snowman955 Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 According to W5, 15 different reported assaults occurred since 1989. Millions have been paid out (hush money). 3.5 million to the 2018 victim. CHL has really made a name for themselves. Parents of players are livid about fees continuing to rise. Corrupt accounting at it's best. Imagine , if you could, how many were not reported? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 21 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said: At the end of the day most of the Crown Counsel out there usually get their asses handed to them from high powered defence lawyers. That's the biggest problem IMO. I used to know a person who went to UBC and became a lawyer. She then went and got a job with the government and became Crown Counsel. She was doing murder and rape trials here in Vancouver. She eventually switched to a private law firm. She told me the pay was shit as a Crown Counsel and the hours were terrible. She has tripled her income since going into private law. The government really needs to increase wages and benefits for these lawyers. Did jobs for both. One was building a 10 million dollar mansion (today at least double that) on the water, high profile defense lawyer, 2 private well groomed acres , other was in a new home in an upper middle class neighborhood. Same age (late 40's). . All their money, from legal fees. Which path indeed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted February 3 Author Share Posted February 3 5 hours ago, DrJockitch said: I think you are underestimating the self serving pressure teams are under. Jake’s own issues were going to push him out of the league soon anyway. Dube and Hart are high end players. Some self serving GM would absolutely bring one of them in if they thought it would help the, win/save job. Biggest problem for them coming back in the situation that they were found not guilty may just be time. They will probably have missed the rest of this season, all of next season and a chunk of the following. If the victim in this case wanted to really drag it out in a sense of justified vindication, a good lawyer could probably keep this spinning for a very long time. According to Canadian law, a trial by judge must commence no later than 18 months after charges are laid. With a trial by jury it is 30 months. If the time elapses on either one then the defence lawyers can ask for a withdrawal of charges due to a violation of the accused’s charter of rights for a timely trial. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrJockitch Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said: According to Canadian law, a trial by judge must commence no later than 18 months after charges are laid. With a trial by jury it is 30 months. If the time elapses on either one then the defence lawyers can ask for a withdrawal of charges due to a violation of the accused’s charter of rights for a timely trial. So the rest of this season all of next season and possibly into the next exactly the time line I described 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted February 3 Author Share Posted February 3 (edited) So I did some research and I remembered about Kobe Bryant. He was charged with sexual assault in the summer of 2003. He still played basketball for the Lakers in 2003-2004. His contract was not terminated and he was not put on a leave of absence. The sexual assault charges were eventually dropped in 2004 when the accuser refused to testify. So not sure that the NHL can ban these players from playing in the NHL prior to the trial. Of course teams can simply not sign them. Which again will be problematic for the league if they are acquitted of the charges. That’s where the lawsuits would come in. This is going to be fascinating to watch. Edited February 3 by Elias Pettersson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrJockitch Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 29 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: So I did some research and I remembered about Kobe Bryant. He was charged with sexual assault in the summer of 2003. He still played basketball for the Lakers in 2003-2004. His contract was not terminated and he was not put on a leave of absence. The sexual assault charges were eventually dropped in 2004 when the accuser refused to testify. So not sure that the NHL can ban these players from playing in the NHL prior to the trial. Of course teams can simply not sign them. Which again will be problematic for the league if they are acquitted of the charges. That’s where the lawsuits would come in. This is going to be fascinating to watch. I think only of the NHL said they couldn’t be signed and there wasn’t a clause in CBA saying otherwise. I believe the commissioner’s office has fairly broad latitude here in the CBA. ‘The owners can all make the choice not to sign any of them individually and not have to explain themselves. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPA Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 34 minutes ago, DrJockitch said: I think only of the NHL said they couldn’t be signed and there wasn’t a clause in CBA saying otherwise. I believe the commissioner’s office has fairly broad latitude here in the CBA. ‘The owners can all make the choice not to sign any of them individually and not have to explain themselves. Kinda like the NFL teams didn’t sign that controversial quarterback Colin Kaepernick. And the lawsuit CK made went nowhere. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrJockitch Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 (edited) 2 hours ago, BPA said: Kinda like the NFL teams didn’t sign that controversial quarterback Colin Kaepernick. And the lawsuit CK made went nowhere. Funny the different standards. Kobe was one of the biggest stars in the world when that happened. $4M ring for wife and it is like it never happened. CK made a reasonable political statement, it was the press and the politicians that made that loud. Gone for good. Edited February 4 by DrJockitch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoosh Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 My guess is all four NHL players will be out for the season, still paid but not playing. Then none will be qualified and that’s it. Guilty or not, no club will take chance on these guys on good faith that it will work out. The aftermath and negative publicity will be too much of a risk. What if a court date will be set and players are free to return to work? For example Carter Hart coming back to play in Philly. How would that work in the room, on the ice, fanbase? Briere and the whole team would be recented and hated for a good 10-15 years at least. Regardless of the outcome of that trial. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumb Nuck Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 15 hours ago, snowman955 said: According to W5, 15 different reported assaults occurred since 1989. Millions have been paid out (hush money). 3.5 million to the 2018 victim. CHL has really made a name for themselves. Parents of players are livid about fees continuing to rise. Corrupt accounting at it's best. Imagine , if you could, how many were not reported? If hush money is good enough for the leader of the country…… 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KZA Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 Not sure if posted yet but McLeod is facing a 2nd charge for being party to the offence, IE he was the one that invited his friends. And he's the guy who openly told police he was worried about an investigation and messaged her the day after to try and pressure her in to dropping the complaint. This guy should absolutely never play in the NHL again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bh90 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 (edited) On 2/3/2024 at 1:16 PM, Elias Pettersson said: So I did some research and I remembered about Kobe Bryant. He was charged with sexual assault in the summer of 2003. He still played basketball for the Lakers in 2003-2004. His contract was not terminated and he was not put on a leave of absence. The sexual assault charges were eventually dropped in 2004 when the accuser refused to testify. So not sure that the NHL can ban these players from playing in the NHL prior to the trial. Of course teams can simply not sign them. Which again will be problematic for the league if they are acquitted of the charges. That’s where the lawsuits would come in. This is going to be fascinating to watch. Key difference though that was 2004 vs 2023 and Kobe Bryent was #1 basketball player.. an idol to millions. NBA and NFL also seem to not care as much if youre a criminal... look at Miles Bridges in Charlotte. He is a convicted felon, pleaded no contest, and hasn't missed a minute of NBA action. He isn't even allowed in Canada and can't play vs. Raptors... overall in the NBA 3-5 guys get charged every year yet it's no big deal... Edited February 5 by bh90 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenbean30 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 First Court Day was today, no players present and lawyers joined via video. The case has been adjourned until April 30th. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 (edited) On 2/4/2024 at 12:52 AM, Dumb Nuck said: If hush money is good enough for the leader of the country…… This has long been debunked, we really gonna just keep parroting baseless extreme right wing talking points in 2024? You also cannot use an NDA to cover up a crime in Canada. Edited February 5 by canuck73_3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowman955 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 11 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said: This has long been debunked, we really gonna just keep parroting baseless extreme right wing talking points in 2024? You also cannot use an NDA to cover up a crime in Canada. The NDA you speak of needs to be agreed upon with each party involved. It prevents transparency of the out come. Preventing the public of all involved to disclose any information of the results of the infractions. More commonly used in corporate affairs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KZA Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 Publication ban ordered for 2 witnesses. Not an expert but possibly other players in the room are testifying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
112 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 8 minutes ago, KZA said: Publication ban ordered for 2 witnesses. Not an expert but possibly other players in the room are testifying. Witnesses don't need to have directly witnessed the crime; they're just able to present evidence. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 24 minutes ago, snowman955 said: The NDA you speak of needs to be agreed upon with each party involved. It prevents transparency of the out come. Preventing the public of all involved to disclose any information of the results of the infractions. More commonly used in corporate affairs. You can not use any NDA to cover up a crime in Canada. Enough with this BS lunatic Right Wing Maga wannabe garbage. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 On 2/4/2024 at 12:52 AM, Dumb Nuck said: If hush money is good enough for the leader of the country…… If it was really hush money you wouldn't know about it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 5 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said: You can not use any NDA to cover up a crime in Canada. Enough with this BS lunatic Right Wing Maga wannabe garbage. When twitter raises someone iq they are in real trouble. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimito Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandmaster Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 Interesting press briefing. The Chief of the London Police Service’ stated new evidence was uncovered when this matter was reviewed. It was originally closed and appeared unfounded. He didn’t get into what that is as it would compromise the court proceedings. The follow up detective sergeant clearly stated that this evidence was not available. Maybe a witness came forward? Video? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 Just now, Grandmaster said: Interesting press briefing. The Chief of the London Police Service’ stated new evidence was uncovered when this matter was reviewed. It was originally closed and appeared unfounded. He didn’t get into what that is as it would compromise the court proceedings. The follow up detective sergeant clearly stated that this evidence was not available. Maybe a witness came forward? Video? My best guess is that the players who aren't being charged who were in the room started talking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandmaster Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 1 minute ago, King Heffy said: My best guess is that the players who aren't being charged who were in the room started talking. Very possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimito Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 McCloud got charged with 2 counts. The rest one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.