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

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

https://lfpress.com/sports/hockey/ju...y-canada-trial

This stuff is pretty thin. The first "contradictory" statement is her saying what she said at the time, and on a pretty irrelevant point. The second is denyng what she says he impairment state was based on some video evidence of her not stumbling? I mean, lots of people are drunk without staggering. Back in my youth I once got drunk enough where I couldn't remember big parts of the night yet everyone said I appeared normal all night.

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

https://lfpress.com/sports/hockey/ju...y-canada-trial

This is pretty troubling to me. The weight comment feels like a gotcha moment rather than something materially relevant. And when it comes to alcohol, people respond very differently, I know people who’ve been near blackout and you’d never be able to tell based on how they walk or talk. Using outward appearance as a blanket measure of impairment just doesn’t sit right.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Sexual assault typically does not have witnesses or physical evidence that can be clearly tied to the accused, so it’s the word of one person against another. Our justice system does not make it easy to get a conviction for a serious crime on the basis of one person’s allegations. That’s intentional, it applies to crimes besides sexual assault, and it’s a good thing.

Is it a good thing that a rapist will almost always be acquitted if it is down to he said she said?

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

https://lfpress.com/sports/hockey/ju...y-canada-trial

Didn’t one of the texts say something about getting their stories straight?

The judge seems to holding EM to a higher standard than the players.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

This stuff is pretty thin. The first "contradictory" statement is her saying what she said at the time, and on a pretty irrelevant point. The second is denyng what she says he impairment state was based on some video evidence of her not stumbling? I mean, lots of people are drunk without staggering. Back in my youth I once got drunk enough where I couldn't remember big parts of the night yet everyone said I appeared normal all night.

I think the question is more whether she appeared to the players to be in a fit state to provide consent (i.e., they thought she looked cognizant enough to provide consent) rather than whether she was actually intoxicated at the time, as the players could use mistaken belief that she was consenting (and capable of consent) as a possible defense. This would be a much more flimsy defense if she was clearly staggering as if impaired and therefore unable to consent.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Why? He is a reporter. His job is to report.

He is profiting off of this scandal. That's not journalism as far as what I understand the word to mine.

I also note he live tweeted during the trial and hasn't made a peep since the verdict.

[sureLoss]

https://lfpress.com/sports/hockey/ju...y-canada-trial

“I accept . . . the evidence that E.M. was acting in a sexual . . . manner when she was masturbating in this room full of men and asking them to have sex with her,” Carroccia said, addressing directly the sexual assault charge against Hart.

Hart is found not guilty.

“There is no evidence that anyone applied force or threatened to apply force to the complainant . . . to cause her to remain in the room,” Carroccia said just before delivering her verdict relating to Hart. “Other than the sexual touching described by E.M., there was no other physical force applied to her by anyone in the room to cause her to remain there, and certainly no violence.”

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by troutman

Is it a good thing that a rapist will almost always be acquitted if it is down to he said she said?

Good question. What's worse, four suspects being acquitted of sexual assault charges, or one person being mistakenly convicted of those charges? Despite my law and order biases, I'm much more willing to accept mistaken acquittals than I am willing to accept mistaken convictions.

Just to be clear, I still think the players' actions were reckless and misogynistic, but that doesn't mean that they should be found guilty of sexual assault without the Crown proving this beyond a reasonable doubt.

[powderjunkie]

I'll hope that the judge has a a stronger timeline of events, but buying your own drinks and walking fine at one point does not mean you are not plyed with drinks later.

IMO the big takeaway here is that the trial was 6 against 1, just as it was in the room. Of course 6 different defence lawyers are going to be able to expose some cracks in testimony compared to botched investigations 7 years ago.


Did the crown fail to produce experts on memory, sexual assault trauma, etc?

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

He is profiting off of this scandal. That's not journalism as far as what I understand the word to mine.

I also note he live tweeted during the trial and hasn't made a peep since the verdict.

WTF?
Profiting how?
He has been doing excellent reporting throughout the process.

Where has what he has been doing "not journalism"?
Please provide specific examples.

Man there are some f'd up things being said in this thread.

[sureLoss]

https://lfpress.com/sports/hockey/ju...y-canada-trial

"In this case, I find that E.M. was expressing her willingness to engage in sexual activity with Mr. Formenton," Carroccia said.

Formenton is found not guilty.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

WTF?
Profiting how?
He has been doing excellent reporting throughout the process.

Where has what he has been doing "not journalism"?
Please provide specific examples.

Man there are some f'd up things being said in this thread.

He wrote a book. Comes out this November.

[Lewis_D]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Didn’t one of the texts say something about getting their stories straight?

The judge seems to holding EM to a higher standard than the players.

Yeah, the wording on some of the other statements by the judge seem to indicate that.

It does feel like a grey area though & definitely out of my depth, I'm not sure you could call it collusion from a legal standpoint if previous events were shown in court to be considered 'consensual'. So I guess while it can't prove admission of guilt to anything, it certainly proves they had acknowledged they were all aware they had done something socially unacceptable.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Didn’t one of the texts say something about getting their stories straight?

The judge seems to holding EM to a higher standard than the players.

I don't think that is something that only guilty people would do though. I think it's conceivable that even innocent people would want to recap everything for their own peace of mind. There was also a text in there saying that all they had to do was tell the truth.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

He wrote a book. Comes out this November.

Journalists writing, and writing books. How dare they.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by troutman

Is it a good thing that a rapist will almost always be acquitted if it is down to he said she said?

C'mon, you're a lawyer. You must understand why it's a good thing that Canadians cannot be easily convicted on the basis of an allegation alone.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

He wrote a book. Comes out this November.

a book!?!?!
A BOOK!?!?!

Well ####. We can't have that.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

a book!?!?!
A BOOK!?!?!

Well ####. We can't have that.

#daniellesmith

[Geordano]

Originally Posted by StrykerSteve

As a Father, I just had to sign in to say this perspective makes me sad and I hope one day you are capable of understanding why.

At the end of the day, Judge Carroccia is in a much better position to assess credibility than anyone commenting on this thread.

[sureLoss]

https://lfpress.com/sports/hockey/ju...y-canada-trial

The allegation against Dube is that he slapped E.M. on the buttocks without her consent. “While I accept that the slap took place, I do not accept that Mr. Dube was one of several men who took turns slapping her as hard as they could,” Justice Carroccia said.

Dillon Dube is found not guilty.