May 1990 Rape Case involving Washington Capitals players

[Sergei Bure]

Straight from Scott Stevens Wikipedia page:

"In May 1990, while playing for the Capitals, Stevens was accused of participating in the rape of a 17-year-old girl outside a bar, alongside teammates Dino Ciccarelli, Geoff Courtnall, and Neil Sheehy No charges wound up occurring but it ended up being largely a he said/she said case, though a spokesperson for the Metropolitan police at the time stated that the police “have sufficient grounds to believe that a criminal offense did occur."

What are your memories from this? Do you guys believe that they got away with rape?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

this has been discussed in several threads before, here's one — The 1990 Georgetown Scandal

 

[WarriorofTime]

It very likely happened but got swept away and buried by the era it happened in, but nobody has any way to ever fully know for sure other than those involved. It'd likely be a much bigger story in 2023.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Do you guys believe that they got away with rape?

Yes. And it’s amazing how much the story was swept under the rug.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Careful with anything that's speculation, por favor.

 

[Staniowski]

Unfortunately, these stories that we hear about - of rape, sexual assault, etc. - in hockey are only the tip of the iceberg. These kinds of incidents were pretty commonplace in hockey in the '80s and '90s, and not just in the NHL and major junior. They happened in minor hockey too.

 

[McGarnagle]

I believe there's more truth to this than there was to the Gilmour case. I don't think Stevens was involved though, he was just implicated for being outside the limo as the incident allegedly occurred inside.

 

[ozzie]

What's with all these dark and depressing threads re-hashing incidents from 30-40 years ago? Most of these have been discussed previously, with no more to say with only old evidence available. I know it's the history section and all, but still. Pretty depressing.

Unless someone admits or writes a book with the truth, we aren't going to uncover anything new on these terrible allegations.

I will say, Gilmour become a God in Toronto. Stevens didn't do too badly either.

I would guess their status impacted any true desire to investigate seriously and effectively, Police sided with them. Such a different world then, no way it happens now.

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

I believe there's more truth to this than there was to the Gilmour case. I don't think Stevens was involved though, he was just implicated for being outside the limo as the incident allegedly occurred inside.

By most accounts, Stevens was definitely involved in the capacity as the lookout, which is pretty damning if the girl was indeed being raped in the car.

For me, the most charitable reading of the events (towards the accused), would be that the girl was a minor and shouldn’t have even been there, shouldn’t have been drinking, but so did, got into the limo with the players who perhaps thought she was of age and made conscious decisions for herself, but she came to regret what then transpired. Stevens didn’t commit rape, but whether it seemed like a fun time for everyone involved or not, he was there to make sure his teammates weren’t getting in trouble.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

What's with all these dark and depressing threads re-hashing incidents from 30-40 years ago? Most of these have been discussed previously, with no more to say with only old evidence available. I know it's the history section and all, but still. Pretty depressing.

Unless someone admits or writes a book with the truth, we aren't going to uncover anything new on these terrible allegations.

I will say, Gilmour become a God in Toronto. Stevens didn't do too badly either.

I would guess their status impacted any true desire to investigate seriously and effectively, Police sided with them. Such a different world then, no way it happens now.

Its the history of hockey forum.

 

[Dingo]

By most accounts, Stevens was definitely involved in the capacity as the lookout, which is pretty damning if the girl was indeed being raped in the car.

For me, the most charitable reading of the events (towards the accused), would be that the girl was a minor and shouldn’t have even been there, shouldn’t have been drinking, but so did, got into the limo with the players who perhaps thought she was of age and made conscious decisions for herself, but she came to regret what then transpired. Stevens didn’t commit rape, but whether it seemed like a fun time for everyone involved or not, he was there to make sure his teammates weren’t getting in trouble.

I think 17 was of age then, and may still be.
Consent is 16 in Canada, and was 14 until the early 2000s.

And a dolled up 17 yr old can look much older.

I think the main question is whether she did consent and then either regretted or money-chased, or if it was forced.

Another thing I’ve seen in my life, and nothing to the magnitude of this story but rather the same mindset, is girls talking about what they did the other night with their friends, who then immediately shame them which causes them to change their mind about how positive they were about it originally.

Im not making a call one way or another on this, cuz how the hell could I know?

I do find it odd to think of 4 men conspiring to rape someone, not due to high standards but only due to fear of consequence if even ONE person speaks, and especially men who have hot girls throw themselves at them a lot, but, I also know that many of the hockey players i know are really effed up.

 

[Mike C]

Its the history of hockey forum.

Plus we're like the old ladies in the laundromat and love the gossip

 

[wetcoast]

I think 17 was of age then, and may still be.
Consent is 16 in Canada, and was 14 until the early 2000s.

And a dolled up 17 yr old can look much older.

I think the main question is whether she did consent and then either regretted or money-chased, or if it was forced.

Another thing I’ve seen in my life, and nothing to the magnitude of this story but rather the same mindset, is girls talking about what they did the other night with their friends, who then immediately shame them which causes them to change their mind about how positive they were about it originally.

Im not making a call one way or another on this, cuz how the hell could I know?

I do find it odd to think of 4 men conspiring to rape someone, not due to high standards but only due to fear of consequence if even ONE person speaks, and especially men who have hot girls throw themselves at them a lot, but, I also know that many of the hockey players i know are really effed up.

Pretty fair reply and I did find a really good newspaper article on it way back when this was on the forum but not sure if I Can find it now.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1990/05/15/4-capitals-accused-of-rape/97bc50b8-0bf0-493c-b7d1-d8a08591ef6f/

It doesn't exactly paint a great picture even if it wasn't criminal.

Stevens and Courtnall were both with new teams the following season and Dino played 2 more years with the Capitals before being traded.

The newspaper report is somewhat similar to the London case with the world juniors in that a young woman known to the team in a social perhaps relationship setting and probably liquor was involved.

Lots of things along the spectrum here but it was looked at and dismissed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1990/06/30/jury-declines-to-indict-capitals-in-alleged-sex-attack/cb8bf32b-4afd-491f-983b-3123e6a8e495/

 

[Jets4Life]

Unfortunately, these stories that we hear about - of rape, sexual assault, etc. - in hockey are only the tip of the iceberg. These kinds of incidents were pretty commonplace in hockey in the '80s and '90s, and not just in the NHL and major junior. They happened in minor hockey too.

I'm willing to bet that they are as common today as they were 30 years ago. Look no further than the 2018 Hockey Canada scandal.

 

[Jets4Life]

Pretty fair reply and I did find a really good newspaper article on it way back when this was on the forum but not sure if I Can find it now.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1990/05/15/4-capitals-accused-of-rape/97bc50b8-0bf0-493c-b7d1-d8a08591ef6f/

It doesn't exactly paint a great picture even if it wasn't criminal.

Stevens and Courtnall were both with new teams the following season and Dino played 2 more years with the Capitals before being traded.

Just wanted to mention that the implication that Stevens was moved out of Washington due to the incident, is false. The Blues were actively courting Stevens at the time, and offered Stevens (a RFA at the time) a very generous contract, as it made him the highest paid defenseman in the NHL. The Blues even gave up two 1st round draft picks.

 

[wetcoast]

Just wanted to mention that the implication that Stevens was moved out of Washington due to the incident, is false. The Blues were actively courting Stevens at the time, and offered Stevens (a RFA at the time) a very generous contract, as it made him the highest paid defenseman in the NHL. The Blues even gave up two 1st round draft picks.

I didn't imply anything by it but thought that it would be an incomplete post without mentioning it and in the article it does state that the Capitals did suffer some damage to their brand.

Players come and go and 2 left after that season.

Sheehy left as well taking the free agent route like Stevens.

It's also very likely that Sheehy was leaving anyway as he was a borderline NHL Dman at that point struggling to stay in the league.

I'm willing to bet that they are as common today as they were 30 years ago. Look no further than the 2018 Hockey Canada scandal.

Hard to say but people attitudes sure have changed and social media brings a whole other world to issues like this.

 

[Jets4Life]

Hard to say but people attitudes sure have changed and social media brings a whole other world to issues like this.

Gang rape is treated just as bad in 1990, as it is today. People's attitudes have not changed in 30 years. It's probably more talked about due to social media, but the actual percentage of convictions is still the same, if not lower. I went to school during this time, and in middle school and High School, we had to do courses that included lessons on sexual assault.

It may only seem like it's more talked about, due to the topic being amplified by social media, but that could be said about many topics. Unfortunately, as we have probably learned by now, social media does not deter people from doing bad things, like rape and other crimes.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Gang rape is treated just as bad in 1990, as it is today. People's attitudes have not changed in 30 years. It's probably more talked about due to social media, but the actual percentage of convictions is still the same, if not lower. I went to school during this time, and in middle school and High School, we had to do courses that included lessons on sexual assault.

It may only seem like it's more talked about, due to the topic being amplified by social media, but that could be said about many topics. Unfortunately, as we have probably learned by now, social media does not deter people from doing bad things, like rape and other crimes.

I wouldn't say attitudes haven't changed. People were definitely much quicker to pull the "she just wants attention" card even 10 years ago, let alone 30 years. The advocacy for victims is a lot more intense and it shuts down some of the blatant "well, you know how those girls can be..." type of talk which used to be an acceptable rebuttal in the public square.

You're right that the actual legal system hasn't changed much. Standards of evidence are more or less the same. What's different is the standards for front-line work, where there's much more scrutiny on situations where a claim is made but not followed up on. Rape kits etc are taken more seriously and it's news when they're mishandled or disregarded.

 

[Jets4Life]

I wouldn't say attitudes haven't changed. People were definitely much quicker to pull the "she just wants attention" card even 10 years ago, let alone 30 years. The advocacy for victims is a lot more intense and it shuts down some of the blatant "well, you know how those girls can be..." type of talk which used to be an acceptable rebuttal in the public square.

You're right that the actual legal system hasn't changed much. Standards of evidence are more or less the same. What's different is the standards for front-line work, where there's much more scrutiny on situations where a claim is made but not followed up on. Rape kits etc are taken more seriously and it's news when they're mishandled or disregarded.

People like to think that rape is taken more seriously now, but there is no evidence to suggest this aside from people's memories. If we were talking about the 50s or 60s, you may have a point, but by the mid 80s and beyond any violence against women was taken as serious as today.

If rape is taken more seriously today, why do habitual rapists like Donald Trump, Andy Dick, and Big Ben Rothesburgler get off scot free? In 20 years, I guarantee you that women are going to come fwd to claim they were raped, and were ignored since the athletes in question were rich and powerful.

Nothing much has changed from 30 years ago. Fame, Money and power rule the world sadly, and the guilty will continue to not be punished.

 

[Melrose Munch]

I'm shocked people don't like Scott Stevens and Dino Cicarelli

 

[Mike C]

Gang rape is treated just as bad in 1990, as it is today. People's attitudes have not changed in 30 years. It's probably more talked about due to social media, but the actual percentage of convictions is still the same, if not lower. I went to school during this time, and in middle school and High School, we had to do courses that included lessons on sexual assault.

It may only seem like it's more talked about, due to the topic being amplified by social media, but that could be said about many topics. Unfortunately, as we have probably learned by now, social media does not deter people from doing bad things, like rape and other crimes.

Social media does the opposite. It emboldens, encourages and advertises meetups for flash mob store break-ins, street takeovers, and assorted criminal activity.

 

[tarheelhockey]

People like to think that rape is taken more seriously now, but there is no evidence to suggest this aside from people's memories. If we were talking about the 50s or 60s, you may have a point, but by the mid 80s and beyond any violence against women was taken as serious as today.

If rape is taken more seriously today, why do habitual rapists like Donald Trump, Andy Dick, and Big Ben Rothesburgler get off scot free? In 20 years, I guarantee you that women are going to come fwd to claim they were raped, and were ignored since the athletes in question were rich and powerful.

Nothing much has changed from 30 years ago. Fame, Money and power rule the world sadly, and the guilty will continue to not be punished.

I totally get what you’re saying, but I’m saying from lived experience (which I assume you share) that this sort of analysis wasn’t even a serious conversation in the mainstream 30 years ago. It is now. Attitudes have in fact changed to some extent, as have regulations regarding the handling of rape cases.

I mean if you want to get specific, I know women (plural) whose rape cases would have been handled differently under today’s laws and certainly under today’s general legal climate than they were in the 90s or even early 00s.

Does injustice still exist? Absolutely. But even in the realm of US Presidents, look at how the Clinton case was handled versus how identical circumstances would be treated today. At that time, the scandal was framed as a President engaging in sordid behavior and lying under oath to cover it up. Today it would be a serious question whether he was a form of rapist, using his authority to gain access to women in the context of a power imbalance. The framework of the conversation has changed.

 

[Jets4Life]

I totally get what you’re saying, but I’m saying from lived experience (which I assume you share) that this sort of analysis wasn’t even a serious conversation in the mainstream 30 years ago. It is now. Attitudes have in fact changed to some extent, as have regulations regarding the handling of rape cases.

With all due respect, it definitely was. The Clearance Thomas hearings in 1991 were mainstream news for weeks. The William Kennedy Smith rape scandal was the most talked about thing that year. When Sheldon Kennedy came out as a rape victim, it was massive news. Everyone was commenting on it. Don Cherry devoted an entire segment on coaches Corner to it. Even more than the Kyle Beach scandal. The CBC made an award winning movie called "The Boys of St.Vincent" about the Newfoundland Catholic sex scandal, which was massive news around 1989-90. It was the same then as it is today.

I mean if you want to get specific, I know women (plural) whose rape cases would have been handled differently under today’s laws and certainly under today’s general legal climate than they were in the 90s or even early 00s.

I really doubt that, considering rape cases today have the same conviction rates as 30 years ago.

Does injustice still exist? Absolutely. But even in the realm of US Presidents, look at how the Clinton case was handled versus how identical circumstances would be treated today. At that time, the scandal was framed as a President engaging in sordid behavior and lying under oath to cover it up. Today it would be a serious question whether he was a form of rapist, using his authority to gain access to women in the context of a power imbalance. The framework of the conversation has changed.

The Clinton and Biden (hunter) share similarities. They are both overblown, and deflected attention from things the GOP was doing, which was infinitely worse. Donald Trump is a serial rapist. So is Big Ben. Andy Dick is a sexual predator. There are many reports that both NHL Kane's have done this. Kobe Bryant went scot free not even 20 years ago for rape.

I actually think it is worse now than at any point since the early 80s. Where I grew up (Winnipeg), it was well known by the 90s, that Peter Nygaard was a serial rapist, yet he got off time and time again. Even as late as 2018, he was still running one of the provinces most successful businesses, in spite of rape complaints going back to 1980.

Sexual assault is about power, and since the early 90s, the gap between rich and poor has continued to widen. If one has money, they can get off of literally any charges, especially if the victim is poor.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i'm taking us to the edge of off topic but i think there's a distinction to be drawn here between (1) sexual assault being handled differently by the legal system and general public, and (2) sexual assault involving celebrities

on the first one, yes things are different. in the US, there are anti-SLAPP laws, for ex, and i'm neither a lawyer or a cop but i am sure victims get a better ride now than 10, 20, 30 years ago. are rapes still underreported? is the path to any prosecution, let alone successful prosecution, still pitiful? are rape kits not being processed in a timely manner, and is there a huge backlog in many major cities? sure. but it's got to be better than it was.

but on the second one, i wonder if it might in fact be worse now. due to digital connectivity, the ability of fanboys, incels, and other garbage humans to harass, dox, and even engage in vigilante retaliation against a victim is so much easier than it used to be. and those people are now so much more organized and emboldened in their garbage human subcultures. if i were a victim, i think i certainly would have a lot to think about before considering registering a complaint against a pro athlete.

 

[Voight]

Straight from Scott Stevens Wikipedia page:

"In May 1990, while playing for the Capitals, Stevens was accused of participating in the rape of a 17-year-old girl outside a bar, alongside teammates Dino Ciccarelli, Geoff Courtnall, and Neil Sheehy No charges wound up occurring but it ended up being largely a he said/she said case, though a spokesperson for the Metropolitan police at the time stated that the police “have sufficient grounds to believe that a criminal offense did occur."

What are your memories from this? Do you guys believe that they got away with rape?

I mean, the police & DA in the Duke lacrosse case had suffice ground too believe a criminal offence did occur, went a step rather and charged the guys. Only for the allegations to be completely untrue.