Jump to content

2021-2022 Around the League thread


MadDog2020
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, SterioDesign said:

Well to be clear, my "position" is based on the basic legal principle that our legal system is based on. and not on my personal opinion. Plus i 100% specified all this and that there's conflicting reports at the moment and that everything is possible

I understand that’s your intent, but the way you worded it is accepting the players’ account without having heard the rest of the evidence. 

I am sure that was not your intention. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mfitz804 said:

I understand that’s your intent, but the way you worded it is accepting the players’ account without having heard the rest of the evidence. 

I am sure that was not your intention. 

Yeah i most likely didn't word things right cause let's be honest i never do. But i'm feeling pretty confident that i made it clear that it's very possible that those guys did something very wrong. We just don't know yet.

Also I'm not sure if i'd say that im accepting the players account rather than just going by what's reported, by her. Fact is, one of them wanted to make sure she was okay with it to the extent that he asked her to take a video of her saying it on camera for proofs. And she called him paranoid in the video. Asserting she was sober and totally fine with it. And then the next day she wasn't okay and said she was hammered. What happened there? Countless reasons why this would happen.

So now, obviously like i already mentioned. We don't know the timeline of these videos, events and if there was any influences behind it. Doesn't mean that she says she's consensual on a video at... 2am... that's she's consensual to anything happening after that. We don't know. That's precisely why there's an investigation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SterioDesign said:

 

I'm choosing to use presumption of innocence as a safe route when things are still under investigations since it's a basic legal principle that every person accused of any crime is considered innocent until proven guilty and at the moment there's conflicting reports at the moment. She's straight up on video claiming she's totally fine with it and that the guys are paranoid. Then she wasn't okay with it the next day or later that night. We don't know the exact timeline. Was that video taken earlier in the evening and the incident happened later that night? We don't fvcking know. There's a reason it's still under investigation.

Plus It doesn't matter what I or you think happened. What's important is what actually happened and hopefully the investigation will shine a light on that and if it was indeed rape i hope those guys all the pay the price for it. Obviously.

So you guys can go around claiming you know what happened and feel good about your "blindly believe all victims" and ignore that false claims also does happen and there's victims of that too. See fvcking Brian Banks, see Patty Kane. Choosing to ignore that as an option is just as dumb and ignorant.

 

 

 

I never said I claimed to know what happened, I pointed out how utterly tone-deaf it is to refer to an alleged gang rape as "a girl getting banged" you fvcking sentient pineccone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MB3 said:

that rationalization is a depressing thing to read.

It is depressing cause it's a rough subject and incredibly tricky to deal with and there's countless victims that will never get justice for what they dealt with, but there's some reasoning based on facts behind everything i said. 

You're the black and white / emotional one claiming "anyone saying something negative about PK Subban has to be racist" and "I blindly have no reason to not believe a woman" dude.

Clearly we all know you're absolutely unable to handle your emotions very well here and this is just another example of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RunninWithTheDevil said:

I never said I claimed to know what happened, I pointed out how utterly tone-deaf it is to refer to an alleged gang rape as "a girl getting banged" you fvcking sentient pineccone

Saying "A girl getting banged" followed right away by the reality that it's really not clear if there was consent or not since there's conflicting reports of thatand we don't know everything is a way more neutral approach than claiming it was "a violent gang-rape" when you have no proofs of that. If you're calling this a rape that's claiming you know what happened.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SterioDesign said:

Saying "A girl getting banged" followed right away by the reality that it's really not clear if there was consent or not since there's conflicting reports of thatand we don't know everything is a way more neutral approach than claiming it was "a violent gang-rape" when you have no proofs of that. If you're calling this a rape that's claiming you know what happened.

 

He can’t say it was a gang rape and you can’t say it wasn’t. Both of you are prejudging the situation without having any evidence before you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In situations like this all I hope for is that claims are taken seriously and handled with sensitivity. Far too often that's not what happens, once the legal system has chewed people up it spits them out to deal with the consequences , especially in trials with public interest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

He can’t say it was a gang rape and you can’t say it wasn’t. Both of you are prejudging the situation without having any evidence before you. 

This is the last time i'll address this. But in the spirit of being willing to understand if i'm actually framing this wrong or not. Cause obviously i don't want to do that.

You feel that if i'm saying that "a sexual act happened between individuals and that we don't know if there was consent or not."

That's be like claiming that it wasn't rape? The way i'm seeing is acknowledging the "action" then stating that the intent or consent is up in the air". Plus i stated many times that it was possible that it was a rape, that she was forced to say or do something later, etc etc Im pretty confident its clear that my stance has never been that we could say it wasn't a rape.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, MB3 said:

Perhaps I’m missing something that you guys have heard/read, but is there any defense yet? This isn’t a situation where a girl says “I was raped” and the other party says “No you weren’t.” So far this is an acquisition — serious enough where charges are being pressed — that a girl was gang-raped. Why am I not allowed to discuss it using those words? 

SD keeps pointing out that there’s a video of consent. But consent to one thing doesn’t mean consent to everything, right? If it was consensual, why is she pressing charges? Maybe instead of leaping to “lol this chick one time tried to claim I raped her haha girls be crazy”, isn’t “I consented to sleeping with player A, but I didn’t consent to him doing X, Y, and Z with Player B, C, D, and E” a perfectly reasonable outcome? Or “I consented to X, but what happened was Y and Z”? It’s also worth repeating twenty times over that consent can be revoked at any time. 

I think bringing up an anecdote about sleeping with someone who cried wolf carries heavy implications. I think referring to a gang-rape charge as “bangin some dudes” is gross. I am not at court and the burden of proof on NJDevs isn’t the same as it will be when this goes to trial, if it gets that far. But I grew up around hockey players, I grew up around jocks. There’s enough circumstantial evidence that this could’ve happened where I find it wildly inappropriate to question whether this woman is just lying. 

There’s a bunch of problems with what you are saying. 

1) It’s an “accusation”, not an “acquisition”, but that’s just me pointing out typos because it’s funny. 

2) You are operating under a presumption that the woman is being truthful and that the accused are “gang rapists” when there has been zero confirmation of that, and people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty; you are applying the opposite standard. This may well have been a gang rape, but you don’t have any idea. 

3) You haven’t seen the video and still have strong opinions concerning what it shows. 

4) You are saying there is no reason not to believe the woman, but conversely there is also no reason to believe her. All of that depends on the evidence and the versions given by either side, and you don’t have either. 

5) Your having grown up around jocks and hockey players is a stupid take. You knew THOSE jocks and hockey players. You can’t determine what action a group of people did or didn’t take based on hockey players you knew. 

6) The way the system works is it has to be questioned whether the woman is lying. She may be or she may not be. 

Don’t get me wrong, I think both you and @SterioDesignare doing the same thing regarding certain aspects of this. Neither one of you has the knowledge or evidence to know what’s true. 

Basing your opinions on media portrayals of an incident rather than any actual evidence is dangerous territory. You’re treating the accused as being guilty before they’ve been proven so. 

And let me add, NJDevs isn’t a court of law and you can have any opinion you want, but to claim that and then to get weird about other people having other opinions is contradictory. 

Edited by mfitz804
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MB3 said:

Perhaps I’m missing something that you guys have heard/read, but is there any defense yet? This isn’t a situation where a girl says “I was raped” and the other party says “No you weren’t.” So far this is an acquisition — serious enough where charges are being pressed — that a girl was gang-raped. Why am I not allowed to discuss it using those words? 

SD keeps pointing out that there’s a video of consent. But consent to one thing doesn’t mean consent to everything, right? If it was consensual, why is she pressing charges? Maybe instead of leaping to “lol this chick one time tried to claim I raped her haha girls be crazy”, isn’t “I consented to sleeping with player A, but I didn’t consent to him doing X, Y, and Z with Player B, C, D, and E” a perfectly reasonable outcome? Or “I consented to X, but what happened was Y and Z”? It’s also worth repeating twenty times over that consent can be revoked at any time. 

I think bringing up an anecdote about sleeping with someone who cried wolf carries heavy implications. I think referring to a gang-rape charge as “bangin some dudes” is gross. I am not at court and the burden of proof on NJDevs isn’t the same as it will be when this goes to trial, if it gets that far. But I grew up around hockey players, I grew up around jocks. There’s enough circumstantial evidence that this could’ve happened where I find it wildly inappropriate to question whether this woman is just lying. 

I 100% acknowledge this and then some. I've been trying to be as transparent and neutral as i could all along.

I posted this article saying it was the article with the most details that i found so far. And that even in that article some stuff was framing in a wrong way and could be misleading. If you didn't read it, well read it. 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-hockey-canada-sexual-assault-lawsuit-police/

Based on this article. 

Here's my personal interpretation of what happened.

A girl went to an hotel room with a hockey player. Sex happened. Then at some point, other players came in and also engaged in sexual act. This portion is kind of blurry and unclear based on the timeline and evidences presented so far. Also the consent through this whole timeline is kind of blury and unclear

At some point a player (we don't know if it's that same player) took a video of her at 3:25am where we hear "You're okay with this?" and she replied "I'm ok with this". Then another video at 4:26am of a woman covering herself with a towel saying "“Are you recording me?” she asks. “Ok, good. It was all consensual. You are so paranoid, holy. I enjoyed it, it was fine. It was all consensual. I am so sober, that’s why I can’t do this right now.”

Then i acknowledged in another post earlier saying that (and like you also brought up), we don't know the timeline of this. We dont know if she gave consent for "something" but then something else happened an hour later or something she didnt agree to happened after that she was not okay with. That's why there's an investigation. 

Only the next day she text a player saying. “I was really drunk, didn’t feel good about it at all after. But I’m not trying to get anyone in trouble," and “I was ok with going home with you, it was everyone else afterwards that I wasn’t expecting. I just felt like I was being made fun of and taken advantage of.” Which goes 100% against what she told the guy on video. (up to 4:26am in the morning at least) Was she really not drunk? Was she forced to say this? Did she lie the next day? i dont fvcking know.

All i know is that a guy made sure she was recorded giving consent. Which is something that i know kids have to do these days. It happened many times that 2 people have sex and that the next day one of them regret and say it was rape. At least that way they have some proofs that were was consent. There's even a cellphone app for this. It's a thing. And all that being said, could she be forced to take that video against her will? its possible too. But what she said and joking that they were paranoid and all that, personally didn't feel like someone being forced to do it". And say for the sake of argument that we accept that she was honest in that video. Imagine taking a video of a girl giving consent, then you have sex with her. And the next day her mom calls the cop saying you raped her. I'd panic too. And even saying this. im still acknowledging that its totally possible she was pressure into doing it. Also its stated in the article that "censent" given in her situation with 6-7 individuals in the room might not be accepted in court cause it could be seen as pressure, etc etc. I'm acknowledging all this.

And we know that she got home and eventually told her mom. And her mom called the cops against her will. She told the player that her mom called, the player panicked and asked her if she could find a way to make that go away. And he said that her mom was misrepresenting what happened. And the girl told him she didnt want to pursue that and that it was a mistake and that hopefully nothing will come out of it.

So all of that is basically what we know, give or take. And depending on the version you imagine in your head... literally everything that's said in there could go either way. And i can 100% make up stories in my head that could go both ways with this. Easy. I can totally see a story where she was forced to do something she didn't want to and intimidated by the player after through text. And i can see this being a case where there was consent and only later she felt remorses and opened up to her mom and her mom took charges.

So that's why i'm no calling this a rape and im also not calling them innocent at the moment cause i just don't know. 

 

 

Edited by SterioDesign
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sad story about Bobby Ryan.

"35-year-old storied NHL Hockey star Bobby Ryan was arrested in Nashville Monday at the Nashville International Airport. An airport store reported that Ryan had taken items and left without paying and alerted Airport Police, who observed him on security cameras. Ryan left the stolen items on a counter along his way and entered Little Harpeth Brewing, where officers found him seated at the bar ordering a drink. Police say he was not compliant with them, was extremely intoxicated, and did not know where he was, the date, or the time, and could not stand on his own. The store declined prosecution on the recovered items, and Ryan was jailed for public intoxication."

https://www.scoopnashville.com/2022/07/professional-hockey-player-bobby-ryan-arrested-at-nashville-airport/

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SterioDesign said:

Well brown won cups as the captain at least

But yeah a statue is a bit much

 

We don’t have a statue of our captain who won three cups, I don’t think I would object if they were putting one up. 

Maybe to Kings fans it does make sense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MB3 said:

To kings fans on reddit it’s baffling, as well. He was their captain for 2 cups, but he’s just a mediocre 3rd line grinder. 60+ points 2 times in his entire career. Our captain is a HHOFer and on a short list of “greatest defensemen of all time”. 

I don’t care one way or another but this has to be the only time a .6PPG third line right winger has ever gotten a statue outside of his team’s NHL arena lol. 

So its more like Brylin if he had happened to be the Captain?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MB3 said:

To kings fans on reddit it’s baffling, as well. He was their captain for 2 cups, but he’s just a mediocre 3rd line grinder. 60+ points 2 times in his entire career. Our captain is a HHOFer and on a short list of “greatest defensemen of all time”. 

I don’t care one way or another but this has to be the only time a .6PPG third line right winger has ever gotten a statue outside of his team’s NHL arena lol. 

Actually 2 of my buddies are LA fans and we have a group chat to chat hockey and i just brought this up and one of them is like "dustin brown is the best" "totally statue worthy" "check his stats in the playoffs during the cup years"

And im like... "i mean around the league you have.. Gretzky... Brodeur... Mario Lemieux.... Phil Esposito.... Maurice Richard, Guy Lafleur...Gordie Howe... Bobby Hull... Bobby Orr................ Dustin Brown lol"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, MB3 said:

To kings fans on reddit it’s baffling, as well. He was their captain for 2 cups, but he’s just a mediocre 3rd line grinder. 60+ points 2 times in his entire career. Our captain is a HHOFer and on a short list of “greatest defensemen of all time”. 

I don’t care one way or another but this has to be the only time a .6PPG third line right winger has ever gotten a statue outside of his team’s NHL arena lol. 

Especially with it being next to Gretzky and Robitaille. Just seems strange 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.