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

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Why would you even need a group chat to coordinate what the truth is?

Maybe because these are kids. In instances like this, initial reactions of a kid might be to lie - to make it sound better than it might otherwise appear. Maybe.
So you have a group chat to tell everyone 'just tell the truth'. Because we didn't do anything wrong. Maybe. It's all just ####ty

And yeah, I'd have gtfo before or as it started to 'get crazy' too. Bean is good here.

[Whynotnow]

Originally Posted by CalgaryJay

That's something I haven't thought about. If we are talking about coercion or feeling pressure to do something that you didn't want to do, couldn't the guys pretty much use the same defense?
Especially if a naked girl is laying on the ground and is calling you a ##### for not having sex with her while all your stupid Neanderthal friends are watching and maybe critiquing your bravado?
I wonder how EM would respond if the defense asked if there could be a possibility that when she called the room of guys pussies, they may have felt pressured to respond "like a pornstar" to keep the respect from other guys?

What if one turns around and counters and presses charges on EM for "rape" because they felt coerced into doing things that were like an out of body experience because she questioned their manhood and took advantage of them in a situation where they felt like they had to "perform" and act like they enjoyed it when they were revolted inside? All because of peer pressure which is even more heightened at that age.
How would we ignore a claim like that while taking EM at face value? that would be gender prejudice.

I don't think this case is so cut and dry. If anything, I think Steenbergen's testimony is actually damaging to EM.

That being said, I find the whole thing disgusting and really hope the truth prevails.

Either way, I doubt we see anymore of these types of incidents coming out of Junior Hockey.
Now that the rug has been lifted, I bet we see major changes on how hockey players conduct themselves.

Umm wow, what a disgusting take. She raped them by coercing them or goading them? Guilty or not guilty that is a new level of victim blaming.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by CalgaryJay

That's something I haven't thought about. If we are talking about coercion or feeling pressure to do something that you didn't want to do, couldn't the guys pretty much use the same defense?

No they couldn't, it's a laughable defense.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Plenty of people made up their minds months ago it seems.

There is a lot of “these guys are probably innocent, let’s try a whole range of explanations as to why she is probably lying” that probably is just a manifestation of a long held belief that the boys (to use defence counsel’s preferred nomenclature for 19 year old and 20 year old men) are innocent. I do agree with that.

[The Cobra]

I have no idea if these men will be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but it's clear that no one would want any of our daughters dating these men.

[Royle9]

Its very hard to discern the actual truth here, as the old saying goes "there's 3 sides to every story" and I think that likely comes into play here.

The one thing that keeps replaying in my head is the recollection of her laying on the floor naked, playing with herself and asking every guy in the room to f__k her. That's just very odd.. especially with all of E.M and multiple players both part of the investigation and witnesses being called for testimony all having said this same thing. However I do understand this doesn't mean they get to spit and degrade her, which is where the guilty of being disgusting pigs comes into play.

The curveball for me is all the covert chatter and the need to tell each other to keep all their stories the "same" which leads me to believe not everything is coming out. I do think there is some significant guilt on at least a few of the guys hands, with the ring leader clearly guilty in my opinion as he initiated the whole group gathering in his room.

But its going to be an uphill battle trying to prove most of these kids guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I'll echo that what I've taken from this most is that you never want your daughter dating a young hockey player.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Whynotnow

Umm wow, what a disgusting take. She raped them by coercing them or goading them? Guilty or not guilty that is a new level of victim blaming.

He never said that, he was just wondering if it was possible. You know what's disgusting, double standards. You are saying if that it did turn out she was totally on board and asking for it and some guys felt pressured into performing that is victim blaming because no matter what actually happened she holds no responsibility.

[the-rasta-masta]

Jury dismissed and sent home. Mistrial?

[The Original FFIV]

Originally Posted by the-rasta-masta

Jury dismissed and sent home. Mistrial?

Sounds like will continue without jury. Judge will make decision.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by the-rasta-masta

Jury dismissed and sent home. Mistrial?

My initial thoughts too but according to this, it will be done by judge now:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1923383639259107698

[Royle9]

Strange no?

[GFG#1]

I have no idea, but doesn't sound like a mistrial, so must be judge making decision. Seems odd. I am not a lawyer but this is what google told me.

https://www.ccohs.ca/infectious-dise...l-jury-process

Discharge of jurors – During the course of a trial, the judge may direct that one or more jurors be discharged, which results in them being relieved immediately from the jury. This situation can arise when a juror falls ill or faces other intervening circumstances, or where circumstances arise that disqualify the juror. A jury will remain viable provided it has at least 10 members. If its numbers drop below this point, the entire jury may be discharged due either to a mistrial or to election to proceed by judge alone. Discharged jurors will exit the courthouse and arrange for their own transportation home.

I would think Trial by Jury would be better for the defendants, with everything that I have seen and heard so far, it seems likely at least one juror would have reasonable doubt up to this point.

[troutman]

Ontario Superior Court of Justice Maria Carroccia discharged the jury without giving reasons Friday morning.

Carroccia’s decision to discharge the jury was made following legal arguments by the Crown and defence held without the presence of the jury on Thursday afternoon. The details of the arguments cannot be reported on. [londonfreepress]

[taxbuster]

I can’t see it being well-received for the Defence to put E.M. through 10 or so more days of grilling. Not a reason of course, legally, just from public perspective.

Judge though has seen and heard all the evidence so far…so Judge alone …? Wow.

[troutman]

In a joint statement sent to the media as soon as Carroccia announced she was discharging the jury, Alex Formenton’s lawyers, Daniel Brown and Hilary Dudding, wrote that “a juror came to somehow believe that our courtroom demeanour was disrespectful of her.”

“This was an unfortunate misinterpretation. No defence counsel would risk alienating a juror, and nothing could be further from the truth in this instance. While it is true that co-counsel will speak with one another from time to time during a trial, this is commonplace. The very idea of counsel making light of a juror is illogical and runs directly counter to our purpose and function.” [tsn]

[JusAFlamer]

This seems strange
approach for judge, jury is drastically different

even though not everything presented yet
current leanings personally would have been toward not guilty due to reasonable doubt

having it go to judge only is massive as now it is down to a different type of trial
where it is not simply reasonable doubt. it comes down to technicalities and legal basis purely.

i am just not a fan of it changing mid trial. Can still go either way. however now it is no longer simply about reasonable doubt
( example : consent video's are not binding so judge can simply ignore existance completely whereas a jury cannot really. and question of cohersion no longer exists )

[troutman]

The Justice still has to determine a verdict on the standard of reasonable doubt. She was formerly a criminal defence lawyer.

[nieuwy-89]

I'll admit I don't follow a lot of trials closely but I do have some experience dealing with the legal system through my career.

This trial seems like its been a bit of a hot mess. Mistrial, new jury, now no jury. Constant tech issues. Protestors outside the court harassing the accused. Just not a good look for our justice system.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Mistrials are part of the checks and balances to ensure fairness. It's not failure of the system, it's part of the system.
Tech issues: meh.
Protestors outside: would you ban people from doing that?

I don't see how any of this is a reflection of the justice system.

[nieuwy-89]

Maybe and again I'm not an expert.

The tech issues would not be acceptable in a corporate environment so why should they be acceptable in courtroom environment?

Just seems kind of bush league.