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

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

So how does that work? Would just McLeod be convicted of a lesser SA charge and the rest go free? Is there a list of consensual and non consensual acts? When someone has likely consented to a number of acts but not consented to others, do they have to specifically name the exact acts that were non consensual and prosecute those ones? I haven’t been following super closely, maybe this has been covered. If there was some consensual group sex but other parts of the group sex weren’t consensual and EM has said her memory isn’t good because she was drunk, how do they determine what happened and with whom?

Well it was Foote that did the splits, but i don't want to pretend to be an expert on the nuances of all this. However, it just seems like at no point did she consent to have someone put their balls in her face.

A lot of the stuff this morning is reviewing the group texts, where the players align on what they should say.

[Scroopy Noopers]

A group chat started by Dillon Dubé asks the players to add anyone who was in the room that night.

The group chat includes:

Carter Hart.
Jake Bean.
Cal Foote.
Dillon Dubé.
Maxime Comtois.
Drake Batherson.
Michael McLeod.
Brett Howden.
Sam Steel.
Alex Formenton.
Tyler Steenbergen.
On June 26, 2018, Dubé sends a message saying, “There are no criminal charges it’s hockey Canada code of conduct and they are investigating on what happened that might (sic) so it won’t happen again.”

Bean asks, “Could we get in trouble for it or no?” and Dubé responds, “I don’t think so.” McLeod says, “We all need to say the same thing if we get interviewed can’t have different stories or make anything up.”

Quote

In the group chat, the men discuss setting up another group chat or a call, on an app called House Party, or on Snapchat or FaceTime. It’s difficult because they’re all in different timezones, Maxime Comptois doesn’t have Snapchat, etc.

Jake Bean writes, “No, boys. Like we don’t need to make anything up. No one did anything wrong. We went to that room to eat. The girl came, she wanted to have sex with all of us. No one did. She gave a few guys head, and then we got out of the room when things got too crazy.” Bean adds, “And Mikey literally has a video giving her consent.”

Dubé writes, “Ok ya f–-k we are fine the boys who did things got consent so just tell them that it’s fine.” Brett Howden replies, “All we have to say is ‘someone brought the girl back to the room. We were all in there ordering food and then this girl started begging from everyone to have sex with her. Nobody would do it. But then as time went on she gave 3 guys head. Once things started to get out of hand we all left and got her out.’”

Comtois agrees and Bean says, “Yeah like boys that’s literally the truth so.”

Dubé writes, “Ya that’s all that happened so we are good. Everybody treated her fine because she gave those guys consent so it’s all good.”

Howden replies, “F–k Mikey has the video of her consenting. Like we just show bully that and we’re fine.”

Bully is Shawn Bullock, a Hockey Canada executive.

Howden writes “Nobody forced her to do anything. If anything we should put allegations on her f–k.”

McLeod then says, “I did have sex with her before everyone came in u guys know that part right.” Howden replies, “She’s the one who got naked and started begging everyone.” McLeod replies, “Yeah what should I say if they asked why I took the videos tho,” referring to the consent videos taken at the end of the night.

Bean replies, “You took the videos because you wanted to make sure nothing bad would happen. And cover yourself.”

They discuss keeping each other “in the loop” and that Hockey Canada can’t go through their phones unless police are involved.

Dubé writes, “Let’s not make her sound too crazy because if she gets wind of this and then she can get even more angry and we don’t need that so just be good about it but the truth with it.”

[Scooter]

Originally Posted by smithtofuhr86

Look up Heather Donkers as well from the Crown side of things. There is a really interesting article about her life and background plus the reason why she decided to get into law. Between Savard and her there is some heavy hitters in the court room battling it out according to my cousin who is a lawyer out in Ontario.

Heather Donkers herself was a SA victim while she was an undergrad student at Queen's University.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Group chat quotes

Link to this?

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

Link to this?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/londo...fies-9.6761551

Everyday, front page of the CBC they have this being updated live. All day everyday.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

Link to this?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/londo...fies-9.6761551

[Scroopy Noopers]

Ohhhhh that’s not great

The conversations were brief because Steenbergen was at development camp and was trying to focus on hockey.

In the first call, Dubé told him he’d gotten a call from Bullock, the Hockey Canada executive, to tell him there’d be an investigation. Dubé told Steenbergen to “just say what you saw” and to not mention what he saw Dubé do, and that Dubé would explain that himself.

The phone call with Foote was “pretty much the same,” Steenbergen said. “Don’t say what he did, that he would go in and explain it himself.”

Steenbergen says he understood that to mean he wasn’t to mention he saw Dubé slapping the woman’s butt or saw Foote do the splits.

(Steenbergen says he was a little confused because he didn’t actually see Foote do the splits, so he was confused about why Foote called him).

Steenbergen says that when he went to speak to the investigators hired by Hockey Canada, he decided he’d tell them what he saw if specifically asked, but wouldn’t volunteer the information.

The investigators didn’t specifically ask about what he saw Dubé or Foote do, so he didn’t say anything, Steenbergen says.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Jake Bean was involved as well?

[Jiri Hrdina]

He was in the room.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Not good, but him being part of the group chat he was likely in the room when things happened even if he didn't participate.

[dieHARDflameZ]

These guys all sound like total dirt bags. If they truly don’t believe they did anything wrong, why is it so critical for them to ensure they align their story? I think they know damn well they crossed the line.

[Tbull8]

Not gonna lie, don't love that bean was present... not that that means he's guilty of something but its not a great look either way

[FlamesAddiction]

Steenbergen and Bean sound like they were caught a little off guard by what was happening and left the room as soon as there was a clear path to do so. It's still not a good look to even be in a situation like that, but I don't think it's a stretch to given them the benefit of the doubt that they were simply at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Also, for people following along, the London Free Press has a live feed just like CBC. Some of the information is the same, but they do provide some different details occasionally.

https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/...y-canada-trial

[WideReceiver]

Where are you guys following this trial?

[Paulie Walnuts]

Dillion Dube being the one who started the group chat not a good look either.

Wanting to use Snapchat for a video call or messages reeks of guilt as those messages expire after 24 hours unless saved. Or FaceTime video calls.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by WideReceiver

Where are you guys following this trial?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/londo...fies-9.6761551

https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/...y-canada-trial

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Dillion Dube being the one who started the group chat not a good look either.

Wanting to use Snapchat for a video call or messages reeks of guilt as those messages expire after 24 hours unless saved. Or FaceTime video calls.

I disagree. Dillon was captain of this team, right? I think it's pretty natural that he be the one to start/ lead conversations and don't think you can attribute any guilt because of that. Further, again, I don't think it's out of the ordinary for a group who is in a crisis situation to wish to discuss the crisis situation. The fact that the group chat exists doesnt demonstrate any guilt on whether or not there was consent at any point.

The contents of the chat so far don't seem to be very predatory. If anything, it seems at the time that the group felt they would be easily vindicated by details of the story. Repeated requests to tell the truth... that doesnt really read like trying to fix a story. They're not repeating specific details of events to each other in the chat. There are some loose details. I'm not privy to all details of the case, but I don't think that's smoking gun evidence of anything.

I also don't think a desire to use different messaging software can really be taken as evidence of guilt. Though, I agree, the use of snapchat in particular is typical of wanting to hide or delete conversations. But it's not a 1+1=2 situation.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Okay, what a leader then…

[Jiri Hrdina]

It's a mixed message. Basically tell the truth but let's make sure we are all saying the same thing. And can be read as some level of peer pressure against those who maybe had a different perception of what happened.

[TheIronMaiden]

I am far from a legal expert, but I would imagine that Dube and Foote get charges for the butt slapping and splits and McLeod for inviting people into the room, but Fortmenton and Hart will get off the hook.