Habs VP of Communications defends Mailloux

[Pink Mist]

Lol... a 'vested interest'. In other words, you're totally out of ammunition and are now creating make-believe agendas.

One last time: The facts are a starting point. They're not up for debate. Accept them and you enter a legitimate discussion. Twist them to suit your feelings and you're wasting everyone's time.

You clearly have not been reading my posts closely. I have already accepted the facts you keep repeating ad nauseum.

1) I have said he has charged with Offensive Photography and Defamation
2) I have said he his crime was taking a photo of someone performing a sexual act and sharing it with his teammates with out consent.

The facts you are missing are:
3) Offensive Photography was a crime entered into the Swedish Criminal Code in 2013 to address the phenomenon of taking sexual and nude photos without consent primarily due to the ease to do so with cell phones
4) That you don't get charged with Offensive Photography for taking unconsented photos of mundane things in private spaces; it was created for the exact types of sexual acts Mailloux was charged with.

You're hung up on fact #1 and unwilling to engage or accept any of the other facts. Maybe you should start doing so if you want to have a legitimate conversation. It is clearly a crime that can be considered sexual misconduct

 

[HabstuckinTO]

@Canadienna

I think you might want to read up on what happened.

I agree with you. But just wanted to point out that Seravalli is a tool.

 

[Xirik]

The funny thing about these posts is the consistent failure of people like you to realize when you're guilty of keyboard warrioring. It's a bit too predictable, like a script is being followed lol.

Funny things about these post are so consistent, Some guy with low self esteem attacking someone else in order to feel good about themselves. They talk about morals yet seem to have no problem with slandering others while doing it. It's very predictable, Like a script is being followed lol.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Funny things about these post are so consistent, Some guy with low self esteem attacking someone else in order to feel good about themselves. They talk about morals yet seem to have no problem with slandering others while doing it. It's very predictable, Like a script is being followed lol.

Doesnt' it feel dirty copy and pasting how they speak to people online?

 

[Ulic]

Thank you for being accurate – in this domain accuracy is very important. I agree what he did was gross and hurtful. Agreeing on the legal and moral realities is a good first step towards a constructive discussion.

You're welcome! Clearly the moral reality of Mailloux's action are more important than the specifics of how Swedish law classifies them.

This kind of unlawful sexual conduct needs to be brought to light everywhere it exists in hockey. Any endorsement or diminishing of this contuct should be met with equal resistance.

 

[Coaches Coroner]

Funny things about these post are so consistent, Some guy with low self esteem attacking someone else in order to feel good about themselves. They talk about morals yet seem to have no problem with slandering others while doing it. It's very predictable, Like a script is being followed lol.

Ya you should stop doing that. Some people attack Logan (not something I've done here), some people attack anyone criticizing him or his offense.

 

[jfhabs]

That doesn't even make sense. How is secretly photographing a sexual encounter and sharing it with teammates with her personal information not sexual misconduct?

Ask the Swedish legal system

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.

Wrong according to the Swedish legal department

 

[jfhabs]

You're welcome! Clearly the moral reality of Mailloux's action are more important than the specifics of how Swedish law classifies them.

This kind of unlawful sexual conduct needs to be brought to light everywhere it exists in hockey. Any endorsement or diminishing of this contuct should be met with equal resistance.

You don't think there's a gradation/difference between grooming underage higschool girls and what Mailloux did!? All in the same basket? Sorry but that sounds crazy too mee and that doesn't mean I'm diminishing what Mailloux did.

 

[Pink Mist]

You don't think there's a gradation/difference between grooming underage higschool girls and what Mailloux did!? All in the same basket? Sorry but that sounds crazy too mee and that doesn't mean I'm diminishing what Mailloux did.

You can walk and chew gum at the same time. No reason both can't be denounced

 

[Xirik]

Ya you should stop doing that. Some people attack Logan (not something I've done here), some people attack anyone criticizing him or his offense.

The fact that you can't see the hypocrisy of your statement is both funny and sad. Attacking me is fine but god forbid someone do it back to you.

 

[jfhabs]

You can walk and chew gum at the same time. No reason both can't be denounced

Clearly not what's happening in this thread and why chantale repsonded to the tweet.

 

[Coaches Coroner]

The fact that you can't see the hypocrisy of your statement is both funny and sad. Attacking me is fine but god forbid someone do it back to you.

Reading your posts I feel the same way, which is the kind of thing I was pointing out to begin with, and you continue to miss lol. Take care.

 

[MadeUpName]

Thank you for being accurate – in this domain accuracy is very important. I agree what he did was gross and hurtful. Agreeing on the legal and moral realities is a good first step towards a constructive discussion.

You seem dead-set on separating the legal and the moral in this situation through the obfuscation of legal terminology. Which is either extremely pedantic or dishonest from a moral standpoint. The morality aspect can't hide behind semantics.

 

[Xirik]

Reading your posts I feel the same way, which is the kind of thing I was pointing out to begin with, and you continue to miss lol. Take care.

I was mocking people on Twitter.

Twitter is a place where people are bloodthirsty and known to rush to judgement and generally not think before they type. I hate twitter with a passion. I think its one of evils of the world and really should be shutdown. I can't stop you attaching yourself to them but it wasn't my intent for anyone on these boards to feel "attacked" by my post.

 

[Ezekial]

person in charge of PR for a team explains factually what happened vs what is being spread online wjen a player on said team is being comoared to a pedophile.

More news at 11


He did show remorse... he has been talking st events examining what he did to other young men and why it is wrong.

Maybe now, his original statement was more of a "sorry this came to light" than "I'm sorry for having done this"

I'm sure he's doing a lot of things differently now.

 

[PostBradMalone]

Lol... a 'vested interest'. In other words, you're totally out of ammunition and are now creating make-believe agendas.

One last time: The facts are a starting point. They're not up for debate. Accept them and you enter a legitimate discussion. Twist them to suit your feelings and you're wasting everyone's time.

Except by spamming the thread with your semantics arguments, you are preventing any discussion from taking place… but I think you know that.

 

[PeteWorrell]

I was mocking people on Twitter.

Twitter is a place where people are bloodthirsty and known to rush to judgement and generally not think before they type. I hate twitter with a passion. I think its one of evils of the world and really should be shutdown. I can't stop you attaching yourself to them but it wasn't my intent for anyone on these boards to feel "attacked" by my post.

I am fine with Twitter existing as it means that i know where all those people are and to avoid it. Shut it down and the users will just split and contaminate other websites.

 

[Lshap]

You clearly have not been reading my posts closely. I have already accepted the facts you keep repeating ad nauseum.

1) I have said he has charged with Offensive Photography and Defamation
2) I have said he his crime was taking a photo of someone performing a sexual act and sharing it with his teammates with out consent.

The facts you are missing are:
3) Offensive Photography was a crime entered into the Swedish Criminal Code in 2013 to address the phenomenon of taking sexual and nude photos without consent primarily due to the ease to do so with cell phones
4) That you don't get charged with Offensive Photography for taking unconsented photos of mundane things in private spaces; it was created for the exact types of sexual acts Mailloux was charged with.

You're hung up on fact #1 and unwilling to engage or accept any of the other facts. Maybe you should start doing so if you want to have a legitimate conversation. It is clearly a crime that can be considered sexual misconduct

Yes, your #3 and #4 points are completely on point. Sex was obviously part of the story or the case wouldn't exist. The argument we were having was over how Mailloux is labeled. Why is this whole labeling thing important to me? Why am I demanding a higher standard of accuracy? Nothing to do with the Habs and much more to do with being a father of two sons. At that age, social labels cut pretty deep; legal labels are much worse and can affect their future lives.

This is just my personal opinion, but I think most teen sexuality is tied to self-esteem. Yes, there are some true sexual predators whose pathology or genes screw up their perception of the opposite sex. Those guys are flat out dangerous. But most normal kids are just looking for validation; most of the damaging garbage that takes place on social media can be traced back to that fundamental need. It doesn't excuse it; it simply helps explain it.

I'd like to think Mailloux's immature thoughtlessness falls into that category. He was too caught up with impressing his fellow jocks to consider the hurt he caused. Obviously I don't know the kid and have no idea what he's like as a person. He said the right things and appears to be on the right track. But none of us know if his thoughts match his apologies. I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I understand why you may not. The real verdict will be what kind of adult he becomes.

 

[Ezekial]

That you can't answer the question tells me you know what Mailloux did is wrong regardless of your efforts to split hairs, but you feel compelled to defend him because you're a Habs fan.

You can think what he did is wrong, and also think it's not sexual assault/sex crime.

At it's core its a privacy issue revolving around a consensual sexual encounter.

 

[hairylikebear]

Mailloux was "convicted of sexual misconduct's" - true enough, he was convicted of a crime that fits neatly in the category of sexual misconduct. The phrasing could be clearer but I'm going to forgive the francophone.

Habs VP: "He was convicted for sharing an explicit photo of a woman without her consent" - also true, and much clearer. Thank you for the clarification!

Wait everyone is mad?

 

[Devonator]

Rabble Rabble Rabble....

 

[Lshap]

Except by spamming the thread with your semantics arguments, you are preventing any discussion from taking place… but I think you know that.

You've been following me around, posting again and again and again about spamming a thread.

I'll let this piece of irony speak for itself.

 

[ole ole]

Multiple NHL teams have placed draft prospect Logan Mailloux on their "do not draft" lists after he was charged in Sweden for allegedly "taking and distributing an offensive photo without consent during a consensual sexual encounter," according to Frank Seravalli of Daily Faceoff.

According to a 48-page investigation report from Sweden’s North Region Polisen, which was obtained by Daily Faceoff, Mailloux secretly photographed the victim without her consent or knowledge while engaging in sex.

You must mean whiling engaging in sexual for-play.

 

[jfhabs]

Mailloux was "convicted of sexual misconduct's" - true enough, he was convicted of a crime that fits neatly in the category of sexual misconduct. The phrasing could be clearer but I'm going to forgive the francophone.

Habs VP: "He was convicted for sharing an explicit photo of a woman without her consent" - also true, and much clearer. Thank you for the clarification!

Wait everyone is mad?

I think "everyone" is mad because they link it to Ian Cole case which is allegedly a lot worse. I could be wrong but seems to me like the twitter poster and many here are trying to put both in the same basket.

Imo the crime Mailloux did isn't sexual in nature as oppose to what Ian Cole. It is related to a consensual sexual activity and it still bad, but there's a pretty big gap.

 

[Gurglesons]

You must mean whiling engaging in sexual for-play.

Man, some of you are insufferable in here.