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

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

Not to derail the thread but Edmonton willingly signed Perry and Kane AFTER they did what they did. Huge difference and you should be embarrassed to be an Oilers fan.

Dube will never play another game for the Flames.

They also invited Virtanen to try out for the team after everything.

Dube is embarrassing, but that's not on the Flames.

[fotze2]

Yeesh. The demons she must see. Nightmare. Then the self guilt kicks in. Be brave sister.

[Enoch Root]

That post from EDMONTONisNG is banworthy. Enough of this clown's trolling.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Agreed he’s been trolling long enough but that was unnecessary.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jetfire

F*** Dube so, so much. The extent to which that guy shafted the team and betrayed the care and effort of his teammates under the guise of "mental health", in order to hide a rape charge that he knew was coming, just despicable. I hope these #######s go away for a long time.

This reminds me of the Norm Macdonald/Jerry Seinfeld discussion about Bill Cosby.

Yeah Dube misled the Flames but that’s not really the worst part. It’s the raping.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Dube probably did have a mental health crisis because he knew all the skeletons in his closet were about to become very public and he was about to go on trial for rape. Even pieces of #### can have mental health issues when they have to face consequences for their actions.

Focusing on him stepping away when he did is very odd. It was for the best for everyone. I’m glad he left when he did. Did the team a favour. Should have left earlier.


Reading the articles of what transpired today in court, the details about their behaviour after the fact seems very damning. The sexual acts they engaged in can be argued to have been consensual and will be he said/she said. But innocent people don’t typically conspire to cover up events, pressure the victim to lie or talk about coordinating stories for investigators.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

That post from EDMONTONisNG is banworthy. Enough of this clown's trolling.

There are people who still don't understand that the username is sarcastic and so are all of his posts.

Probably one of the lowlier mom's basement dwelling losers up there.

And there are at least 2-3 other accounts that do their own version of the same thing but they don't try as hard, and will occasionally engage in real conversation.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by EDMONTONisNG

Dube is an embarrassing stain on this organization. Thanks a lot for making Perry and Kane look like saints. Hope you rot in jail.

Unfortunately there may be a future in hockey yet for him as the organization that hired Perry, Kane and a GM that enabled sexual assault seems to always have a seat at their table for scum like that.

[GullFoss]

One girl in a room naked with 10 pro-athlete dudes. I dunno how that could ever been seen as not coercive unless McLeod says "she told me to text my teammates" and the other players say "McLeod told us she wanted it." So that's where Im going to guess this is the direction the story is going in.

Do you think the five witnesses would throw their teammates under the bus?

Why did 10 players end up in the room if only 5 raped her? Did the other 5 come to watch? Did they get to the room and then realized she was too drunk and they did not want to rape her? Did they come into the room under false pretences?

This is going to be really ugly

[FlamesAddiction]

As the prosecution lawyer said, this will be about what is consent, but just as importantly, what isn't consent. I could see in many circumstances how this could be difficult to demonstrate, but as someone else mentioned, the accused probably didn't do themselves any favours by trying to coordinate and work out their stories through texts. Then there is the video where the accuser apparently says that it was all consensual, but while being coerced to say that. Just going by descriptions that were reported, obviously.

Legally trying to coordinate a story to tell investigators doesn't necessarily mean 100% guilt, but it sure doesn't look good. It could very well shave off some potential reasonable doubt.

[GullFoss]

"The jury is expected to hear from some witnesses that the complainant was at times offering to perform sexual acts or asking whether anyone was going to have sex with her, Donkers said. "

This is the part the defense is going to push on. If you're offering to perform sexual acts, doesn't that imply consent? I can see a scenario where the players can suggest "I thought the girl was really into nympho, exhibitionist, group sex and between what McLeod told me and what the girl said...it was implied consent."

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

"The jury is expected to hear from some witnesses that the complainant was at times offering to perform sexual acts or asking whether anyone was going to have sex with her, Donkers said. "

This is the part the defense is going to push on. If you're offering to perform sexual acts, doesn't that imply consent? I can see a scenario where the players can suggest "I thought the girl was really into nympho, exhibitionist, group sex and between what McLeod told me and what the girl said...it was implied consent."

There is no such thing as implied consent.

[troutman]

Even if there was “legal consent”, this was evil ####ty behaviour. Who answers a call to join a gang bang? Bastards.

[AustinL_NHL]

???

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

There is no such thing as implied consent.

If consent is expressed through encouraging actions, it is accepted as valid.

Implicit consent is acceptable if the complainant’s actions were clear beyond doubt. For instance, if the complainant did not express consent in words but willingly made advances, gestured to the accused to touch them in a sexual manner.

I'm not saying how I feel about the situation, but just where I think the defenses case is heading. If someone doesn't say "no" and "offers sexual acts" and then "performs oral sex" and "gets on the floor to be [tea bagged]"...there's an argument to be made that implicit consent was given through verbal gestures and encouraging actions.

It's pretty deplorable behavior to dehumanize someone and coerce them into group sex through physical intimidation. But the defense will see an opening to get a not-guilty verdict.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Well there is an actual trial occurring now so guess I will wait to render my judgment until some evidence is actually presented.

But sounds like some more of these young men were in the room and were not charged. They may have cooperated or whatever, maybe we find out. But even if not charged, I sure hope they are taking responsibility for their actions, or lack thereof, that day.

Nm

[BigThief]

Originally Posted by troutman

Even if there was “legal consent”, this was evil ####ty behaviour. Who answers a call to join a gang bang? Bastards.

People who like gang bangs? Getting muddled in sexual acts and judging what people do confuses the conversation. The topic is consent; that's the issue we should be focused on. These men took advantage of a woman who was drunk and while initially gave consent to one thing, had it spiral and had that initial consent taking advantage of and used. A person can give consent for vaginal sex but it doesn't mean suddenly anal sex is agreed too. Getting high and mighty if someone likes a gang bang means you've lost the plot.

The one thing that stuck out to me is the humilation factor. Having one player drag his testicles across her face as she's laying down is degrading and puts you into their head space and things like that should be illuminating for the jury. They didn't care about her, didn't care how she felt, if she was okay and of course if she consented. They wanted to have their fun, use her for sexual gratification and to have some laughs at her expense.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

If consent is expressed through encouraging actions, it is accepted as valid.

Implicit consent is acceptable if the complainant’s actions were clear beyond doubt. For instance, if the complainant did not express consent in words but willingly made advances, gestured to the accused to touch them in a sexual manner.

I'm not saying how I feel about the situation, but just where I think the defenses case is heading. If someone doesn't say "no" and "offers sexual acts" and then "performs oral sex" and "gets on the floor to be [tea bagged]"...there's an argument to be made that implicit consent was given through verbal gestures and encouraging actions.

It's pretty deplorable behavior to dehumanize someone and coerce them into group sex through physical intimidation. But the defense will see an opening to get a not-guilty verdict.

Sure, but that’s not implied consent, and implied consent is not a defence.

“I can see a scenario where the players can suggest "I thought the girl was really into nympho, exhibitionist, group sex and between what McLeod told me and what the girl said...it was implied consent."”

You shouldn’t, because that’s very clearly defined as not a defence.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

There is no such thing as implied consent.

So all consent must be explicit? What fraction of the people who have sex in Calgary tonight will get explicit consent from their partner?

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

So all consent must be explicit? What fraction of the people who have sex in Calgary tonight will get explicit consent from their partner?

All of them should. But within the cultural context many of us are raised in, it's a messy and complicated.

Like really you should ask for permission to do x, to touch y. In a live fire situation you may touch y first then confirm that's okay. But Ideally it should be the former not the latter.

And considering various other factrs like power dynamics etc, someone might not want to say y is okay, doesn't want to do it, but feels compelled or coerced to