve physical contact kids thoughtlessly post some seriously hurtful, damaging shit. My opinion - I'd place Mailloux's actions into that category.

I do not disagree, but I think it is deeper than that.

Forget the nature of social media. The kid still took a picture of the young woman and sent it to its friends. To me, the channel he used to brag, while a problem, is pale in comparaison to the action itself. He clearly saw her as nothing more than a trophy. That's sad in itself. Until that kind of view of women changes, scandals like his (and much worse - ie Cole, gang rape, etc) will continue to happen.

 

[Machinehead]

"He left his feet, Bill, but other than that it's a clean hit."

 

[Rubi]

Montreal... still tone deaf.

 

[Ezekial]

Got in a discussion with a buddy about this kid and he was hell bent on saying how terrible of a human he was for being a sexual assaulter, it was only after multiple times explicitly saying what happened that he realized "oh I was thinking about a different situation with a different prospect."

He shared a video of him being blown and shows no remorse for it. Super uncool and not smart thing to do but he's not an assaulter and there is coming back from it. Not something that should ruin his career.

 

[PaulD]

Montreal... still tone deaf.

The Marc Bergevin sabotage rolls on.

 

[Frank Drebin]

She would fit in well here in the thread where people were arguing Cole wasn't a pedophile because "you need to be attracted to pre-pubescent people to be a pedophile!"

He's not that piece of shit, he's just another piece of shit that I'm arguing purely for semantics.

Ian Cole and Logan Mailloux are murderers.

Would you say that is accurate, or would you argue that purely for semantics?

Setting the record straight with facts and with the truth is embarrassing? What did Chantal say in that tweet that was wrong, or even remotely embarrassing?

Some mouth breather on twitter calling for the protest of someones career was spewing libel about a Canadiens player by saying he was convicted of something that he was not. She set the record straight about an employee of the organization by spelling out exactly what the charges against him were.

But yes, let's continue to forgo facts and truth in favour of people's misguided feelings.

Like these morons calling Ian Cole a pedophile and then getting up in arms when they're corrected on their ignorant terminology. "hes a bad guy so we can call him whatever we want" Fk off.

 

[Frank Drebin]

I can't stand how this board is turning into reddit.

There really is only a handful of outspoken, obnoxious posters. Show up like clockwork in every thread like this.

 

[PostBradMalone]

Sure, obviously it involved sex. However, the reason it wasn't a sex crime is because sex crimes carry much more severe punishments, as well as permanent social stigmas – as they should. Calling something a 'sex crime' and Mailloux a 'sex offender' is not only factually wrong, it dilutes real sex crimes, it lumps him in with real sex offenders, and it lowers the bar even further (if that's possible) on social media chatter.

Just like stealing money from your pants can be part of a sexual act. Or blackmailing you after sex is part of the sexual act. These aren't sex crimes, even though sex is part of the story.

Please don't confuse this issue with incorrect and misleading legal definitions. Mailloux committed a crime and was justly punished. Either stick to the facts or don't comment.

This is a good point. Saying nothing is often the best recourse.

The law is not 'my opinion'. Mailloux's specific indictment and conviction are not 'my opinion'. These are very specific outcomes adhering to very specific legal definitions. Disagree? Go yell at Sweden's legal system.

Real sex crimes are extremely serious. The term should not be used casually and incorrectly.

Agreed. His motives were probably bragging or a similarly dumb teenaged thing. What he did was a crime and deserved punishment, however it's not a sex crime; we should at least try to be more responsible when it comes to using that term.

I agree with the root of this problem – kids who are living in a bubble without the checks and balances of parents and normal social environments.

The other part of this problem is the dehumanizing aspect of social media. That's what makes boys and girls believe they can post pics, cyberbully, catfish, whatever, without consequences. Because it's indirect and doesn't involve physical contact kids thoughtlessly post some seriously hurtful, damaging shit. My opinion - I'd place Mailloux's actions into that category.

Get a grip and read again. I didn't post a 'defence'. I shared the actual facts. You're welcome to share your opinion, but don't twist reality to feed your feelings.

He was charged in Section 4 of Sweden's criminal code – an entirely different section than their sexual crimes, which is Section 6. Disagree? Take it up with the Swedish courts.

So yes, those were facts. Either accept them or keep your misinformed statements to yourself.

Want my personal feelings? Ask me. But the legal rulings won't change, no matter how either of us feel.

One page of this thread alone. You’re working harder than Habs PR to try and “correct the record”.

 

[Frank Drebin]

I'm not charging him with anything. It was sexual misconduct.

Sexual misconduct is a broad category. What he did was absolutely sexual misconduct, even if his exact plea agreement was semantically something else.

Just like if you kill someone, and you're charged with manslaughter - someone calling you a "murderer" isn't inaccurate.

Yeah, thats completely inaccurate, by definition of the words themselves. Just like calling someone who grooms and has sex with young ladies a pedophile. Its just incorrect, so lets stop doing that. No matter how upset you are, no matter how much it makes you feel like an activist.

 

[Romang67]

She's not technically incorrect. There is no "sexual misconduct" law in Sweden, so of course he wasn't convicted of sexual misconduct.

He was convicted of, without consent, recording and sharing a woman's performing a sexual act.

It could be that the VP of Communications wanted to clarify what Mailloux had done. Or she wanted to obfuscate because it's becoming such a long list of hockey players' sexual misconducts (using the colloquial term here, Habs VP of Communication, please don't tweet at me) against women surfacing in the past few years.

"He left his feet, Bill, but other than that it's a clean hit."

I'd liken it a bit more to "He wasn't penalized for leaving his feet on the hit, Bill. He was penalized for charging."

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

Fair enough.

Then, I'll make my moral judgement using other words.

Logan Mailloux is a piece of shit who did not have any respect for the girl he engaged in sexual encounters with. He is the product of a toxic culture that encourages young men to view women as trophies to be collected. The entire response around his action AND the other scandals of sexual nature around hockey are proof of that sick culture. Behavior like his is not acceptable and should not be reduced to "boys will be boys".

I agree with what you've said here, though I always have some trouble/trepidation pinning this exclusively to hockey or 'hockey culture'.

These people exist in hockey, in Canada hockey is special and offers special status, so their is uniqueness for sure, but I've also seen these people in high school generally, on jobsites, playing other sports, exc. If you wanna talk about culture & women being trophies, look at rap & popular music that kids love - alot of it is very degrading. And also a culture that, atleast in part, promotes partying/alcohol consumption.

In Canada alot of these people go into hockey b/c it is so big here, and in alot of places enough isn't done to weed out this behaviour, but I do think it's a deeper/bigger/wider cultural thing than just hockey (also a high-status male thing).