Mistrial in Canada World Junior case

[ThatGuyPal]

https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/...ury-being-pick

A judge declared a mistrial Friday in the sexual assault case involving five former members of Canada's world junior hockey team.

The ruling from a judge in Ontario means a new trial will be held for Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dube and Callan Foote, who have all pleaded not guilty to sexual assault. Jury selection for the new trial began Friday.


Hart wasn’t doing bad from what I remember don’t follow the others. If they beat this I definitely think some teams will sign some of these guys regardless of optics.

[discostu]

I had high hopes for Formenton's skill set, then this. If the rumors are correct, he seemed to be the most involved.

That said, I don't see any of these guys suiting up in the NHL again...so they'll be in Europe or another career path.

[anusinha]

Welcome to the KHL

[hairysasquatch]

Just an awful episode all around.

[irv]

Which begs the question that was talked about in the other thread a year or so ago, why was it re-opened?

"Jury sees video of woman calling sex 'all consensual"

“It was all consensual. Are you recording me?” she asked in the video, played Wednesday for jurors at the sexual assault trial of McLeod and four teammates from Canada’s 2018 gold-winning world junior hockey team, who were in London for a Hockey Canada gala.

“You are so paranoid,” she said. “I enjoyed it. It was fun. It’s all consensual."
https://torontosun.com/news/local-ne...1-aa4ad77833a8

[Satan]

Originally Posted by irv

Which begs the question that was talked about in the other thread a year or so ago, why was it re-opened?

"Jury sees video of woman calling sex 'all consensual"

“It was all consensual. Are you recording me?” she asked in the video, played Wednesday for jurors at the sexual assault trial of McLeod and four teammates from Canada’s 2018 gold-winning world junior hockey team, who were in London for a Hockey Canada gala.

“You are so paranoid,” she said. “I enjoyed it. It was fun. It’s all consensual."
https://torontosun.com/news/local-ne...1-aa4ad77833a8

food for thought

This trial centres on the issue of consent, as the Crown’s opening statements stressed.

Earlier today, the jury saw a video of the complainant, known as E.M. under a publication ban, asking if she’s “OK with all this stuff,” and her responding, “Yeah, I’m OK.”

In the second video, at 4:26 a.m., E.M., wearing no clothing, is shown holding a towel in front of her chest.

She says, “It was all consensual. Are you recording me? K, good,” E.M. says. “You are so paranoid. Holy. I enjoyed it. It was fine. I’m so sober — that’s why I can’t do this right now.”

I spoke to Kaitlynn Mendes, who’s not involved with this trial, about consent videos. She’s a sociology professor and holds the Canada Research Chair in Inequality and Equity at Western University in London. She’s also an expert in technology-facilitated sexual violence.

Mendes says consent videos aren’t new — they’re meant to pre-empt accusations that a sexual encounter was not consensual.

She says they became a “thing” during the #MeToo movement, which gained international prominence in 2017, focused on addressing sexual harassment and abuse, particularly in the workplace.

Mendes says there’s controversy over consent videos because “consent is something that can only really happen in the moment … consent has to be ongoing. It's something that can be withdrawn at any point.”

So, for example, if someone has consented to having sex with one person and a second person enters the room or they want to change acts, the participants need to get consent, in the moment, for everything happening, adds Mendes.

“That’s really the only case in which these videos I think could really stand up,” she says, acknowledging the act of recording a video in that moment is also complicated.

Mendes hasn’t seen the consent videos in the world junior hockey case, but has some questions about the context in which they were recorded, including: Who was in the room? Was there coercion or threats? Was the complainant sober and able to consent?

“We don't know whether it was like, ‘Hey, you need to record this video before you're allowed to leave.’ Are there other people standing around intimidating you? … Do they feel as though they're being coerced into saying that, yes, this was consensual?”

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/londo...=1746034563715

[irv]

Originally Posted by Satan

food for thought



https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/londo...=1746034563715

That's quite a mouthful for someone who hasn't even seen the vid.

If she's allowed to be any part of this trial/called upon, these kids are doomed.
https://sociology.uwo.ca/people/profiles/Mendes.html

[kellmuff]

my uneducated take here is that unless she takes the stand, that video will be enough to cast reasonable doubt with the jury.

[Satan]

Originally Posted by kellmuff

my uneducated take here is that unless she takes the stand, that video will be enough to cast reasonable doubt with the jury.

EM is testifying today

[kingb22]

So the verdict is still to come on the players, but the Judges comments would seem to indicate that they will be acquitted (US term - not sure if it's different term in Canada).

So .. what now. Is the Flyers goalie situation now solved?

[stoopid]

Originally Posted by kingb22

So the verdict is still to come on the players, but the Judges comments would seem to indicate that they will be acquitted (US term - not sure if it's different term in Canada).

So .. what now. Is the Flyers goalie situation now solved?

The question will be "were they acquitted, and were they innocent?" OJ murdered his wife and was acquitted. Innocence in a court of law is only one measure of guilt. Depending on what case pertinent facts have been or will be released, the court of public opinion will matter the most for their futures as athletes.

[mallowciraptor]

Carter Hart to Oilers when?

[Retired hobbist]

Originally Posted by stoopid

The question will be "were they acquitted, and were they innocent?" OJ murdered his wife and was acquitted. Innocence in a court of law is only one measure of guilt. Depending on what case pertinent facts have been or will be released, the court of public opinion will matter the most for their futures as athletes.

After seeing the Diddy trial and now this one you safely say that crass behavior doesn't mean guilt to a jury or a judge.

After hearing how these players treated the women like a human blow up doll I could safely say I wouldn't want any of these guys "dating" my daughter, niece or grand daughter but that doesn't mean they raped the complainant.

[boxbuster7]

why is this on a card forum?

[stoopid]

Originally Posted by boxbuster7

why is this on a card forum?

They're (former) nhl players with licensed trading cards. Especially with Hart, there was a lot of collector money that was lost when this legal action started.

[stoopid]

Originally Posted by Retired hobbist

After hearing how these players treated the women like a human blow up doll I could safely say I wouldn't want any of these guys "dating" my daughter, niece or grand daughter but that doesn't mean they raped the complainant.

That's the court of public opinion part, which plays a role in whether a person is employed and a company (team) wants to be associated with behaviors, lack of moral fiber, etc.

[boxbuster7]

I thought these were 16 year old kids or something

[glen87]

Originally Posted by boxbuster7

I thought these were 16 year old kids or something

happened 7 years ago

[boxbuster7]

Originally Posted by glen87

happened 7 years ago

that makes a bit more sense

I remember seeing this story - so the trial took 7 years?

[kellmuff]

I followed the trial quite a bit and it really felt like her case was lost when multiple players testified that she said (slightly paraphrasing here) something like "Which one of you P***ies is going to come over and F me"

I mean, that's not the action of a woman being sexually assaulted.

And the screenshots of the group text after with a few of them saying "she was asking us to F her, we are ok" basically corroborated that to a small extent.

[PejaD]

I think the over/under for number of the five to return to play in the NHL in any capacity is 1.5. Precedents such as Voynov/Virtanen in the NHL show that the league would still "blackball" the accused even if found not guilty.

[stoopid]

Originally Posted by PejaD

I think the over/under for number of the five to return to play in the NHL in any capacity is 1.5. Precedents such as Voynov/Virtanen in the NHL show that the league would still "blackball" the accused even if found not guilty.

They were guilty of being slimy humans, IMHO. [Based on their own testimony, accounts, and facts presented during the trial] Being a crappy human isn't always a legal offense. No NHL team will want their brand associated with someone of such high moral fiber. The idea one of these frat minded thick necked jock dudes will get accosted by women or angry dads in the sport for what they indefensibly DID do/engage in/admit to under oath, leaves too much room for bitterness, confrontation, etc. None of them are of the highest skillset demanding their talent be put back on the ice, so there's also that (risk outweighs reward). They showed their true character. Their character is suspect, at best. Again, IMHO.

Fwiw, and not directly applicable to every aspect of this specific case, we live in a world where rape cases often end up being tossed out or the defendants let off. There's still an unhealthy amount of "she wore a short skirt = was asking for it" mentality out there. Elements of dehumanization and casting doubt are how defense teams get their clients verdicts in their favor. There was a lot of evidence just to get this to trial and for the NHL to take the steps it did to suspend these players, it was not a fictional case where an angry ex girlfriend made this up.

[gomiamigo]

Carter Hart is a free agent.

Alcohol and u18 and sex are a bad mix. Given not only her changing stories since the event --as the judge noted-- but the fact that she misidentified at least one of the players afterwards, lied about her weight at the time of the event, lied about her actions in the club as shown on the videotape, totally shot her credibility.

I don't think having sex as a teen with another teen who wants to have sex with you makes you a 'slimy human.' Group sex has been around forever, they weren't breaking new ground here. Group sex is the 2nd most common fantasy reported by women, in fact.

There are no winners here.

[ZappBrannigan]

Matt Walsh summarized this incident well.

[stoopid]

Originally Posted by gomiamigo

I don't think having sex as a teen with another teen who wants to have sex with you makes you a 'slimy human.' Group sex has been around forever, they weren't breaking new ground here. Group sex is the 2nd most common fantasy reported by women, in fact.

There are no winners here.

For most of my life I have concluded that the human race and lizards are not as far apart as we (humans) would like to believe. If true, what you posted certainly tracks and maintains that exceptionalism.

Agree that no one 'wins' in sexual assault/rape cases, which is why it's difficult to get them into the courtroom in the first place.