[News] Patrick Kane being investigated for rape. UPD: DA announces no charges

[White Out 403]

after reading this thread its no wonder why guys like Cosby get away with this ####, and why so many rapes (the vast majority actually) go unreported. The victim blaming, shaming, and outright venom towards them is actually kinda gross. We have a lot of hero worship going on here.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

after reading this thread its no wonder why guys like Cosby get away with this ####, and why so many rapes (the vast majority actually) go unreported. The victim blaming, shaming, and outright venom towards them is actually kinda gross. We have a lot of hero worship going on here.

What victim? Wouldn't someone have to be charged with a crime for there to be a victim?

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by polak

What victim? Wouldn't someone have to be charged with a crime for there to be a victim?

So if a body washed up on shore with its head cut off, and no one was yet charged with the murder, that's just likely a person who was bored and cut their head off until proven otherwise? Stellar

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

So if a body washed up on shore with its head cut off, and no one was yet charged with the murder, that's just likely a person who was bored and cut their head off until proven otherwise? Stellar

To be fair, maybe it was a boating accident.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

So if a body washed up on shore with its head cut off, and no one was yet charged with the murder, that's just likely a person who was bored and cut their head off until proven otherwise? Stellar

LOL.

Pretty much. If cutting your head off was the same as consensual sex with somebody.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by polak

LOL.

Pretty much. If cutting your head off was the same as consensual sex with somebody.

I'm just saying that determining if there's a victim isn't based on if charges are made or not. Plenty of unsolved murders, robberies, etc, all have victims with no charges being laid. It's a terrible way to decide if there is a victim or not.

[GioforPM]

Cops say "victim" before any charge is laid. It's just a term of art.

Of course, to many here, Kane is the victim of a dastardly frame-up by a gold-digging slut (who apparently is rolling the dice with criminal charges, legal expenses and reputational risk, in the hopes of a pay-off in a few years).

[polak]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

I'm just saying that determining if there's a victim isn't based on if charges are made or not. Plenty of unsolved murders, robberies, etc, all have victims with no charges being laid. It's a terrible way to decide if there is a victim or not.

But it's different in situations where it's one person versus the other in determining if anything happened.

In a rape accusation where it's established that both people did indeed have sex, if there is a victim that means the accused is guilty 100% so using the term "victim" implies that Kane is therefore guilty. You can't have a victim without Kane being guilty of rape.

She's an accuser until charges are laid.

[CliffFletcher]

A lot of logic fail going on in this thread.

* Entertaining the possibility that Kane didn't rape the woman =/= assuming she's probably a gold-digger.

* Presuming Kane's innocence until proven guilty =/= assuming she's probably a gold-digger.

* Suggesting that some women are malicious enough to falsely accuse a man of rape =/= fostering a culture of rape.

This is an emotional topic, but getting emotional and ignoring the principles of reason and due process that underlay our justice system isn't going to make the world a better place.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by polak

But it's different in situations where it's one person versus the other in determining if anything happened.

In a rape accusation where it's established that both people did indeed have sex, if there is a victim that means the accused is guilty 100% so using the term "victim" implies that Kane is therefore guilty. You can't have a victim without Kane being guilty of rape.

She's an accuser until charges are laid.

I'm fine with her being referred to as the alleged victim. But polak your posts here are very narrow minded and stink of male privilege. Previously you talked about how Kane would have to be a nutjob to want to rape someone over control. Yet that's what the vast majority of rapes are about. Sex and control. The statistics on the number of women who will be raped in their lives in disgusting... yet you seem to take the position that it's rare. You haven't explicitly said so but if I just read your posts in this thread about rape, I would think in your mind that you think only 5% of less of women in the world ever get raped in their lifetime.

Rape is a crappy thing, and, for our justice system and society its tricky I agree. We treat everyone as innocent until proven guilty... but then you also have to respect the alleged victim here and treat her with respect and basic decency. Kane being innocent until proven guilty doesn't make her a liar until he's found guilty in court. Taking that attitude will ensure that rapes go wildly unreported. Do you have a mother? A daughter? A sister? If so, this should bother and upset you.

[polak]

What are you talking about? I've taken no such position. All I've said was lets not call him a rapist until at least charges have been laid.

I've never once called her a liar. The closest I've said to anything like that was that Kanes attorneys look like they're going to dismantle the prosecution at this pace. I haven't commented on the women at all.

One thing I've said was that it's entirely possible that she is lying just like it's very possible that Kane is guilty.

How is anything I've said, implying that rape is rare? or that she's liar? I'm just saying lets let due process take place and at least let a charge be laid before we brand someone a rapist.


I think that's a very reasonable stance.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

A lot of logic fail going on in this thread.

* Entertaining the possibility that Kane didn't rape the woman =/= assuming she's probably a gold-digger.

* Presuming Kane's innocence until proven guilty =/= assuming she's probably a gold-digger.

* Suggesting that some women are malicious enough to falsely accuse a man of rape =/= fostering a culture of rape.

This is an emotional topic, but getting emotional and ignoring the principles of reason and due process that underlay our justice system isn't going to make the world a better place.

I'm not saying assuming innocence means assuming she's a gold-digger. I'm specifically addressing the theory that some posters have made to that effect. I also specifically said there are other ways that Kane acn be either innocent or found not guilty.

As for the second overstatement of someone's position, it's not the suggestion that's criticized - it's the almost immediate reaction of posters here and elsewhere (look at HF for example). They have thrown up a theory that almost never happens - again, I can think of only one example of a celebrity being accused and only a couple others ever, and none of them were for financial gain - as some sort of realistic possibility.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

I'm fine with her being referred to as the alleged victim. But polak your posts here are very narrow minded and stink of male privilege. Previously you talked about how Kane would have to be a nutjob to want to rape someone over control. Yet that's what the vast majority of rapes are about. Sex and control. The statistics on the number of women who will be raped in their lives in disgusting... yet you seem to take the position that it's rare. You haven't explicitly said so but if I just read your posts in this thread about rape, I would think in your mind that you think only 5% of less of women in the world ever get raped in their lifetime.

Rape is a crappy thing, and, for our justice system and society its tricky I agree. We treat everyone as innocent until proven guilty... but then you also have to respect the alleged victim here and treat her with respect and basic decency. Kane being innocent until proven guilty doesn't make her a liar until he's found guilty in court. Taking that attitude will ensure that rapes go wildly unreported. Do you have a mother? A daughter? A sister? If so, this should bother and upset you.

I think you lose a lot of people when you say stuff like this, and quite frequently on topics relating to the treatment of females you get quite pushy. You should not be telling people how they should be feeling about this topic, regardless of how strong of an opinion you have.

I agree that rape is a crappy thing, and I agree that reporting a rape is a hard thing to do. Really I wish that people wouldn't show up and cheer for Kane until this is dealt with, and I also wish people wouldn't jump to calling her a slut or gold-digger either until it's dealt with.

Ideally we wouldn't need to have a conversation about this until it all comes out in the wash, then there wouldn't be wild speculation on what happened.

[doctajones428]

I'm amazed this 54 page squabble isn't locked.

Either he did it, or she made it up. The end until we get answers

[justafan]

Originally Posted by doctajones428

I'm amazed this 54 page squabble isn't locked.

Either he did it, or she made it up. The end until we get answers

I agree this is a lot of supposition and debate. In the end I think there will be some answers. But, I disagree it's as simple as "did it" or "made it up". Often in these date rapes I would think both parties may see it different ways. He may feel she wanted it. He is a rich athlete and may feel intitled. I don't want to think he is a rapist. Also don't like thinking she is a crazy person making stuff up.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by doctajones428

I'm amazed this 54 page squabble isn't locked.

Either he did it, or she made it up. The end until we get answers

I agree on some level, but unfortunately in these types of cases, I also believe it's possible that even in the eye's of the parties involved it's not that cut and dry.

I think many in here are assuming that one of either Kane or alleged victim know they are lying. There is a possibility that neither feel or know they are lying. There is a very real possibility IMO that he feels he got complete consent, and that she feels that she most certainly did not give consent. The reasons for this could be wide ranging, and include the fact that one of them may have a very misguide thought process on what is acceptable way to behave and treat people, but it also could be something much more grey than that.

Anyway, I worry that comments like the above falsely lead people down a different path from what I'm trying to say, this is by no means an attempt to blame the victim in this or any other situation. It's just me wanting to call to attention that I think these types situations CAN be a little less cut and dry. Lots of people operating under the assumption that one of the two people in this situation "know the truth" and one of them knows that they were or are up to no good. I think it's very possible for example that both of these people feel they are 100% right and both would pass a lie detector test about the events of that night. What it comes down to is a miss alignment of what each of them think is acceptable behaviour and what happened that night. Again, I have no ideas on the details, and if I had them I don't doubt for a second I'd likely have an opinion in one way or the other, but I don't think assuming this is either a he's lying or she's lying situation actually does justice to likely how complicated this might be.

[dino7c]

its weird how people worship celebs and athletes

guy gets a standing O at hawks camp...now he may or may not be a rapist but I would wait and see the facts before going out of my way to cheer for the guy (for stepping on to the ice) so brave

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

You haven't explicitly said so but if I just read your posts in this thread about rape, I would think in your mind that you think only 5% of less of women in the world ever get raped in their lifetime.

What do you mean by "in the world" do you have stats that average out all countries? But we are talking about the United States here and the actual stat is 0.7%. I think this is way too high (any number is really) but a far cry from the bogus stats that are constantly repeated.

Read the DOJ data for yourself

The full study, which was published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, a division within DOJ, found that rather than one in five female college students becoming victims of sexual assault, the actual rate is 6.1 per 1,000 students, or 0.61 percent (instead of 1-in-5, the real number is 0.03-in-5). For non-students, the rate of sexual assault is 7.6 per 1,000 people.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by zamler

What do you mean by "in the world" do you have stats that average out all countries? But we are talking about the United States here and the actual stat is 0.7%. I think this is way too high (any number is really) but a far cry from the bogus stats that are constantly repeated.

Read the DOJ data for yourself

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5784686.html

this study is about rape in america, not just college students.

[zamler]

Please read the quoted part more carefully, and also read the link.