Hockey Canada Scandal and Rape Trial

[Silky Johnson]

Innocent until proven guilty

"Ya but if you are found not guilty it doesn't mean you are innocent!"

How many times I have seen this said on this board.

The whole point of innocent until proven guilty means you continue your innocence even after the trial when you are found not guilty.

Sort of. The presumption of innocence and a not guilty verdict protects them in the context of criminal courts and governments.

However, it does not protect the acquitted from being sued civilly and being found libel for the same conduct. This also applies to employment law. Someone could be found "not guilty" but the standard for them breaking their employment code of conduct is not to the level of "reasonable doubt".

To sum up, if you are found "not guilty" you need to be treated as "innocent" by the government and criminal system, but you may be found to be liable or responsible. Employers and general public are not held to the "reasonable doubt" standard.

 

[DEANYOUNGBLOOD17]

Always the same few posters on the wrong side in these threads

Same as the Panarin thread, previous WJC scandal threads

Seriously embarrassing stuff

How can there be a wrong side?

Is the wrong side any view that is opposite or opposed to your views and beliefs.

I enjoy hearing all sides and opinions and putting the proper weight and consideration to everyone’s opinion that I think it deserves.

“ I’m sure there are good people on both sides of this event”

 

[archangel2]

Interesting that so many players from the team are being called. This makes it more interesting.

 

[DEANYOUNGBLOOD17]

I could see a team that doesn't care much about past behaviour, who is desperate for goaltending rolling the dice on Carter Hart.

I agree ….. I think Carter Hart is the only player out of the group that plays in the NHL again.

Goalies are Voodoo any ways!

 

[DEANYOUNGBLOOD17]

Would make a good jury member.Is this really a thread (topic) where jokes fit? This is very serious stuff here. A woman was sexually assaulted by a group of young men. There’s a trial because of their actions. Nothing is funny here.

I don’t think you make a good jury member.

Coming to this conclusion after 1 day of trial of a possible 8 week trial. Coming to this conclusion after only hearing the prosecution opening statement without hearing any evidence.

No bias whatsoever.

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

Asking you to clarify wtf you're talking about is deflection? Sure thing.

What I was talking about was very clear. Being willfully ignorant kinda gave me my answer.

 

[Statto]

Why would someone's gender or race be an indication of their ability to be neutral?

I’m genuinely surprised you need to ask. Even subconscious bias plays a role even before you get into blatant prejudice and sexism. The majority of people with those views keep them too themselves so they will still find themselves on juries… in all countries.

 

[Statto]

So when a woman says that she was gang raped, you believe her?

If I’m the police I take what she’s says at face value and conduct an objective investigation. I don’t make any judgments and follow all the evidence.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

Who was being hateful?

If that’s what you took from that then you might need to read it again. Maybe let it marinate. Let it build up some bold flavours.

 

[Dr Quincy]

If declared not guilty some of these players should sue someone for all the millions they potentially missed out on because of this.

That's the last things players want. I'm not sure about Canadian law, but in the US defendants don't have to testify under oath and be vigorously cross-examined.

In any civil suit they will be deposed on record and be forced to answer all kinds of questions.

There is zero chance any would be sue unless a player can prove they weren't there and the Crown knew it.

 

[Voight]

He also went to prison for a year.

Yes and that didn't prevent him from having a long and successful career.

 

[Chainshot]

Yes and that didn't prevent him from having a long and successful career.

Yes, because he paid his debt to society and some level of justice was served to the family of the woman who was killed.

 

[Voight]

Yes, because he paid his debt to society and some level of justice was served to the family of the woman who was killed.

& what I'm saying is even if Carter Hart ends up being guilty and serves any kind of prison time (whether its house arrest or actual jail) I would not be shocked to see him play in the league again.

 

[Chainshot]

& what I'm saying is even if Carter Hart ends up being guilty and serves any kind of prison time (whether its house arrest or actual jail) I would not be shocked to see him play in the league again.

If that happens, I look forward to rooting with every fibre of my being against whatever team decides to sign him.

 

[StrangeVision]

Innocent until proven guilty

"Ya but if you are found not guilty it doesn't mean you are innocent!"

How many times I have seen this said on this board.

The whole point of innocent until proven guilty means you continue your innocence even after the trial when you are found not guilty.

"Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal mechanism, it is not natural law or some kind of objective truth. A person who committed a crime can be found not guilty in a court of law, just like an innocent person can be found guilty. The result of this trial doesn't change the fact that this group took advantage of a drunk woman and then tried to cover it up.

 

[Dr Quincy]

Not sure what you mean, or what your point is?

That one other case with a different set of fact patterns neither proves the guilt nor innocence of the defendants in this case.

Have there ever been cases of an innocent person being tried for rape? Yes (though the Duke players were never put on trial, thankfully and not to diminish their unjust ordeal at the hands of a corrupt government official). There have also been guilty people tried for rape.

So, we know both circumstances can happen. Now what specifically have you heard in this case that shows an on point comparison to the facts in the Duke case?

 

[bcv]

As usual, lots of people showing their colors in this thread.

 

[Curufinwe]

& what I'm saying is even if Carter Hart ends up being guilty and serves any kind of prison time (whether its house arrest or actual jail) I would not be shocked to see him play in the league again.

I would not want him back on the Flyers under any circumstances.

 

[toddkaz]

"Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal mechanism, it is not natural law or some kind of objective truth. A person who committed a crime can be found not guilty in a court of law, just like an innocent person can be found guilty. The result of this trial doesn't change the fact that this group took advantage of a drunk woman and then tried to cover it up.

Whats your point? You weren't there yet you presume to know what happened.

 

[Goatlender]

As usual, lots of people showing their colors in this thread.

I didn’t understand why we have a “no politics” rule on this board, but I do now after having read through this thread.

 

[BB79]

I would not want him back on the Flyers under any circumstances.

I don't know, even though he hasn't played NHL level hockey in years he could probably still come in stone cold and play better than either Flyer goalie I jest, but in all seriousness I agree, neither would I

 

[TheFinalWord]

& what I'm saying is even if Carter Hart ends up being guilty and serves any kind of prison time (whether its house arrest or actual jail) I would not be shocked to see him play in the league again.

If he's found guilty, there is zero chance he plays again. Even if he's found not guilty, I think there's zero chance any of these guys play again. Fair or not. If one of them was McDavid, then perhaps...but even Hart isn't good enough and will have been off the ice for years before this ends.

 

[FMichael]

That one other case with a different set of fact patterns neither proves the guilt nor innocence of the defendants in this case.

Have there ever been cases of an innocent person being tried for rape? Yes (though the Duke players were never put on trial, thankfully and not to diminish their unjust ordeal at the hands of a corrupt government official). There have also been guilty people tried for rape.

So, we know both circumstances can happen. Now what specifically have you heard in this case that shows an on point comparison to the facts in the Duke case?

No comparison - just a media driven case where those charged are deemed guilty until proven innocent...From what little I know of this case involving 'consent' was given and recorded via smartphone...I'm sure there's more to it than that.

 

[MXD]

If declared not guilty some of these players should sue someone for all the millions they potentially missed out on because of this.

They can if they want to lose time and money, unless they can prove a serious fault on the prosecution's/justice administration side.

It's also time to reiterate that a not guilty verdict doesn't mean they didn't factually do what they were charged of.

 

[RedHawkDown]

What's been presented isn't the facts, it's what the prosecutor plans to try to establish as facts

The defense will try to show, though their witnesses and questioning, that what the prosecutor is presenting isn't fact

You're skipping the 2nd part... please tell me you'll never serve jury duty

And it sucks for both falsely accused men, and for women who aren't believed. There doesn't have to be a heirachy about which one sucks more

Are you seriously insinuating that being falsely accused is just as bad as being raped?

WTF is going on in this thread?