18-A.2 Commissioner Authority to Impose Discipline for Off-Ice Conduct. Whenever the Commissioner determines that a Player has violated a League Rule applicable to Players (other than Playing Rules subjecting the Player to potential Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice Conduct), or has been or is guilty of conduct (whether during or outside the playing season) that is detrimental to or against the welfare of the League or the game of hockey, he may discipline
such Player in any or all of the following respects:
(a) by expelling or suspending such Player for a definite or indefinite period;
(b) by cancelling any SPC that such Player has with any Member Club; or
(c) by imposing a fine on the Player not exceeding the maximum permissible fine under Section 18.7(b).
You would think the NHL & NHLPA have already had discussions around the way forward depending on possible outcomes, even if they're off the record.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to UKflames For This Useful Post:
18-A.2 Commissioner Authority to Impose Discipline for Off-Ice Conduct. Whenever the Commissioner determines that a Player has violated a League Rule applicable to Players (other than Playing Rules subjecting the Player to potential Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice Conduct), or has been or is guilty of conduct (whether during or outside the playing season) that is detrimental to or against the welfare of the League or the game of hockey, he may discipline
such Player in any or all of the following respects:
(a) by expelling or suspending such Player for a definite or indefinite period;
(b) by cancelling any SPC that such Player has with any Member Club; or
(c) by imposing a fine on the Player not exceeding the maximum permissible fine under Section 18.7(b).
Again, easy to file a grievance if a judge finds them not guilty.
After giving an introduction to the case, Carroccia says she did “not find the evidence of E.M. to be credible or reliable” and so does not conclude the Crown met its burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
There was an audible sigh of relief when Carroccia said she didn’t find E.M. “credible or reliable,” and that the Crown did not prove its case.
McLeod’s mom and dad, who have sat through the entire trial, are both crying, as is one of his brothers.
Hart’s mom is also crying.
When the judge read her words, some of the men turned around to look at their family members — what I would call looks of relief on their faces.
__________________ "I think the eye test is still good, but analytics can sure give you confirmation: what you see...is that what you really believe?" Scotty Bowman, 0 NHL games played
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to united For This Useful Post:
In reading her decision, Justice Maria Carroccia said, "having found that I cannot rely upon the evidence of E.M. and then considering the evidence in this trial as a whole, I conclude that the Crown cannot meet its onus on any of the counts before me."
She is now going over all the evidence of the case and has not made an official verdict at this time.
__________________ "I think the eye test is still good, but analytics can sure give you confirmation: what you see...is that what you really believe?" Scotty Bowman, 0 NHL games played
As part of her reasons — that are still being read in the courtroom at this time— Carroccia said, "in this case, I have found actual consent not vitiated by fear."
__________________ "I think the eye test is still good, but analytics can sure give you confirmation: what you see...is that what you really believe?" Scotty Bowman, 0 NHL games played
