Hart, McLeod, Dube, Foote, Formenton charged with sexual assault

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

"A text message “sent to a friend … is not a statement made under oath,” she said."

Reasoning here is difficult to parse: yes, the statement is third-party (but a witness) to another third-party. And, indeed, not under oath. But there is nothing in my mind that negates the fact that it was made AT THE TIME and is, at the very least, factual in event, if not intensity or evaluation of the incident.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by blankall

Legal research is a pretty small part of a lawyer's day. I don't spend that much time researching, and I have a junior associate do a lot of that work for me. I also would never trust AI to do any kind legal research. I'd trust a legal assistant before AI any day. I mean maybe that will improve, but currently AI is struggling to create human hands with the correct amount of fingers. It has a ways to go.

All large professional services firms are investing heavily in dynamic AI use cases, knowing they need to do this to not get left behind. Not just research, the applications are extremely broad.

You can't focus on what AI gets wrong, it's about how much easier it makes certain activities. In your example, AI doesn't replace the assistant entirely, it's a tool they use.

I think you'd be very surprised at what custom GPT's and AI agents can do. The progress I have seen in just the last three months on so many use cases is jaw dropping.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The text messages have been ruled out. That's a big hit to the prosecution.

Edit: Sounds like they are trying a different avenue to get it in .

They really need some kind of win.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I think you'd be very surprised at what custom GPT's and AI agents can do. The progress I have seen in just the last three months on so many use cases is jaw dropping.

Researching an audiobook for a trip tomorrow, I was surprised to see that the AI told me the book “was released on June 5, 2025”.

I wouldn’t trust any AI in tax research at all. Maybe in years, but they (all?) still make up out of thin air…or Reddit.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by GFG#1

No Wonder our justice system is so slow. I have never really followed a trial before, but it feels like they are always on a break for some reason or another. I get not everything that is happening is typed in the CBC or London press updates, but every start, break, lunch break end is recorded. It really seems like it is about 4-5hours at most per day.

Today start at 11 EST
about 12:30EST take a break
back in for about 20 Min then take Lunch for an hour and a bit till 2:15 EST
3PM EST adjourn for the day

I think the longest day so far was 10am till about 4:30 EST with 2 30ish minute breaks and an hour lunch.

A lot happens in down time. Unlike TV where a Justice makes a snap decision of some form, most need - and WANT - time. Time to think through issues, make a calm and reasoned choice and research background material (often supplied by staff) in their pursuit of same. This, while aggravating to some, is a GOOD thing. And yes, mental breaks I’m a gruelling trial? You’d want them, too.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Titan2

I assume they are referring to the naysayer's posts that say she consented to all of it and asked for it so it was ok to smack her.

If not, I remove my thanks.

So like, 2 idiots?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

All large professional services firms are investing heavily in dynamic AI use cases, knowing they need to do this to not get left behind. Not just research, the applications are extremely broad.

You can't focus on what AI gets wrong, it's about how much easier it makes certain activities. In your example, AI doesn't replace the assistant entirely, it's a tool they use.

I think you'd be very surprised at what custom GPT's and AI agents can do. The progress I have seen in just the last three months on so many use cases is jaw dropping.

The AI is cutting costs for the firms themselves by replacing work that lower level employees would do. At this stage, AI isn't doing anything beyond what a paralegal would do.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

Researching an audiobook for a trip tomorrow, I was surprised to see that the AI told me the book “was released on June 5, 2025”.

I wouldn’t trust any AI in tax research at all. Maybe in years, but they (all?) still make up out of thin air…or Reddit.

So true. I have clients give me "cases" they find on AI sometimes, and I have to spend time looking into them which clearly don't exist.
I find AI in the legal world sucks.

[GFG#1]

Almost seems like a moot point now that there is no Jury. It made sense when the Jury wouldn't be in the room to know about the evidence. I also know it is the Judges job to be impartial and only consider the evidence that is allowed in the trial when making her final verdict.

With that said, how would anyone that knows about those text messages be able to just "ignore it" when trying to make a decision. The fact that it wasn't sent under oath, doesn't make it not true. Why would anyone send that text message to anyone without at least some validity to it, especially when you are under investigation by Hockey Canada at the time.

Then taking into account that all these witnesses conveniently don't seem to remember details of that evening. Saying I have been trying to forget that night etc. It's a big stretch to think that you wouldn't remember what happened that evening unless a gang bang was a normal part of your everyday life, and B, what happened that evening could have ended your amateur/professional hockey career that up until that point you had been working towards your entire life.

you get shown a text message you sent at the time and still don't remember.

Then the Judge is supposed to look at all of that and just ignore the text message.

I know there are lots of things that have happened in my past that I don't remember, but then someone says remember that time we did this, and you go OMG yes that was a great night etc. Memories start coming back to you.

So again, how you could read your past statements previous text messages and still have no recollection of the evening seems about as farfetched as the text not being semi accurate.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GFG#1

With that said, how would anyone that knows about those text messages be able to just "ignore it" when trying to make a decision. The fact that it wasn't sent under oath, doesn't make it not true. .

The same way physical evidence in a murder trial that was gathered without legal consent or authorization can be ignored. Judges are trained (and you would think temperamentally suited) to compartmentalize information.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by GFG#1

Almost seems like a moot point now that there is no Jury. It made sense when the Jury wouldn't be in the room to know about the evidence. I also know it is the Judges job to be impartial and only consider the evidence that is allowed in the trial when making her final verdict.

With that said, how would anyone that knows about those text messages be able to just "ignore it" when trying to make a decision. The fact that it wasn't sent under oath, doesn't make it not true. Why would anyone send that text message to anyone without at least some validity to it, especially when you are under investigation by Hockey Canada at the time.

Then taking into account that all these witnesses conveniently don't seem to remember details of that evening. Saying I have been trying to forget that night etc. qunless a gang bang was a normal part of your everyday life, and B, what happened that evening could have ended your amateur/professional hockey career that up until that point you had been working towards your entire life.

you get shown a text message you sent at the time and still don't remember.

Then the Judge is supposed to look at all of that and just ignore the text message.

I know there are lots of things that have happened in my past that I don't remember, but then someone says remember that time we did this, and you go OMG yes that was a great night etc. Memories start coming back to you.

So again, how you could read your past statements previous text messages and still have no recollection of the evening seems about as farfetched as the text not being semi accurate.

It's quite normal that people can't even remember details of sex they just had. It's a bit of a meme in the kink world.

Most people probably couldn't give you a coherent description of any specific time they've had sex that's years in the past. I certainly can't, and I've had some really memorable and unique encounters in my life.

If you've ever had one of Those arguments, you should know that two people can even have very different ideas of what was said or not said between them 15-30 minutes before.

Human memory is pretty much at it's worse when trying to correctly remember situations that were emotionally charged in any way.

...and also, apparently based on that article linked earlier, there is a decent chance that these guys have actually been part of similar events multiple times :/

[The Big Chill]

I get the memory can change, but there is a pretty big difference in the feeling of the room if she was weeping vs she was begging. Even if it started consensual and changed throughout the night I doubt those guys forgot the general vibe of the room. Especially when there is multiple references to things getting out of hand.

Legally that may not be enough to do anything with, but I really don’t think the complete truth is coming out here from what I’ve read so far.

[OptimalTates]

Originally Posted by Itse

you should know that two people can even have very different ideas of what was said or not said between them 15-30 minutes before./

But this isn't about two people. It's about a singular person who remembered specific details of the event in 2018, 2022, 2023 but forgot in 2025 while remembering more trivial aspects of the events. That's not a common occurrence at all.

[GFG#1]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

But this isn't about two people. It's about a singular person who remembered specific details of the event in 2018, 2022, 2023 but forgot in 2025 while remembering more trivial aspects of the events. That's not a common occurrence at all.

this exactly, not to mention the text message backs up the victims testimony and statements.

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

But this isn't about two people. It's about a singular person who remembered specific details of the event in 2018, 2022, 2023 but forgot in 2025 while remembering more trivial aspects of the events. That's not a common occurrence at all.

The main thing that changed between then and now is that then it was primarily an investigation that led to a settlement for $ that didn't really impact his teammates livelihood or lifestyle. Which, at the end of the investigation, led Hockey Canada to conclude that the best course of action was to pay almost $4MM to E.M.. Clearly there was enough in the investigation to warrant that conclusion.

Now with freedom of teammates as the table stakes the story has conveniently changed in their favor.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by blankall

The AI is cutting costs for the firms themselves by replacing work that lower level employees would do. At this stage, AI isn't doing anything beyond what a paralegal would do.

My point exactly. Law firms bill for all kinds of work, not just when a particular lawyer is on the phone or sending an email. More and more we are seeing firms move away from hourly pricing to alternative pricing models as AI makes certain tasks so much more efficient.

Everyone wants to point to examples where AI or chatGPT gave the wrong answer to a question. If you're only seeing the mistakes, IMO you're really missing the big picture.

edit: Sorry going way off topic in an important and sensitive thread.

[IliketoPuck]

And to add to that statement, the complainant's story has largely remained the same over time. Not perfectly similar, but generally so.

The hockey players story has varied substantially, and in lock-step with the severity of the investigation being undertaken. More details provided when it was thought to be contained at Hockey Canada, to far less when it became criminal.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

But this isn't about two people. It's about a singular person who remembered specific details of the event in 2018, 2022, 2023 but forgot in 2025 while remembering more trivial aspects of the events. That's not a common occurrence at all.

Remembering trivial aspects but not important ones is super duper normal.

Doesn't mean he's not lying.

(Also, if two people remember things differently, at least one of them remembers wrong.)

[3thirty]

Originally Posted by Makarov

I don't think you appreciate how much work (both on the record and off the record) goes into a day of trial or hearing.

But do they get paid to wash their hands for 5 minutes?

[YyjFlames]

Originally Posted by OptimalTates

But this isn't about two people. It's about a singular person who remembered specific details of the event in 2018, 2022, 2023 but forgot in 2025 while remembering more trivial aspects of the events. That's not a common occurrence at all.

I'm potentially taking the witness stand in a couple weeks on a non-criminal issue from a decade ago, and this is exactly how my mind works.

I have tried to block the topic out over the years, as it was fairly stressful for me, and I suspect trying to block out the topic for stress reasons doesn't help with my recollection, even though there were a couple of probes around it that forced me to recollect.

I'm not defending the witness as yes, it's quite possible he may not be being completely truthful. I just don't know how you can be certain, especially after only interpreting the testimony through media stories on the topic.