[News] The Evander Kane saga: suspended 21 games for violating COVID protocols

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I dont know why people are obsessed in siding with anyone. This doesn't only apply to this situation, but why? Just sit back and watch, none of us have to have any vested interest or side with anyone, and it's better for the legal system if public opinion doesn't loom over cases.

If you were in charge of the Sharks, knowing what you know now- would you dress and play him?

[Philly06Cup]

Weird how so many people keep saying "both parties" are horrible/terrible/liars. There's a simple rule here to follow. That rule is:

Believe women.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by fleury

Very true, but that same principle can be applied even in sports situations on speculating why a team isn't doing well.

That would be applying the principle where it doesn't belong. The purpose of a sports team is to entertain the public, and nothing the fans say has any significant effect on the team's actions. The purpose of a criminal trial is serious and potentially life-changing, and a big public outcry can prejudice the jury, or worse yet, the judge.

Originally Posted by Philly06Cup

Weird how so many people keep saying "both parties" are horrible/terrible/liars. There's a simple rule here to follow. That rule is:

Believe women.

That rule is not only sexist, but downright wrong. What, women never lie? In any dispute between a woman and a man, the man is automatically wrong, regardless of other evidence? And then, how do you handle a dispute between two women? I suppose you could find two men somewhere and make them pay damages to both parties. But what on earth would any of that have to do with justice?

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Philly06Cup

Weird how so many people keep saying "both parties" are horrible/terrible/liars. There's a simple rule here to follow. That rule is:

Believe women.

I hope this is a joke

[Philly06Cup]

When it comes to sexual assault, you should believe women.

If you think that's a joke, you are wrong.

Women are sexually assaulted all of the time. It is severely underreported. Thousands never speak up, because of fear of not being believed. Thousands never get justice, because of fear of not being believed. Thousands of creepy, violent, lowlife men get away with sexual assault and reoffend, because we do not believe women.

We as a society can fix that, if we start with the mentality that we believe women.

When women speak, we should believe them.


"What about men who are falsely accused"
-Women are sexually assaulted at a far higher rate than men get falsely accused. Being sexually assaulted is more damaging than loss of character. We should realistically prioritize sexual assault over false accusations.

"What about men who are sexually assaulted"
-In this case, I would agree that we should believe men who say they have been sexually assaulted. Because the victims are much more often women, I phrase it as believe women.

"What about innocent before proven guilty"
-This legal doctrine works for a lot of law and morality, but fails miserably when it comes to sexual assault. It takes momentual courage for a survivor to come forward and even make a claim, and yet the automatic legal stance is for the courts and public to not believe them and presume the offender innocent. That fact alone is depressing and can make pursuing legal action a nightmare. On top of that, sex occurs behind closed doors with few witnesses, and consent is impossible to prove, making the chances of succeeding incredible difficult. Yes, "innocent until proven guilty" is what we in Canada hold as a moral standard, but it just does not work for sexual assault.

Believe women.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by Philly06Cup

Weird how so many people keep saying "both parties" are horrible/terrible/liars. There's a simple rule here to follow. That rule is:

Believe women.

I just spilled my beer. thanks

[Philly06Cup]

A woman speaks up and says she's been beaten and sexually assaulted.

In reaction, in this thread you have people saying:

-she's lied about other stuff, so let's not believe her
-dismissing her claims, because, you know, people can lie under oath
-both people are terrible human beings
-people who allege really terrible things are more likely to be lying
-she needs to be careful about making allegations because she is ruining a cash cow
-constantly bashing the offender, with no mention or regard for the victim

What a load of toxic bull****.

Let's start by showing some concern for the victim.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

At the end of the day the Sharks may be employing a rapist.

That’s all there is to it. There is little wonder why they uninvited him to camp. I don’t even think they had a choice. I’m actually blown away at the lack of faux cancel culture outrage that permeates many other threads with many very similar topics.

Total condemnation of Jake Virtanen. Evander Kane? Woah woah woah- the Sharks can’t do anything yet NO EVIDENCE! Except, like, under oath allegations?

If you go by the letter of the law, I bet you every team has multiple rapists. some more predatory than others.

that being said, I've seen tons of outrage over Kane here. There was probably more outrage over Virtanen, as it seems multiple people here have had personal experiences with him, or know people who have.

[Poe969]

Such a good player but such a garbage person. Such a waste but at least he's on a team I hate!

[fastpuck]

Wow, just wow. I am a women, I think sexual assault and abuse is serious. Should I always believe women, just because they are a women. What a load of crap. I have spent a lifetime in careers, generally dominated by men. The men overall, despite a few dirtbags, have been gracious and often my best mentors. I have also encountered some real toxic women, who lie, who threaten and also know the power of the courts are in their favour. There are also a large percentage of men that have been abused, and they often are not believed. So the generalization that we should always believe women is just garbage. More appropriately we should listen to victims as well as accusers, and have greater equanimity and discernment in our legal judgements.

[QUOTE=Philly06Cup;7998170]When it comes to sexual assault, you should believe women.

If you think that's a joke, you are wrong.

[bdubbs]

Wouldn't we just agree to believe victims instead of one gender over another? Believe people who claim they have been assaulted, and then find out the truth thereafter? It's not that complicated but I guess history is against me in that sense.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Ugh, the rule isn't "believe women" it's "take their claim seriously and investigate".

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I dont know why people are obsessed in siding with anyone. This doesn't only apply to this situation, but why? Just sit back and watch, none of us have to have any vested interest or side with anyone, and it's better for the legal system if public opinion doesn't loom over cases.

Personally, I’m torn. On the one hand, I want to see Kane back on the ice and earning his millions so I can continue to tag along on his European gambling vacations and pick off the straggling immoral women who crowd around us on the casino floor.


On the other hand, I have also been having a torrid affair with his baby mama, Anna I think her name is - I don’t think Kane treats Andi right.


A real conundrum.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Philly06Cup

A woman speaks up and says she's been beaten and sexually assaulted.

She also says that Kane has been betting on NHL games, and you say we have to believe her because she's a woman – even though an investigation into that specific charge found nothing.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by fleury

I'm siding with the woman here if anything, personally. Certainly both sides can lie or exaggerate, but in this case the woman has everything to lose and she's talking out about it, to some degree money be damned. Takes away one aspect of a motivation. Besides that, the guy is a narcissist, a dbag, and has addiction issues. There's enough skeletons to take believe her more credible than him.

Well, theres a lot to unpack there, but the fact of the matter is:

"There is no money."

Kane is broke and he's up to his ears in creditors. At the moment he'll be lucky to spend his twilight years working at a Car Wash.

In that context, she has nothing to lose. He doesnt have a penny to give her and there are people standing ahead of her in line for whatever he does have.

This does 2 things.

1. She has nothing to lose, so why not tell what she knows?

But....

2. She is likely bitter and resentful, who can blame her? But that likely shadows the truth of her statements.

Either way, I dont care. I have no dog in this fight. This is like being 'A Clockwork Oranged' in front of a Soap Opera that you dont really want to watch.

They both sound like amazing pieces of work. I feel bad for their kid. Hopefully they're setting some funds aside for that child's future therapy costs.

[NegativeSpace]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Ugh, the rule isn't "believe women" it's "take their claim seriously and investigate".

With respect, the only way to properly investigate is to start by making the victim feeling sincerely listened to and believed. Often, a person experiencing such traumatic experiences (and I have seen sexual assault allegations but those in Kane’s case are … why would someone lie about that) have trouble describing sequential events and need emotional safety to have a fair investigation. It is not as simple as taking down notes of what they say and go verify it. So, I agree that to start the view should be to believe women and other victims.

It merits saying that the traditional investigation process and subsequent litigation has often been doubly traumatic to victims without being very concerned about truth.

At least in criminal or civil assault cases, confirmation and other evidence can come afterwards. Though these cases are often without “hard evidence” victims have to explain many times in different ways. Family cases like Kane’s do lend themselves to mud slinging. That being said she has legal counsel, hopefully counseling, and likely good support.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by NegativeSpace

With respect, the only way to properly investigate is to start by making the victim feeling sincerely listened to and believed.

Hmm making the victim feel believed. What else could we call that? Oh I know. We’ll call that step “take their claim seriously” followed by “investigate”.

Why would the police even investigate if they just believed women? They could recommend the charges go straight to trial where the judge and jury would also adhere to the “believe women” mantra. Would certainly speed up our justice system for backlogs!

[Mr.Coffee]

It’s a trickier one than people like to admit. I see both sides but ultimately I think I side with Cali. Given the seriousness of any accusation involving sexual assault, would it be offside for police in their investigation to request / require? Polygraph tests? Especially if that type of accusation is lodged while under oath on the stand?

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Philly06Cup

When it comes to sexual assault, you should believe women.

If you think that's a joke, you are wrong.

Women are sexually assaulted all of the time. It is severely underreported. Thousands never speak up, because of fear of not being believed. Thousands never get justice, because of fear of not being believed. Thousands of creepy, violent, lowlife men get away with sexual assault and reoffend, because we do not believe women.

We as a society can fix that, if we start with the mentality that we believe women.

When women speak, we should believe them.


"What about men who are falsely accused"
-Women are sexually assaulted at a far higher rate than men get falsely accused. Being sexually assaulted is more damaging than loss of character. We should realistically prioritize sexual assault over false accusations.

"What about men who are sexually assaulted"
-In this case, I would agree that we should believe men who say they have been sexually assaulted. Because the victims are much more often women, I phrase it as believe women.

"What about innocent before proven guilty"
-This legal doctrine works for a lot of law and morality, but fails miserably when it comes to sexual assault. It takes momentual courage for a survivor to come forward and even make a claim, and yet the automatic legal stance is for the courts and public to not believe them and presume the offender innocent. That fact alone is depressing and can make pursuing legal action a nightmare. On top of that, sex occurs behind closed doors with few witnesses, and consent is impossible to prove, making the chances of succeeding incredible difficult. Yes, "innocent until proven guilty" is what we in Canada hold as a moral standard, but it just does not work for sexual assault.

Believe women.

Problem is I live in the real world and have seen lives ruined by false accusations. Blanket statement is a joke IMO.

Investigate any serious accusations made by women or men obviously.

Kane is a total dbag but this particular women has already made false accusations.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

It’s a trickier one than people like to admit. I see both sides but ultimately I think I side with Cali. Given the seriousness of any accusation involving sexual assault, would it be offside for police in their investigation to request / require? Polygraph tests? Especially if that type of accusation is lodged while under oath on the stand?

Polygraphs are not reliable should not be used in court cases.