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

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by GFG#1

What 18 or 19 year old male doesn't remember walking into a room with a naked lady on the bed?

Not defending him or his argument in the slightest, but these young hockey players have probably seen MANY occurrences of their teammates in a hotel room with naked girls/women.

Like many have said in this thread and other threads, almost everyone here knows stories of junior players being sleazy/abusive and young women and girls throwing themselves at them.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Not defending him or his argument in the slightest, but these young hockey players have probably seen MANY occurrences of their teammates in a hotel room with naked girls/women.

Like many have said in this thread and other threads, almost everyone here knows stories of junior players being sleazy/abusive and young women and girls throwing themselves at them.

I would think the incident being investigated by police at the time made it a little more memorable. Stuff like that tends to burn things in.

I doubt almost everyone here has had to answer to the police.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I can almost guarantee you that they don't completely understand the gravity of it. Like they knew it was wrong enough to warrant collaborating for a story, but not wrong enough that they deserve to be severely punished. I am sure part of them still feels justified and that not dissenting is the same as consenting.

I'd be surprised if they aren't worried to death about going to prison.

I have little doubt they know very well how serious this is.

[the-rasta-masta]

Raddysh texts McLeod right after about an investigation, but can't recall anything about the night and says he wasn't drinking? Sure buddy.

[Buzzard]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Not defending him or his argument in the slightest, but these young hockey players have probably seen MANY occurrences of their teammates in a hotel room with naked girls/women.

Like many have said in this thread and other threads, almost everyone here knows stories of junior players being sleazy/abusive and young women and girls throwing themselves at them.

Sorry, I could never buy that one. No 18-19 year old horny guy doesn't remember a (presumably) good looking, naked young lady laying on a hotel room bed no matter how many they've seen. That's sorta like saying..."these guys see hot, expensive cars all the time. They probably drive them, and their friends probably drive them, so it's quite possible they can't remember seeing the Grand Turismo sitting in team mates parking stall at the rink".

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I'd be surprised if they aren't worried to death about going to prison.

I have little doubt they know very well how serious this is.

Sorry, I don't think I articulated that right.

I think they understand the gravity of the repercussions. I question whether they understand the gravity of the wrongness of it, if that makes sense.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Sorry, I don't think I articulated that right.

I think they understand the gravity of the repercussions. I question whether they understand the gravity of the wrongness of it, if that makes sense.

Yes, that does make sense. And I agree.

[CFO]

I wonder if they went through her phone? Did she text or call any friends throughout the night?

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

On a personal comment:
Why none of the accused has stood up and said "I did this and I'm ashamed." is beyond my moral code by rather a long way. This stains them - whether they are found guilty or not - for life, IMO. this was not "boys being boys" (even if EM consented). It's piggish, and then some. Yes, I have step-daughters, a wife, and a mother.

Sorry but what does this mean? I mean I can understand outrage if there was cohesion, intimidation, or force that is used in order to engage in sexual activities where someone isn't consenting but if someone is engaging in consensual activities why is it a legal issue?

I know a lot of people who have engaged in consentual group sex - the biggest issue is consent not your views on sexual relations.

[MacDaddy77]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

Sorry but what does this mean? I mean I can understand outrage if there was cohesion, intimidation, or force that is used in order to engage in sexual activities where someone isn't consenting but if someone is engaging in consensual activities why is it a legal issue?

I know a lot of people who have engaged in consentual group sex - the biggest issue is consent not your views on sexual relations.

Founding member of chicken on the way I see

[MacDaddy77]

Garbage from Raddysh. No way he’s telling the truth. If he was in the room and she was naked he would FOR SURE remember.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Not defending him or his argument in the slightest, but these young hockey players have probably seen MANY occurrences of their teammates in a hotel room with naked girls/women.

Like many have said in this thread and other threads, almost everyone here knows stories of junior players being sleazy/abusive and young women and girls throwing themselves at them.

Yeah, even by those standards, there’s an orgy of evidence that indicates the parties involved knew they’d ####ed up.

[BoLevi]

The whole thing makes me nauseous, so I haven't really tracked the details. But do I have it correct that the legal dispute here is whether or not her claiming consent after the fact is a reflection of whether or not she actually consented?

( I don't think the disgusting nature of the players is in dispute).

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

The whole thing makes me nauseous, so I haven't really tracked the details. But do I have it correct that the legal dispute here is whether or not her claiming consent after the fact is a reflection of whether or not she actually consented?

( I don't think the disgusting nature of the players is in dispute).

The issue is whether or not she consented to the acts.
The “after the fact” is seemingly an attempt to get evidence she consented.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I would think the incident being investigated by police at the time made it a little more memorable. Stuff like that tends to burn things in.

I doubt almost everyone here has had to answer to the police.

I didn't realize it was investigated back then. I thought the investigation only recently began, hence the trial happening 8 years later.

You are absolutely right that someone would have remembered the incident.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

I didn't realize it was investigated back then. I thought the investigation only recently began, hence the trial happening 8 years later.

You are absolutely right that someone would have remembered the incident.

The London police insist that the investigation was never "closed" and it was all one long investigation. They said that new information came to light which led to the charges. They never really gave satisfactory answers about what the hold up was other than after reviewing everything, they discovered that there were additional steps they could take.

In reality, what I think happened was that they stopped investigating after Hockey Canada paid the victim hoping it would just go away, but then the media picked up on it and started asking questions about why Hockey Canada paid someone out for something of this nature and the police felt pressure to continue. It's kind of ridiculous and the London police still have a lot to answer for IMO.

It's also noteworthy that originally there were 8 players said to be involved, but only enough evidence to charge 5.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/londo...case-1.7105197

[blankall]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

The whole thing makes me nauseous, so I haven't really tracked the details. But do I have it correct that the legal dispute here is whether or not her claiming consent after the fact is a reflection of whether or not she actually consented?

( I don't think the disgusting nature of the players is in dispute).

The only issue is whether she consented at the time of the acts. Statements made afterwards can be used as evidence of that. The courts will look at whether those statements were genuine or made due to coercion. Based on how cheesy they are, I don't think the courts will give those much weight. They seem exactly like the kind of statements a teenage boy would force a victim to state.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

Sorry but what does this mean? I mean I can understand outrage if there was cohesion, intimidation, or force that is used in order to engage in sexual activities where someone isn't consenting but if someone is engaging in consensual activities why is it a legal issue?

I know a lot of people who have engaged in consentual group sex - the biggest issue is consent not your views on sexual relations.

I highly doubt that, even if she did consent to the acts, she consented to the behaviour afterwards. Did she really say show all your teammates videos of me and laugh about it on the bus afterwards?

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by MacDaddy77

Garbage from Raddysh. No way he’s telling the truth. If he was in the room and she was naked he would FOR SURE remember.

About the only thing you can say is that he could have been heavily intoxicated at the time and that could certainly make things hazy for anyone or anything. It also could be 1 of many similar incidents over the years making it murky to place who was who and at what time. Bizarre nonetheless and if he is conveniently forgetting as it appears, he should be ashamed.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

About the only thing you can say is that he could have been heavily intoxicated at the time and that could certainly make things hazy for anyone or anything. It also could be 1 of many similar incidents over the years making it murky to place who was who and at what time. Bizarre nonetheless and if he is conveniently forgetting as it appears, he should be ashamed.

He also stated in court that he hadn’t been drinking heavily, so that tosses the heavily intoxicated angle out the window.

I guess all we really know about his involvement is that he was in the room with the victim at some point, he was in the group chat, he reached out to McLeod specifically to tell him there was an investigation, and there wasn’t enough evidence to charge him of anything. We’ll see what happens, but given the above, it’s not entirely surprising he doesn’t remember anything more than what there is evidence of.