[News] The Evander Kane saga: suspended 21 games for violating COVID protocols

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Philly06Cup

When it comes to sexual assault, you should believe women.

No, you should believe where the evidence is. For example...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...nchor-n1280004

This woman comes out and accuses Chris Cuomo of sexual harassment, while she was his boss, then proceeds to built up a narrative that he's a serial sexual predator. This whole thing is bull#### and nothing more than an attempt to smear Cuomo. How do we know this is the case? Because in the immortal words of Catherine Alvarez in Disclosure, sexual harassment is not about sex, it is about power. When did Chris Cuomo have the power in this allegation? He didn't. She was his boss. She had the power. Her claims are bull#### just based on the definition of sexual harassment. This is a hit job and nothing but a blatant smear campaign.

I'm all for giving women a voice and allowing them to bring matters forward, but the pendulum has swung way too far and we are now allowing women to make allegations in the public rather than through proper channels and all it does is taint or destroy other people's (mostly men's) lives. Even after the allegations are proven false. I feel for women who have suffered through harassment, just like I feel for the men who have been unjustly accused of something they did not do. Rose McGowan was a hero for exposing Harvey Weinstein and did great things for the abuse women take. But then you have women like Leeann Tweeden who crossed the line the other way, ruining Al Franken over a joke while the guy was a comedian. Unfortunately, these allegations must be vetted as they are made and you just can't believe something because it comes from a woman.

[Kipper_3434]

As someone who knows firsthand that most women are assault survivors "believe women" is the most generalized, useless and divisive statement to come from a bunch of virtue signaling simps. Women lie as much as other humans, Cali got it right.

[mrdonkey]

Originally Posted by Itse

Polygraphs are not reliable should not be used in court cases.

Thankfully polygraphs are generally not considered admissible forms of evidence in court, and are basically only used for screening in law enforcement.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

No, you should believe where the evidence is. For example...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...nchor-n1280004

This woman comes out and accuses Chris Cuomo of sexual harassment, while she was his boss, then proceeds to built up a narrative that he's a serial sexual predator. This whole thing is bull#### and nothing more than an attempt to smear Cuomo. How do we know this is the case? Because in the immortal words of Catherine Alvarez in Disclosure, sexual harassment is not about sex, it is about power. When did Chris Cuomo have the power in this allegation? He didn't. She was his boss. She had the power. Her claims are bull#### just based on the definition of sexual harassment. This is a hit job and nothing but a blatant smear campaign.

I'm all for giving women a voice and allowing them to bring matters forward, but the pendulum has swung way too far and we are now allowing women to make allegations in the public rather than through proper channels and all it does is taint or destroy other people's (mostly men's) lives. Even after the allegations are proven false. I feel for women who have suffered through harassment, just like I feel for the men who have been unjustly accused of something they did not do. Rose McGowan was a hero for exposing Harvey Weinstein and did great things for the abuse women take. But then you have women like Leeann Tweeden who crossed the line the other way, ruining Al Franken over a joke while the guy was a comedian. Unfortunately, these allegations must be vetted as they are made and you just can't believe something because it comes from a woman.

Yikes.

Cuomo is a creep and his sexual harassment of his boss was all about power. He wanted to prove she had no power because she’s a woman despite being his (former) boss.

"When Mr. Cuomo entered the Upper West Side bar, he walked toward me and greeted me with a strong bear hug while lowering one hand to firmly grab and squeeze the cheek of my buttock," she wrote. "'I can do this now that you’re no longer my boss,' he said to me with a kind of cocky arrogance."

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by 868904

I know there's a lot of anger there but the ex-wife needs to be careful, she's killing a cash cow.

Just take your half and run. Spill all the beans when his career is over.

Half of nothing is nothing.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Knightslayer]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Half of nothing is nothing.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think she'd be lucky if it was nothing. She will be on the hook for his debt as well if I'm not mistaken.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Itse

Polygraphs are not reliable should not be used in court cases.

Really? I had no idea. Where did you hear that?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Knightslayer

I think she'd be lucky if it was nothing. She will be on the hook for his debt as well if I'm not mistaken.

I think you might be mistaken on that one, granted I'm not entirely sure either. I'm not one of the myriad of lawyers around here, but I'd bet that part of their Divorce is that she is likely to walk away with nothing but dubiously enforceable Child Support and no liability for his debt and thats about it.

Unfortunately for her, there are creditors ahead of her in line. And that is exclusively Evander's fault.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Kipper_3434

As someone who knows firsthand that most women are assault survivors "believe women" is the most generalized, useless and divisive statement to come from a bunch of virtue signaling simps. Women lie as much as other humans, Cali got it right.

Not typically about this topic. Accusers are almost always truthful, despite barriers and disincentives to coming forward. Liars are pretty rare.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Not typically about this topic. Accusers are almost always truthful, despite barriers and disincentives to coming forward. Liars are pretty rare.

Correct. There have traditionally been incidents of major social scrutiny and black-listing for women who have come forward, which made it so that only the most egregious cases ever heard the light of day, and many women were reluctant to say anything. That seems to be less and less the case these days, which is a good thing.

But even though it's rare, there are women who are either liars or are prone to mischaracterization or exaggeration of events, which is why due process must be done to ensure people aren't punished without merit.

Which is why I say again, take the accusation very seriously and investigate, but don't assume that the woman's account is always the fully correct one. If the evidence generally supports her account, but a few pieces are missing from the equation, it's fair to err on the side of the accuser because people rarely accuse another without reason.

There is room for nuance in discussing this topic. Blanket statements are the opposite of that.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Correct. There have traditionally been incidents of major social scrutiny and black-listing for women who have come forward, which made it so that only the most egregious cases ever heard the light of day, and many women were reluctant to say anything. That seems to be less and less the case these days, which is a good thing.

But even though it's rare, there are women who are either liars or are prone to mischaracterization or exaggeration of events, which is why due process must be done to ensure people aren't punished without merit.

Which is why I say again, take the accusation very seriously and investigate, but don't assume that the woman's account is always the fully correct one. If the evidence generally supports her account, but a few pieces are missing from the equation, it's fair to err on the side of the accuser because people rarely accuse another without reason.

There is room for nuance in discussing this topic. Blanket statements are the opposite of that.

Slogans are generally that way. I tend to dislike them.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Correct. There have traditionally been incidents of major social scrutiny and black-listing for women who have come forward, which made it so that only the most egregious cases ever heard the light of day, and many women were reluctant to say anything. That seems to be less and less the case these days, which is a good thing.

But even though it's rare, there are women who are either liars or are prone to mischaracterization or exaggeration of events, which is why due process must be done to ensure people aren't punished without merit.

Which is why I say again, take the accusation very seriously and investigate, but don't assume that the woman's account is always the fully correct one. If the evidence generally supports her account, but a few pieces are missing from the equation, it's fair to err on the side of the accuser because people rarely accuse another without reason.

There is room for nuance in discussing this topic. Blanket statements are the opposite of that.

Nothing against women, I'm always reminded that, unfortunately, victims dont always remember things clearly.

Violence and reflection change people's perceptions and recollections. It sucks, but trauma is real.

The most important element is a cool-headed third party to investigate impartially.

Look at this circumstance involving the Kanes. Is Evander Kane a monster? Does his soon-to-be Ex-Wife have an Axe to grind? The truth is most likely somewhere in the middle.

The issue now is that they're fighting each other in Public, and what they scream out in Public is probably not the truth. Each side wants Public opinion on their side.

Its ugly, but hopefully due process and cool heads prevail.

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Really? I had no idea. Where did you hear that?

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled on it several times, generally coming to the conclusion that polygraph tests are not reliable. IIRC, the first time it came up was R vs Béland.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Yikes.

Cuomo is a creep and his sexual harassment of his boss was all about power. He wanted to prove she had no power because she’s a woman despite being his (former) boss.

That's her account anyways. The facts are that she was in the position of authority and held all the power. Interesting that she waited all of this time to bring this forward when she could have made his life difficult at the time, seeing as she would have been an important reference for him. Again, she was his superior and would have been able to provide a bad reference. I wouldn't take any of this a truthful without a serious investigation. That's the point here. Investigate and determine the truth before allowing someone to damage another's reputation.

[Knightslayer]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Really? I had no idea. Where did you hear that?

Dateline NBC.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

That's her account anyways. The facts are that she was in the position of authority and held all the power. Interesting that she waited all of this time to bring this forward when she could have made his life difficult at the time, seeing as she would have been an important reference for him. Again, she was his superior and would have been able to provide a bad reference. I wouldn't take any of this a truthful without a serious investigation. That's the point here. Investigate and determine the truth before allowing someone to damage another's reputation.

Exactly, I once had a ex-girlfriend spreading rumors that I was stalking her when in fact it was the exact opposite, it stopped when my current girl caught her in my back yard and she phoned the cops.

It could be just as truthful that Cuomo turned down her advances and she felt rejected and now has it out for him.

What a world we live in where some careers are ruined from a fun tap on the arse or a hand not even touching a breast in a joke but people like Trump get away with dozens of sexual misconducts and even pure rape.

[Philly06Cup]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Correct. There have traditionally been incidents of major social scrutiny and black-listing for women who have come forward, which made it so that only the most egregious cases ever heard the light of day, and many women were reluctant to say anything. That seems to be less and less the case these days, which is a good thing.

But even though it's rare, there are women who are either liars or are prone to mischaracterization or exaggeration of events, which is why due process must be done to ensure people aren't punished without merit.

Which is why I say again, take the accusation very seriously and investigate, but don't assume that the woman's account is always the fully correct one. If the evidence generally supports her account, but a few pieces are missing from the equation, it's fair to err on the side of the accuser because people rarely accuse another without reason.

There is room for nuance in discussing this topic. Blanket statements are the opposite of that.

Sounds like we're mostly saying the same thing. Nuance is great. Blacklisting of women and victim shaming is a real tragedy indeed.


Some stats from the Department of Justice Canada:

-88% of sexual assault survivors are women.
-Only 5% of sexual assaults are reported.
-One of the most commonly stated reasons: they didn't think they would be believed
-Two thirds of survivors in the study said they were not confident in the police/court/justice system.
-Of the cases that do go to trial, only 42% result in a finding of guilt.

-It is a gendered issue. It is absolutely fair to focus on women victims.
-We should empower women to speak up. We should support them, hear them, and you know, believe them. Is it that crazy to ask? When Anna Kane speaks up about being sexually abused in gory detail, at the very least, show some sympathy. It boggles my mind that many people's first instinct is to post reasons why they don't believe her, or why she is a flawed person. It's no wonder more victims don't speak out. I don't think those people are uncapable of sympathy, but I think it is a reflection of toxic misogyny in our society. We can do better.

-There needs to be serious justice reform. When women are brave enough to speak up and actually face their abuser in court, do you really believe that 58% of women are "lying"? Our justice system is failing sexual assault survivors. It is protecting sexual predators. "Taking claims seriously and investigating" isn't cutting it right now. Something needs to change.

-Again, a good first step is to believe women when they speak up about sexual abuse. That applies to friends, colleagues, police officers, and possibly even the courts. If our collective society put more emphasis on supporting victims and believing women, a lot of positive change would arise.

[Knightslayer]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Exactly, I once had a ex-girlfriend spreading rumors that I was stalking her when in fact it was the exact opposite, it stopped when my current girl caught her in my back yard and she phoned the cops.

It could be just as truthful that Cuomo turned down her advances and she felt rejected and now has it out for him.

What a world we live in where some careers are ruined from a fun tap on the arse or a hand not even touching a breast in a joke but people like Trump get away with dozens of sexual misconducts and even pure rape.

You call it a fun tap on the ass, I call it sexual assault.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Philly06Cup

Sounds like we're mostly saying the same thing. Nuance is great. Blacklisting of women and victim shaming is a real tragedy indeed.


Some stats from the Department of Justice Canada:

-88% of sexual assault survivors are women.
-Only 5% of sexual assaults are reported.
-One of the most commonly stated reasons: they didn't think they would be believed
-Two thirds of survivors in the study said they were not confident in the police/court/justice system.
-Of the cases that do go to trial, only 42% result in a finding of guilt.

-It is a gendered issue. It is absolutely fair to focus on women victims.
-We should empower women to speak up. We should support them, hear them, and you know, believe them. Is it that crazy to ask? When Anna Kane speaks up about being sexually abused in gory detail, at the very least, show some sympathy. It boggles my mind that many people's first instinct is to post reasons why they don't believe her, or why she is a flawed person. It's no wonder more victims don't speak out. I don't think those people are uncapable of sympathy, but I think it is a reflection of toxic misogyny in our society. We can do better.

-There needs to be serious justice reform. When women are brave enough to speak up and actually face their abuser in court, do you really believe that 58% of women are "lying"? Our justice system is failing sexual assault survivors. It is protecting sexual predators. "Taking claims seriously and investigating" isn't cutting it right now. Something needs to change.

-Again, a good first step is to believe women when they speak up about sexual abuse. That applies to friends, colleagues, police officers, and possibly even the courts. If our collective society put more emphasis on supporting victims and believing women, a lot of positive change would arise.

See this is a good point. gives room for debate, discussion and understanding.

much better than just telling us "There's a simple rule here to follow. That rule is: Believe women."

but to the bold part, I don't know if I agree that a good step is to have the courts believing women. shouldn't some part of the justice system remain impartial?
I would agree judges, need better education around the subject. (especially on how a victim is "supposed" to act) but I don't want a court of law just blindly believing one side over another.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by Knightslayer

You call it a fun tap on the ass, I call it sexual assault.

I'm glad the law doesn't agree with you