Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
TML fan said:Kane's claim is taken as fact because that's what our system of justice teaches us to do.
CarltonTheBear said:TML fan said:Kane's claim is taken as fact because that's what our system of justice teaches us to do.
The NHL is our system of justice. Innocent until proven guilty isn't anywhere in the CBA.
TML fan said:CarltonTheBear said:TML fan said:Kane's claim is taken as fact because that's what our system of justice teaches us to do.
The NHL is our system of justice. Innocent until proven guilty isn't anywhere in the CBA.
Oh you're talking about the league. I thought you were talking about people in general.
CarltonTheBear said:TML fan said:CarltonTheBear said:TML fan said:Kane's claim is taken as fact because that's what our system of justice teaches us to do.
The NHL is our system of justice. Innocent until proven guilty isn't anywhere in the CBA.
Oh you're talking about the league. I thought you were talking about people in general.
Well in this case yeah, I'm specifically talking about how the league should absolutely be taking action against Kane right now. There's even language in the CBA that gives them the right to suspend a player under criminal investigation when it could be damaging to the league:
With that said I do think that public opinion shouldn't blindly follow a very flawed and faulty system of justice, but I've been through all that before here.
CarltonTheBear said:I expanded on my post a tad after posting if you wanted to check that out.
But I mean, yeah that is basically the entire premise of his article. Kane says that he's innocent so there's absolutely no reason for the Blackhawks or the NHL to act like it isn't just status quo here.
CarltonTheBear said:I know I'm going in circles here from before, but I don't care. Why is the woman's claim of rape "speculation" and Kane's claim of "innocence" taken as fact? We're so far past the point of just an accusation here anyway. There's evidence being prepared in this case. There's been an active investigation on it for 6 weeks. There's a grand jury about to decide whether or not charges are to be laid. And Kane's in the middle of all of this. The NHL has every right to suspend Kane with pay while this plays out. He shouldn't be anywhere near his team or the league at this point. Any business out there would so the same.
Somebody brought this point up on twitter. Let's say that instead of Kane this was all happening to HNIC broadcaster John Doe. Would Rogers take that person off air while the investigation was going on? Absolutely they would.
TML fan said:Because public opinion is much less flawed and faulty...
CarltonTheBear said:TML fan said:Because public opinion is much less flawed and faulty...
Again, I've been through all this before. If you want to take the word of an accused rapist over the word of an accused rape victim just because a system that is more beneficial towards accused rapists says so, know yourself out.
bustaheims said:Well, that there is an accusation is fact, and that there is a claim of innocence is fact. Which of these is truthful is what the whole potential trial is about. What actually happened is, to those of us who weren't involved, speculation right now.
bustaheims said:As for the grand jury, did they reconvene? As of last week, their investigation had been cancelled, and I haven't seen anything about it since.
TML fan said:CarltonTheBear said:TML fan said:Because public opinion is much less flawed and faulty...
Again, I've been through all this before. If you want to take the word of an accused rapist over the word of an accused rape victim just because a system that is more beneficial towards accused rapists says so, know yourself out.
I'm not taking anyone's word. I'm admitting that I don't know, which is something the court of public opinion never does.
Also, I just told everyone you raped me, you rapist. You're a rapist. See my point, rapist?
Bullfrog said:Anyone with a right mind would suggest that we err on the side of caution and give the accuser the benefit of the doubt, especially in sexual assault cases.
CarltonTheBear said:Bullfrog said:Anyone with a right mind would suggest that we err on the side of caution and give the accuser the benefit of the doubt, especially in sexual assault cases.
I completely disagree. I think that anybody with knowledge about how rape accusations usually play out would be giving the victim the benefit of the doubt.
Bullfrog said:CarltonTheBear said:Bullfrog said:Anyone with a right mind would suggest that we err on the side of caution and give the accuser the benefit of the doubt, especially in sexual assault cases.
I completely disagree. I think that anybody with knowledge about how rape accusations usually play out would be giving the victim the benefit of the doubt.
I think you misread. I stated we should give the accuser (aka the victim) the benefit of the doubt.
CarltonTheBear said:Bullfrog said:Anyone with a right mind would suggest that we err on the side of caution and give the accuser the benefit of the doubt, especially in sexual assault cases.
I completely disagree. I think that anybody with knowledge about how rape accusations usually play out would be giving the victim the benefit of the doubt.
CarltonTheBear said:I'm sorry, yes, of course I did.
But you don't think in the world of public opinion the vast majority of people are giving Kane the benefit of the doubt as opposed to the victim?
Bullfrog said:I really don't know. I honestly haven't been reading anything about this case other than what's in this thread. If the majority of people are giving Kane the benefit of the doubt, I suspect it's because as he's a major star people are mostly hoping that it's not true. I'm with tmlfan on this one; I just really have no way of making any judgement. Due to the nature of the accusations, the alleged victim needs the benefit. At the same time, I'm leery of passing judgement without any real knowledge of the situation.
Bullfrog said:I've seen first-hand a situation where someone has pretended to be a victim solely out of vindictive reasons (full disclosure: the event was a faked pregnancy and not an assault). This doesn't cloud my understanding that most sexual assault victims are denied justice, but it does remind me that not all accusations have merit.
louisstamos said:Uhhh...did Damien Cox just infer that the definition of consent doesn't matter?