Teams expecting suspensions as 2018 Hockey Canada investigation concludes (update 7/13) up to 8 players from Team Canada to be named

[Slats432]

You're still not getting it, the type of evidence you are looking for does not exist. Courts also do not require the kind of evidence that you are demanding.

There are no videos, pictures, confessions, messages, audio clips, or anything.

Just to show you are way off base.

"A day after an encounter in a hotel room that led to a sexual-assault lawsuit, a player with Canada’s world junior hockey team exchanged text messages with the woman involved.

The player began by asking the woman whether she had gone to the police.

The woman said she had spoken to her mother and her mother had called police against her wishes.

“You said you were having fun,” the player wrote.

“I was really drunk, didn’t feel good about it at all after. But I’m not trying to get anyone in trouble,” she replied.

“I was ok with going home with you, it was everyone else afterwards that I wasn’t expecting. I just felt like I was being made fun of and taken advantage of.”

The text messages, sent a little more than a day after the sexual encounter, were shown to The Globe and Mail by lawyers for seven unnamed members of Canada’s 2018 world junior hockey team. The team has been at the centre of allegations surrounding a multimillion-dollar lawsuit that was settled by Hockey Canada in May for an undisclosed sum. The matter is now under investigation by Hockey Canada, the National Hockey League and Parliament."

Canadian world junior player asked woman whether she had gone to police after alleged sexual assault

Text messages between player, woman shown to The Globe and Mail by lawyers for seven unnamed members of Canada’s 2018 world junior hockey team

www.theglobeandmail.com

The players are at fault and whatever punishment by league and justice system should be applied. THE REASON IS THAT IF YOU SHOW YOUNG MEN THAT THEY WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS IT MIGHT PREVENT THE NEXT RAPE!! And if you don't understand this, f*** you.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

I guess there’s some misunderstanding going on between the two of us. I’m not asking for any specific evidence here. All I’m asking is that all the evidence go through criminal justice and that any punishment is given only after due process of law. If the main evidence is the victim’s testimony, so be it, it’s not that big of a deal, although we should be careful with that in the era of “believe all victims”. Of course, if there is no evidence, there should be no punishment.

This is so stupid. The bar for punishment shouldn't be convicted in a court of law. Otherwise employers couldn't punish workers who show up late for work.

There's some serious Dennis Reynolds behaviour in here who totally think "the implication" is fair game. It's beyond f***ed up.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

This is so stupid. The bar for punishment shouldn't be convicted in a court of law. Otherwise employers couldn't punish workers who show up late for work.

Wow, what a stupid comparison....performance/being tardy to an alleged criminal action

When the misdeed is an alleged crime (and not pucnhing in late) the threshhold for being fired or facing employer action should be, if not close to, at least arrested/charged and perhaps convicted of said crime....

 

[Fish on The Sand]

Wow, what a stupid comparison....performance/being tardy to an alleged criminal action

When the misdeed is an alleged crime (and not pucnhing in late) the threshhold for being fired or facing employer action should be, if not close to, being at least arrested/charged and perhaps convicted of said crime....

Just so I'm clear, rape is a-ok but tardiness gets the hammer. Got it.

 

[kingsholygrail]

Just so I'm clear, rape is a-ok but tardiness gets the hammer. Got it.

You're not clear at all it looks like. Not a single person in this thread is advocating rape.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

You're not clear at all it looks like. Not a single person in this thread is advocating rape.

I'm seeing a lot of advocacy for not punishing rapists by imposing unrealistic standards, such as the post I quoted.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Just so I'm clear, rape is a-ok but tardiness gets the hammer. Got it.

Jesus....that was really your takeaway from that?

I'm saying that in general and probably in this case, in order for employers to take action against an alleged crime, there has to be something concrete to substantiate that imo.

-Such as Arrests/charges brought
-Individual players being found liable in civil court
-Facts and behaviour so disturbing and reckless they warrant action regardless of criminal guilt

Maybe #3 applies here...but players weren't on these teams at the time and they were basically kids, so i don't know. But the league (I hope) knows more information than you or I do so well see.

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

For me personally it's any one or any combo of the following

-There was intent and premediation to take advantage of the girl
-Shown the girl was resisting or actively not consenting
-Shown the girl was so clearly incapacitated relative to the players who were also drinking (essentially being passed out or in a stupor) that she couldn't give the choice

Everything I've read anecdotally, it doesn't seem like these requirements were met.

You’ve also said previously that the boys have already gone through enough and boys will be boys.

 

[AvroArrow]

Just to show you are way off base.

"A day after an encounter in a hotel room that led to a sexual-assault lawsuit, a player with Canada’s world junior hockey team exchanged text messages with the woman involved.

The player began by asking the woman whether she had gone to the police.

The woman said she had spoken to her mother and her mother had called police against her wishes.

“You said you were having fun,” the player wrote.

“I was really drunk, didn’t feel good about it at all after. But I’m not trying to get anyone in trouble,” she replied.

“I was ok with going home with you, it was everyone else afterwards that I wasn’t expecting. I just felt like I was being made fun of and taken advantage of.”

The text messages, sent a little more than a day after the sexual encounter, were shown to The Globe and Mail by lawyers for seven unnamed members of Canada’s 2018 world junior hockey team. The team has been at the centre of allegations surrounding a multimillion-dollar lawsuit that was settled by Hockey Canada in May for an undisclosed sum. The matter is now under investigation by Hockey Canada, the National Hockey League and Parliament."

Canadian world junior player asked woman whether she had gone to police after alleged sexual assault

Text messages between player, woman shown to The Globe and Mail by lawyers for seven unnamed members of Canada’s 2018 world junior hockey team

www.theglobeandmail.com

The players are at fault and whatever punishment by league and justice system should be applied. THE REASON IS THAT IF YOU SHOW YOUNG MEN THAT THEY WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS IT MIGHT PREVENT THE NEXT RAPE!! And if you don't understand this, f*** you.

Thank you for sharing this

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

Jesus....that was really your takeaway from that?

I'm saying that in general and probably in this case, in order for employers to take action against an alleged crime, there has to be something concrete to substantiate that imo.

-Such as Arrests/charges brought
-Individual players being found liable in civil court
-Facts and behaviour so disturbing and reckless they warrant action regardless of criminal guilt

Maybe #3 applies here...but players weren't on these teams at the time and they were basically kids, so i don't know. But the league (I hope) knows more information than you or I do so well see.

Being 19 years old isn’t being a kid

 

[kingsholygrail]

I'm seeing a lot of advocacy for not punishing rapists by imposing unrealistic standards, such as the post I quoted.

Calling for due process for things like being accused of terrible crimes like rape is not advocating rape. Not by any logic.

 

[MXD]

Jesus....that was really your takeaway from that?

I'm saying that in general and probably in this case, in order for employers to take action against an alleged crime, there has to be something concrete to substantiate that imo.

-Such as Arrests/charges brought
-Individual players being found liable in civil court
-Facts and behaviour so disturbing and reckless they warrant action regardless of criminal guilt

Maybe #3 applies here...but players weren't on these teams at the time and they were basically kids, so i don't know. But the league (I hope) knows more information than you or I do so well see.

- They were adults
- If they aren't employed anymore, labor law is irrelevant
- Even if they're employed, there are morality clauses in the SPC, and the standard of proof regarding violation of these clauses isn't BARD.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

Calling for due process for things like being accused of terrible crimes like rape is not advocating rape. Not by any logic.

By your logic NBC was wrong to fire OJ because he was actually acquitted in court. After all, if a court found him not guilty, then what right does NBC have?

 

[kingsholygrail]

By your logic NBC was wrong to fire OJ because he was actually acquitted in court. After all, if a court found him not guilty, then what right does NBC have?

I don't think exceptional miscarriages of the legal system mean due process should no longer exist. Nice try, though.

 

[AndreRoy]

I'm seeing a lot of advocacy for not punishing rapists by imposing unrealistic standards, such as the post I quoted.

No, what people are advocating for is making damn sure somebody actually IS a rapist before taking away their livelihood. As opposed to the white knight internet lynch mob of those who believe that mere accusation equates to guilt.

 

[NyQuil]

By your logic NBC was wrong to fire OJ because he was actually acquitted in court. After all, if a court found him not guilty, then what right does NBC have?

No, that's not his logic at all.

You're conflating two separate decisions:

1. The decision made by the jury in the criminal court to acquit OJ Simpson on the basis of the evidence.
2. The decision made by NBC to terminate OJ's employment.

His logic is that someone wanting to wait until the court completed its proceedings before passing judgment on the accused doesn't mean that they support or enable the crime that he is being accused of.

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

Proven not guilty =/= proven innocent

 

[JimmyG89]

"A day after an encounter in a hotel room that led to a sexual-assault lawsuit, a player with Canada’s world junior hockey team exchanged text messages with the woman involved.

The player began by asking the woman whether she had gone to the police.

The woman said she had spoken to her mother and her mother had called police against her wishes.

“You said you were having fun,” the player wrote.

“I was really drunk, didn’t feel good about it at all after. But I’m not trying to get anyone in trouble,” she replied.

“I was ok with going home with you, it was everyone else afterwards that I wasn’t expecting. I just felt like I was being made fun of and taken advantage of.”

So two things here:

The others that joined in, they don't really have any ground to stand on. If they participated, they'll be done.

As for the player that was with her originally, he participated, so he's done on that, but he may not have had any knowledge of what the others were planning on doing. Doesn't excuse it, but it would make their initial action (going home with the player) legitimate and not coerced. I'm sure there is something that they could get him for if he did know this would happen and actively chose her.

Laws in Canada are different from the US for sure, but this shouldn't be too difficult. They'll need to get records of calls/texts from everyone else through discovery.

End of the day, I'd be shocked if any of them are allowed to continue in the NHL or any professional league period (sans KHL).

 

[Gregor Samsa]

Public figures are held to much higher standards than average joe’s, especially when they represent an organization or company. If the investigation reveals something damning, players involved have a good chance of being punished, whether there is a criminal trial or not

 

[Filthy Dangles]

You’ve also said previously that the boys have already gone through enough and boys will be boys.

Was that in a prior thread, I made no such post here. If so, that's a little weird to remember or dig up.

Anyway, if said, that was a not so compassionate way of saying I don't see the players as criminals or that they definitively commited a crime with the facts and informaton ive seen.

On the other end of the spectrum, you have people declaring them rapists and gang rapers so i think we can be spared of being sensitive to that.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

No, that's not his logic at all.

You're conflating two separate decisions:

1. The decision made by the jury in the criminal court to acquit OJ Simpson on the basis of the evidence.
2. The decision made by NBC to terminate OJ's employment.

His logic is that someone wanting to wait until the court completed its proceedings before passing judgment on the accused doesn't mean that they support or enable the crime that he is being accused of.

Yes, exactly my point. The post I responded to said the NHL has no right to punish the players until they've had their literal day in court.

Setting such a ridiculous standard is rape apology, plain and simple.

 

[Slats432]

So two things here:

The others that joined in, they don't really have any ground to stand on. If they participated, they'll be done.

As for the player that was with her originally, he participated, so he's done on that, but he may not have had any knowledge of what the others were planning on doing. Doesn't excuse it, but it would make their initial action (going home with the player) legitimate and not coerced. I'm sure there is something that they could get him for if he did know this would happen and actively chose her.

Laws in Canada are different from the US for sure, but this shouldn't be too difficult. They'll need to get records of calls/texts from everyone else through discovery.

End of the day, I'd be shocked if any of them are allowed to continue in the NHL or any professional league period (sans KHL).

Media that I have read indicates that the others participated by invitation of the original player. If he helped facilitate the gang rape, I am sure that will be part of the investigation/conclusion if applicable.

Yes, exactly my point. The post I responded to said the NHL has no right to punish the players until they've had their literal day in court.

Setting such a ridiculous standard is rape apology, plain and simple.

I don't think anything FOTS is saying is wrong. Punishment should be applied after the result of the investigation. The NHL/AHL or any league in question can review the results of the investigation and regardless of charges/conviction can use their SPC clause of behaviour unbecoming of team to apply any type of punishment they deem fit.

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

Was that in a prior thread, I made no such post here. If so, that's a little weird to remember or dig up.

Anyway, if said, that was a not so compassionate way of saying I don't see the players as criminals or that they definitively commited a crime with the facts and informaton ive seen.

On the other end of the spectrum, you have people declaring them rapists and gang rapers so i think we can be spared of being sensitive to that.

Previous thread. You bemoaned how they should be able to play because they’re just kids. I remember when people say awful shit.

To say it’s not so compassionate is putting it very lightly.

Once again. No mention of the true victim. All you due process people don’t seem to give a flying shit about the true victim in all this.

 

[NyQuil]

Yes, exactly my point. The post I responded to said the NHL has no right to punish the players until they've had their literal day in court.

Setting such a ridiculous standard is rape apology, plain and simple.

No, what is ridiculous is equating being late for work with committing sexual assault.

The fact is that there are a number of investigations into the matter (legal, Hockey Canada) due to the seriousness of the alleged crime and the undoubtedly significant consequences for the perpetrators.

We're having a discussion here.

Calling someone a rape apologist because they want to see the imminent results of the investigation(s) being conducted before calling someone a rapist is pointless hyperbole.

No one is asking them to shut down the investigation. No one is saying that they will never believe that it was rape even if the investigation says it was. No one is saying that the woman is somehow at fault here.

You're arguing against something that no one is defending.

The NHL can do whatever it likes, as can the teams. They have chosen to wait until the investigation runs its course.

I know what I think happened, but I'm certainly also going to read what the report has to say.

On a more specific level, I don't think it's an amazing coincidence that Player X was suddenly out of work after putting up a stellar season for the Senators.

If you don't think he's already being punished by the Ottawa organization, I have a bridge to sell you.

 

[JimmyG89]

Media that I have read indicates that the others participated by invitation of the original player. If he helped facilitate the gang rape, I am sure that will be part of the investigation/conclusion if applicable.

Yeah this isn't really getting the media attention in the states, outside maybe the athletic. ESPN hasn't really done anything on it yet, and if they have it isn't recent.

If that is true, I never want to see these guys ever again.