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

[Flamette]

Originally Posted by Philly06Cup

Some tidbits:

Carter Hart's lawyer statement expressly says the allegations are false. That is stronger than the other four statements, which say they will defende their innocence. --> Could be his lawyer is more bold than others, or maybe something something pizza.

There is a ton of speculation out there but the consensus seems to be the pizza guy is Drake Batherson. Makes much more sense the pizza guy is not one of the five charged.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Sure, but good media can also lead to strong insights and important discussions. I have a problem blanketing all of this kind of disappointment as faux outrage.

Two of the four you listed are known to click bait.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by MBates

There may be some differences in standard practices in Ontario versus Alberta, but that said there should be no reason any of these individuals would have any travel restrictions imposed on them as a condition of release, nor would they be expected to be on any form of house arrest.

They have all voluntarily attended without incident to subject themselves to the jurisdiction of the court. One even flew from overseas to do so.

I would expect conditions would be minimal such as having no contact with the complainant and not going to her home / work / school.

So...stupid question. Who is bringing the charges? Is it the girl or is it the Crown?

Originally Posted by Flamette

There is a ton of speculation out there but the consensus seems to be the pizza guy is Drake Batherson. Makes much more sense the pizza guy is not one of the five charged.

He's suffered enough. He lives in Ottawa...he never got Pizza...

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Locke

So...stupid question. Who is bringing the charges? Is it the girl or is it the Crown?



He's suffered enough. He lives in Ottawa...he never got Pizza...

The Crown. People don't bring charges in Canada, outside the very rare private prosection (which is always taken over by the Crown if it progresses at all).

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The best journalists talk about what the feel. How others feel. I can't imagine wanting journalists just to report facts without any commentary.

If you're good at the job, you can report the story in a way that communicates what you feel without ever directly saying it.

If you're bad at the job, you talk about your feelings directly while reporting the facts, because you don't have the skills to create an emotional response in the audience.

If you're really bad at the job, you just report what you feel and never even mention the facts. This is what people usually do on Twitter. Every one of the tweets linked in the post I was responding to was a personal statement of opinion in emotionally charged language. That isn't journalism.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Locke

So...stupid question. Who is bringing the charges? Is it the girl or is it the Crown?

The Crown.
There can be privately laid charges, but they are rare. This is not one of them.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

If you're good at the job, you can report the story in a way that communicates what you feel without ever directly saying it.

If you're really bad at the job, you just report what you feel and never even mention the facts. This is what people usually do on Twitter. Every one of the tweets linked in the post I was responding to was a personal statement of opinion in emotionally charged language. That isn't journalism.

I think we're getting into semantics here, but my initial response wasn't that these tweets are journalism - just that they are all known/respected journalists/writers in their field and that they took issue. While I certainly agree twitter isn't the best gauge of public opinion, I just wanted to point out to EE that it's not just sheep screaming into the void.

[dino7c]

Flames are the worst thing on earth

meanwhile a guy found guilty of sexual assault with 90 some pending charges is neck and neck to be the leader of the free world for life. Twitter warriors unite and take down the Calgary Flames

[Locke]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

The Crown.
There can be privately laid charges, but they are rare. This is not one of them.

Right. Okay. Just because...my understanding is the girl took the money and signed the deal and appears to have abided by it, but the Government can still bring charges?

[CF84]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The best journalists talk about what the feel. How others feel. I can't imagine wanting journalists just to report facts without any commentary.

I don't think that's true. Rick Westhead is one of the best and only journalists to dig deep and cover all of this and he seems to be patiently waiting without throwing too much judgement Calgary's way. Bad journalists don't do the digging and make outrage statements to garner clicks. People don't actually know the details. "The best" journalists don't know any of the inside details regarding Calgary's statement. The Flames post doesn't look great from the outside, but Dube was the first to take leave and likely said it was for his mental health. He probably knew he was being charged, but it's just as likely that he didn't disclose that information to the Flames. The Flames would have had an inkling that this was related to the charges, but if it wasn't charge related and they denied the same treatment that Kylington had received, it would be a terrible look for the organization. It's also possible that legal action could have then been taken against the Flames. I'm not positive, but I think Dube is the one who put the Flames in this tough position and they then chose the route that made the most sense legally.

I can think of scenarios where the Flames statement would make sense. If Dube had a nervous breakdown at a practice and the team didn't know that he had just received word that he was charged, the right thing to do would be to get him in touch with specialists while granting him a mental health leave. If he made a suicidal threat in the vicinity of the team because his world felt like it was crashing down, the best course of action would be to get him in touch with health professionals while making a statement about his mental health. It could also have been Dube's lawyers telling him that a statement like that could help him in court. Who knows? I don't. I think the flames probably felt trapped by Dube's request. If they knew he would eventually be charged, only a stupid person could truly think that the Flames organization believed they would gain reputation from the statement they made. For what? A few days? It just doesn't make any sense to waste anger on something we don't yet know much about. I'm not even sure the Flames will ever be legally able to disclose the information many people want.

The saddest thing about the outrage against the Flames is that within the context of the internet it doesn't look much different than the outrage against the 5 who are accused.

[Titan2]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

But Dube said essentially the same thing through his lawyer. Maintaining your innocence = the allegation is false.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1752458680014934289

An american style press release would have been all over the "spurious, false, malicious, mean-spirited allegations from a clearly, crazy person."

Formenton's team tip-toed into that with the 'false' allegation.

Dube maintains his innocence and says he will fight the allegation but does not cast any aspersions on the allegations. Maintaining innocence can also mean the charged person does not think the allegations can be proven in court. That does not equal false.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Torture

Nobody is saying you deny the leave or ask more about the circumstances. But you don't have to communicate the reason for his leave, just like they didn't with Kylington.

You simply say, "Dube is on a leave of absence. No further comments. Period. End of sentence."

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Okay, sure.

But why the outrage? Why is this a discussion point for anyone? What does it affect?

Unless you believe that the Flames' motives were nefarious, in that they were consciously covering up for Dube in some way (a very difficult position to take), what does it matter?

I don't see outrage in what Torture posted.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I don't see outrage in what Torture posted.

If that was the only thing Torture had to say in this thread, sure. It wasn't.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Locke

Right. Okay. Just because...my understanding is the girl took the money and signed the deal and appears to have abided by it, but the Government can still bring charges?

Yes. Generally only the Crown brings charges.

[FlamesAddiction]

I don't see the shade being put on the Flames as "outrage". There is a lot of real estate between frowning on something and being outraged. You can be critical of the statement without being outraged by it, is where I think most of the negative comments land.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Titan2

An american style press release would have been all over the "spurious, false, malicious, mean-spirited allegations from a clearly, crazy person."

Formenton's team tip-toed into that with the 'false' allegation.

Dube maintains his innocence and says he will fight the allegation but does not cast any aspersions on the allegations. Maintaining innocence can also mean the charged person does not think the allegations can be proven in court. That does not equal false.

Nope. As a lawyer I would never say my client "maintains innocence" unless he tells me he didn't do the crime. A plea of "not guilty" and saying "I'm innocent" are two different things.

Saying you are innocent is 100% casting aspersions on the allegations. Or at least a major component of them (I think almost all of the important facts except one will be uncontested).

[Locke]

Frankly...with all of the shady BS and obscuring and moving pieces in this case, I'm leaving the Flames out of this entirely.

This is about a group of morally bankrupt young men who did something criminal and the ownership of that activity needs to rest on and with them and the people who paid to cover it up.

[devo22]

Originally Posted by Locke

Frankly...with all of the shady BS and obscuring and moving pieces in this case, I'm leaving the Flames out of this entirely.

This is about a group of morally bankrupt young men who did something criminal and the ownership of that activity needs to rest on and with them and the people who paid to cover it up.

how dare you focus on the important parts of this story?! Bashing the Flames is so much more fun.

[FlamesAddiction]

Maybe it's all semantics, but I also see declaring innocence different than calling the allegations completely false in the sense that saying the allegations are false basically accuses the person of lying. Saying you are innocent can be massaged in way that is softer and puts less shade on the alleged victim.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The best journalists talk about what the feel. How others feel. I can't imagine wanting journalists just to report facts without any commentary.

It is really important that it's clear when a piece is reporting and when a piece is an opinion column. In traditional media, this was always very important and something that was upheld.
But in the world of social media and the decline in actual journalism, it's become very blurry, to everyone's decrement.