Hockey Canada, CHL settle lawsuit over alleged sexual assault involving WJ players

[midniteowl]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

30-32 months after pleading guilty to avoid a trial.

The Hockey Canada Five are probably crapping themselves now. I expect higher sentences if they are convicted.

Also, I wonder who that coach was that the players thought would want to see a video of teens having sex.

I'm sorry, didn't mean to nitpick, it's not teen having sex, it's teen getting raped.

[Groot]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Right, cause an article written by today’s finest journalists about an incident three years ago are going to be 100% on top of all the fine details.

Why are you only antagonistic in your posts?

A quick Google search brings up dozens of articles, by many different journalists. Many of them cite the same details. And one of the guilty players plead guilty to exhibiting the video, meaning that all of these different "fine journalists" are likely going off actual details released in the case and reporting as such.

But keep defending the nameless coach because...reasons.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Right, cause an article written by today’s finest journalists about an incident three years ago are going to be 100% on top of all the fine details.

I don’t know this for a fact but I am sure it is 100% true but I strong suspect that the reporter just reported agreed upon facts from the court case. A reporter would not need to speculate on facts that are part of the written record in a court of law.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Groot

Why are you only antagonistic in your posts?

A quick Google search brings up dozens of articles, by many different journalists. Many of them cite the same details. And one of the guilty players plead guilty to exhibiting the video, meaning that all of these different "fine journalists" are likely going off actual details released in the case and reporting as such.

But keep defending the nameless coach because...reasons.

Where’s the antagonism?

So you’ve read all those other articles, and informed all of those in this thread of those additional articles prior to posting in this thread, and cross referenced them to the police reports and court docs? We appreciate your detective work.

I’m not defending a coach. I just get a kick out of how quick the Jump to Conclusions mat gets pulled out, and when the word coach is included PW is always the first in line.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

I don’t know this for a fact but I am sure it is 100% true but I strong suspect that the reporter just reported agreed upon facts from the court case. A reporter would not need to speculate on facts that are part of the written record in a court of law.

I don’t see anything written in the article about what the coaches actions were or weren’t, but profits on pitchforks have gotta be made I guess.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

I don’t see anything written in the article about what the coaches actions were or weren’t, but profits on pitchforks have gotta be made I guess.

The coaches on the team were 44, 37 and 43 years old at the time of the incident. Correct the articles do not say what the coach did after he had an 18 year old teenager show a video of him and another 18 year old teenager having some unknown form (at the time for the coach) sexual contact with a girl of an unknown age. Maybe seeing videos of people less than half their age engaging in those type of activities was normal for the coach, we will never know.

[Groot]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Where’s the antagonism?

So you’ve read all those other articles, and informed all of those in this thread of those additional articles prior to posting in this thread, and cross referenced them to the police reports and court docs? We appreciate your detective work.

I’m not defending a coach. I just get a kick out of how quick the Jump to Conclusions mat gets pulled out, and when the word coach is included PW is always the first in line.

Literally everything you posted following the bolded and your prior posts in this and every topic you pop up in. Have you heard of passive aggressive? And then you commented on another specific poster. Yeah, you are nothing but antagonistic.

Dozens of journalists reported the same thing and one player was charged with exhibiting the video. If you don't want to believe the reports because it's jumping to conclusion over a closed case, you do you.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Groot

Literally everything you posted following the bolded and your prior posts in this and every topic you pop up in. Have you heard of passive aggressive? And then you commented on another specific poster. Yeah, you are nothing but antagonistic.

Dozens of journalists reported the same thing and one player was charged with exhibiting the video. If you don't want to believe the reports because it's jumping to conclusion over a closed case, you do you.

You’re just assuming what’s written in my posts was in the tone you wish to be reading it in, so I can’t really do anything about you the reader misinterpreting and it’s not my responsibility to pare it down for you every time.

Not sure why you’re obsessing over the minorest of posts completely directed at someone else. Are you trying to antagonize me?

[PepsiFree]

I see what topfive is saying though, it’s not like there are a lot of details.

No idea what the coach said, or did. We do know that they proceeded with charges in part because witnesses told police about the video, since it had been deleted. We also know that the players were arrested 3 days after it happened, so it’s not like there’s any indication anyone was covering anything up.

I don’t think it’s crazy to avoid throwing the coach under the bus for whatever reason. It’s been 3 years and it’s been public almost the entire time so you’d think someone would have reported something about the coach if it was worth reporting.

[Calgary4LIfe]

This is the kind of intrusive thoughts I have while reading part of the story. I immediately thought: "Surprise MFer, you aren't alone in this prison room either." Yes, there is probably something about two wrongs don't make a right, and there is definitely wrong with me taking a little bit of satisfaction thinking about how ironic these two young men's futures' might soon become for the next 32 months. I guess there is a little monster inside everyone of us. No? Just me? Just ignore this post then.


I can only imagine how many stories that we don't hear about. Any updates with Stajan's team from the early 2000's? I haven't heard anything further about an investigation on that front.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

How could you know what the coach did?

It says that an unidentified team employee dealt with the video. Ergo, not the coach.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

The coaches on the team were 44, 37 and 43 years old at the time of the incident. Correct the articles do not say what the coach did after he had an 18 year old teenager show a video of him and another 18 year old teenager having some unknown form (at the time for the coach) sexual contact with a girl of an unknown age. Maybe seeing videos of people less than half their age engaging in those type of activities was normal for the coach, we will never know.

It really makes you wonder, like you said before, what kind of relationship the coach had with the players if that was something they considered a normal thing to do. I would wager it's like a nuclear ladder where events scale up until it gets to something like that. I am sure it doesn't go from normal adult-teenager interactions like pizza parties and talking about your favourite movies, to here, let me show you homemade porn I just made 5 minutes ago.

[Ped]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

It says that an unidentified team employee dealt with the video. Ergo, not the coach.

No idea of what happened, but the very fact that it is "unidentified" doesn't mean the coach didn't tell that unidentified person. It's very possible that he did report it up the food chain.


I personally don't think it's likely, but we certainly can't be definitive about it.

[GFG#1]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

It says that an unidentified team employee dealt with the video. Ergo, not the coach.

The coach may have told the GM, or the HR equivalent. He may have wanted the evidence to still be available.

In theory you would think he would have just confiscated the phone at that point. They may have a protocol for something like this that the coach had to follow.

Jumping to conclusions that the coach had no input to the team official that deal with the video.

[GioforPM]

Well, however it happened, the team employee who advised Daigle to delete the video is also a criminal.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Well, however it happened, the team employee who advised Daigle to delete the video is also a criminal.

Interesting...something to do with destroying evidence? Because OTOH it seems reasonable to advise someone to delete underage material in that circumstance (where the non-consensual nature presumably wasn't obvious)...

[Jason14h]

If he knew it was underage or non consensual then certainly is criminal

However if he just knows it’s sick and creepy to have someone showing people that but assumed it was consensual and of age he’s doing what I would expect (hope) most to do - tell the person to delete and stop “bragging”

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Interesting...something to do with destroying evidence? Because OTOH it seems reasonable to advise someone to delete underage material in that circumstance (where the non-consensual nature presumably wasn't obvious)...

He's helping him to hide the evidence, yes. If someone said "I shot someone" would you advise them to get rid of the gun? I suppose the person didn't think it through and was hoping to protect the girl. But if it was to hopefully not have incriminating material available to an investigator, yup, that's offside.

I'd certainly tell them not to show that material to anyone else. That's OK. That's crime prevention (since even showing it is an added offence).

EDIT: I'm guessing the employee just thought it was a sex tape, not a rape tape. Otherwise they would have been charged.

EDIT 2: There doesn't appear to be much coverup here. Incident was in June 2021, charges were October 2021 (and a league suspension). Guilty plea 2 years later (right after a ruling on video evidence being admissible).

[blankall]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Well, however it happened, the team employee who advised Daigle to delete the video is also a criminal.

We don't actually know what was on the video. The act could have appeared consensual from the video. I highly doubt the player was showing a video of a girl crying or begging for help. In which case the coach was telling his players not to spread a video around of them engaging in a sexual act, which was good advice, and also acts to maintain the girl's dignity.

[InternationalVillager]

Originally Posted by blankall

We don't actually know what was on the video. The act could have appeared consensual from the video. I highly doubt the player was showing a video of a girl crying or begging for help. In which case the coach was telling his players not to spread a video around of them engaging in a sexual act, which was good advice, and also acts to maintain the girl's dignity.

Yeah - I don't understand why this is so hard for some to comprehend.

It's very easy to play Monday Morning QB and dissect these situations to the nth degree.

Unless you're knowingly acting in an illegal manner, you're just trying to give the best advice that you can possible in that moment based on what your life experiences are. end of story. to say that the best decision wasn't made after spending time analyzing it, it's irrelevant. you weren't there. you don't know what you would have done.