Yes, I know the players are not going to testify they get killed.
I can’t wait to see Newton testify. He’s got some explaining to do.
Last edited:
Report: Five members of Canada’s 2018 WJC team told to surrender to London Police
- Thread starter bazokajoe
- Start date
I can’t wait to see Newton testify. He’s got some explaining to do.
If you look at the chat from back in 2018 I don't think there was anything misleading about it. But here's the thing. They aren't testifying, she is. Her testimony has to meet the bar of helping to convince the jury (now the judge) beyond a reasonable doubt of the following
1. That she was too drunk to consent
2. That she was pressured by the group to have sex
3. That the players should have known that she was too drunk and/or that she was uncomfortable with the situation
Your understanding of consent law is incomplete.
Her level of intoxication doesn't necessarily matter.
Let's get specific: Did she explicitly consent for the encounter with 1 guy to turn into an encounter with many guys? If no, could be assault
Did she explicitly consent for someone to do the splits on her face? If no, could be assault.
Did she explicitly consent for someone to smack her ass, or spit on her? If no, could be assault.
Sexual Assault FAQ: Consent Laws In Canada | Filkow Law
This article discusses canadian sexual assault law, specifically consent laws in canada. For more information, contact Filkow Law today.
filkowlaw.com
She could have been saying "yeah, give it to me" and still not be giving consent. Google "fawning trauma response".
Consent needs to be gained for every action by every person. If she didn't give consent for the 3-way text, mcleod could be guilty of 5 counts. If she didn't consent to the splits, foote could be guilty. And every combination in between.
Oh sure, just another night…McLeod sent the message out to the team inviting them to a 3-way, that was all him and not her in the slightest…I think her testimony shows she was pressured and the players should have known she was uncomfortable….they were all drunk, they should have known that too, they have video of her buying drinks and players buying her some too.
That takes care of your concerns...
Last edited:
What is the definition of explicit consent ? Would a document similar to the contract that adult film stars sign with legal advice before filming suffice ? There is evidence of ample consensual sexual and likely implied sexual consent in this case. There is no evidence of non consensual sex unless the lady was deemed to have been too intoxicated to consent which is not the case. If it is established that the level of intoxication for consent is irrelevant then a very dangerous precedent would have been set which would make any person who has sex with an intoxicated person guilty of sexual assault. It would follow then that potentially any party that gave, sold or permitted an individual to become intoxicated would have a legal responsibility for that individual’s sexual assault .Your understanding of consent law is incomplete.
Her level of intoxication doesn't necessarily matter.
Let's get specific: Did she explicitly consent for the encounter with 1 guy to turn into an encounter with many guys? If no, could be assault
Did she explicitly consent for someone to do the splits on her face? If no, could be assault.
Did she explicitly consent for someone to smack her ass, or spit on her? If no, could be assault.
Sexual Assault FAQ: Consent Laws In Canada | Filkow Law
This article discusses canadian sexual assault law, specifically consent laws in canada. For more information, contact Filkow Law today.
She could have been saying "yeah, give it to me" and still not be giving consent. Google "fawning trauma response".
Consent needs to be gained for every action by every person. If she didn't give consent for the 3-way text, mcleod could be guilty of 5 counts. If she didn't consent to the splits, foote could be guilty. And every combination in between.
Should warnings be placed at restaurants, bars, the LCBO ( or provincial / territorial equivalent) or on alcoholic beverages that sexual assault may ensue after consumption above and beyond “drink responsibly “ considerations ?
That the first hockey player after having consensual sex with the complainant found it necessary to use his cell phone to text invitations to his team mates to join in too could be seen as egregious but not criminal and that the complainant apparently willingly and eagerly was able to initiate and accept unprotected sexual intercourse and fellatio with four more team mates over the next few hours is not surprising but also not criminal . All parties in this case behaved recklessly with the potential for any even worse outcome that what happened.
The judge will find these individuals not guilty as the crown’s case is porous and collapsing.
I believe that this case as I said before is the result of a consensual gang bang gone bad, with the complainant feeling post coital remorse, humiliation and degradation but not being the victim of any crime under the Canadian Criminal Code.
It wasn't a consensual gang bang...she did not have anything to do with the other guys coming in the room, a point she made clear in text messages to McLeod the next day and in her testimony.
That's a helluva assumption you're making when you say "willingly and eagerly"...you make a lot of assumptions that five legal teams couldn't make.
I don't know why you are trying to push the case is falling apart, because of one guy? I still believe they're guilty...
You say there is no evidence of non-consensual sex...did I miss the consent part when Foote rubbed his bag and dick in her face? Dube slaps her ass and spits on her, was that consensual? Formenton and McLeod fucking her in the bathroom one after another, I don’t think that was her idea.
And No, you don't have to put warnings at bars that sexual assault could happen after alcohol use, decent humans know better...these are selfish kids.
Last edited:
She DID say "It was all consensual" in a cellphone video after the sex acts were completed. That is evidence. Any suggestion that she was not in a frame of mind to have made that statement is speculation.
Regretting having made bad decisions after the fact is not sexual assault from the position of a Judge.
It's very likely that the burden of proof is sufficient for civil, but not criminal court. Civil damages have already been settled out of court.
From the text of the Toronto Star article on Saturday, (post #311):
"A man had called the organization reporting his partner’s daughter may have been sexually assaulted in a hotel room with players, McCurdie told police, and the young woman didn’t want to come forward."
"The police’s probe ended in February 2019 without charges being laid, only to be re-opened in 2022 amid intense public pressure when it was revealed Hockey Canada had settled, for an undisclosed sum, a $3.5-million sexual assault lawsuit filed that year by the complainant.
As London police stated in court records in 2022: “The media attention surrounding this event is significant.”
"She did not feel that she had a choice" is not evidence, it's a belief held by some people with a vested interest in the verdict, whether or not they are a party in the trial.
Ideally a Judge and jury have no emotional reaction to any testimonial evidence. An accused should never be convicted in criminal court because the Judge or jury 'feels sorry' for the 'victim'.
E.M.'s mother and her boyfriend can offer no evidence - ANYTHING they have to say is hearsay. The court also owes nothing to the social media popcorn eaters who decided that justice was not served.
The cellphone video was brought up in court…it got destroyed and isn’t the safe haven the players thought it was…you’ve mentioned the cell phone before about 3 times and its been pointed out to you every time that it isn’t a factor at all…why are you still bringing it up?
Again…
-McLeod taking that video shows his guilt, he knew something was wrong and the night went too far or he wouldn’t need a ‘protection’ video
-McLeod is telling her what to say. “It’s ok right”, “it’s all consensual, say it”…she says it under duress twice
-He asks for consent 3 hours after it started, they should have gotten it 3hours earlier
The cellphone evidence will be used against the players.
Are you not following the testimony at all?
Saying “$he feels she didn’t have a choice” is evidence…it’s same thing that victims of Mike Tyson and Kobe Bryant said…you can’t force yourself on someone.
The mother and boyfriend can offer lots of evidence…it is not hearsay for them to testify in their dealings with the victim.
My God…you’re wrong almost every time you comment on this.
Last edited:
Excerpt from the Toronto Star article, (post #311):
The documents reveal that a veteran detective with London police’s sexual assault and child abuse section spoke to the complainant multiple times in 2018, including several formal interviews, as she went back and forth on whether she wanted to pursue charges. At one point, Det. Steve Newton wondered whether she was being “coerced” to report as a result of pressure from family and friends. He also interviewed four of the five players now on trial (all except Hart), telling them upfront he didn’t have grounds to lay criminal charges. Those who admitted to engaging in sexual activity with the complainant maintained it was consensual.
What appears to have caused Newton the most doubt that a crime had been committed was the video evidence: surveillance footage showing the complainant walking steadily and unaided in heels in the hotel lobby led Newton to question her account that she was too intoxicated that night to consent And, perhaps most importantly, two video clips recorded by McLeod of the complainant smiling in the hotel room following the alleged sexual assaults; in one of them, she says: “It was all consensual.”
Newton ultimately wondered in a report whether the complainant had been an “active participant” in the events of June 18-19, 2018; he closed the case in February 2019.
You're assuming that your beliefs are both truths and evidence of guilty. Clearly Detective Newton did not share your opinions.
No, he asked her to confirm, after the fact, that it was consensual. To assume that this means that consent was not also obtained prior to the group acts is speculation.
E.M. has confirmed that she had consented to the initial act with McLeod. There is no video evidence that could confirm whether the group participation was suggested by McLeod or E.M., and no video evidence in which E.M. objects, or says no. There is testimony about this from more than one witness, with very different accounts.
In cross examinations, E.M. repeatedly said "That doesn't sound like something I would say.", in lieu of a yes or no response. To me, avoiding the question in this manner is suspicious. When someone says 'I can neither confirm nor deny...', something, It usually means "I am unwilling to tell the whole truth'. It also seems odd to me that E.M. appears to have had vivid recollection of certain parts of the evening, and little to no memory of other parts.
Playing loose with the facts there aren't we? The first consent video was at 3:25 am. That's not 3 hours after. In fact we still haven't determined whether that was pre or post gang bang.
I disagree with you on the cellphone video not being a factor. It clearly points out that E.M. was a willing participant. She wasn't slurring her words and she didn't sound like she was under any duress.
The cover up and collusion started early
www.tsn.ca
Rick Westhead: Steenbergen details calls from Foote, Dube during Hockey Canada investigation | TSN
Tyler Steenbergen, a former member of Canada’s 2018 world junior team, testified Thursday that teammates Callan Foote and Dillon Dube both phoned him after learning Hockey Canada was conducting an investigation into an alleged sexual assault and asked him not to reveal what he had seen those...
www.tsn.ca
“I was glad that the police tried to investigate, but I was very
disappointed that they thought there was not enough to go further,” says
the complainant’s 2022 statement. “I was too drunk to consent, and Mikey
and the other guys should have known that. Any decent guy would have
seen how drunk I was and not done what they did.”)
How is the Crown going to prove this assertion?
''Prosecutors intend to show that the woman was complying because she was
surrounded by large men she didn’t know while separated from her friends.''
This is going to be difficult to do..
''In a meeting with the woman, her mother, lawyer, and police about three
weeks before the players were charged, Cunningham also told the
complainant that they didn’t have a “strong argument” that she was
incapable of consenting, despite the complainant alleging that in her
lawsuit''
So far I would say that they don't have much of an argument at all...
disappointed that they thought there was not enough to go further,” says
the complainant’s 2022 statement. “I was too drunk to consent, and Mikey
and the other guys should have known that. Any decent guy would have
seen how drunk I was and not done what they did.”)
How is the Crown going to prove this assertion?
''Prosecutors intend to show that the woman was complying because she was
surrounded by large men she didn’t know while separated from her friends.''
This is going to be difficult to do..
''In a meeting with the woman, her mother, lawyer, and police about three
weeks before the players were charged, Cunningham also told the
complainant that they didn’t have a “strong argument” that she was
incapable of consenting, despite the complainant alleging that in her
lawsuit''
So far I would say that they don't have much of an argument at all...
Last edited:
These are not “selfish kids”, they are adults who behaved egregiously but not criminally. Foote was fellated by the complainant after he did the splits. Some of this guys slapped the complainant’s ass with their balls instead of their hands ok with obvious consent.
Again this was a consensual gang bang “ gone wrong” with elements of degradation suck as spitting, misogyny perhaps and humiliation but no actions perpetrated by the defendants that are in the Criminal Code of Canada.
She said she”zoned out” , the defendants she told to “ fuck her” and they did and that called them “ pussies” to entice them.
Is there any evidence that she said “no” at anytime or tried to leave , which significantly would significantly help the. Crown ?
Furthermore, this case is a setback and travesty for victims of legitimate sexual assault !
None of these clowns will serve a day in jail for this debacle and consensual debauch.!
Last edited:
Read this article by tsn's Rick Westhead and tell me if you feel the same way.
If you think EM had inconsistencies in her story , there were plenty more inconsistencies in the players accounts.
Between what they told the police detectives and the investigation by Hockey Canada, makes them look like they were trying to cover up what actually happened. This was definitely not a consensual gang bang. They knew they did something wrong, and to me are guilty. Whether that can be proven in court is a different story.
Rick Westhead: 2022 statements from accused players won’t be heard at London hockey trial | TSN
Crown attorney argued during pre-trial hearings there were ‘many, many’ inconsistencies with what Michael McLeod, Alex Formenton and Dillon Dube told a Hockey Canada investigator in 2022 and their previous interviews with London police about alleged incident.
www.tsn.ca
I don't agree with you at all.Read this article by tsn's Rick Westhead and tell me if you feel the same way.
If you think EM had inconsistencies in her story , there were plenty more inconsistencies in the players accounts.
Between what they told the police detectives and the investigation by Hockey Canada, makes them look like they were trying to cover up what actually happened. This was definitely not a consensual gang bang. They knew they did something wrong, and to me are guilty. Whether that can be proven in court is a different story.
Rick Westhead: 2022 statements from accused players won’t be heard at London hockey trial | TSN
Crown attorney argued during pre-trial hearings there were ‘many, many’ inconsistencies with what Michael McLeod, Alex Formenton and Dillon Dube told a Hockey Canada investigator in 2022 and their previous interviews with London police about alleged incident.
I didn't see any any inconsistencies on the players' parts which would indicate non consensual sex whereas her inconsistencies totally contradict her
accusations of non consensual sex and whether she was free to leave or not.
According to E.M. her fiance (boyfriend at the time), has chosen to not to hear any of the testimony. Lucky for her, stupid for him.
From post #311, (text of May 18 Toronto Star article):
"And, unlike in 2018, London police decided to get a court order for records from Hockey Canada’s independent investigation into the matter, which included interviews with some of the players now on trial. They had refused to speak to police in 2022 to exercise their right to remain silent, but faced the choice of either participating in the Hockey Canada probe or being banned for life from the organization’s programs — including Canada’s world championship and Olympic teams.
A judge would later toss the players’ statements from the criminal case because the way in which they were obtained was so “unfair and prejudicial” that it harmed the accused men’s right to a fair trial."
In today's climate, North American team sports leagues are more concerned about inclusivity and the league's marketing image than with the players. All of the London defendants are effectively blackballed from any future NHL careers, even if they are acquitted. Any allegation of domestic violence or sexual assault, or even an unflattering social media post about 'the Alphabet community' makes a player kryptonite to every team. Some teams, like the Toronto Blue Jays, won't touch any player who's had a PED suspension. Their own Orelvis Martinez is possibly an exception, if only because there is a reasonable case to suggest that he was 'accidentally guilty' - from wikipedia: " Martínez was suspended 80 games after testing positive for the performance–enhancing substance clomiphene, which he said in a statement that he had taken for fertility issues as he and his girlfriend are trying to have children.".
"And, unlike in 2018, London police decided to get a court order for records from Hockey Canada’s independent investigation into the matter, which included interviews with some of the players now on trial. They had refused to speak to police in 2022 to exercise their right to remain silent, but faced the choice of either participating in the Hockey Canada probe or being banned for life from the organization’s programs — including Canada’s world championship and Olympic teams.
A judge would later toss the players’ statements from the criminal case because the way in which they were obtained was so “unfair and prejudicial” that it harmed the accused men’s right to a fair trial."
In today's climate, North American team sports leagues are more concerned about inclusivity and the league's marketing image than with the players. All of the London defendants are effectively blackballed from any future NHL careers, even if they are acquitted. Any allegation of domestic violence or sexual assault, or even an unflattering social media post about 'the Alphabet community' makes a player kryptonite to every team. Some teams, like the Toronto Blue Jays, won't touch any player who's had a PED suspension. Their own Orelvis Martinez is possibly an exception, if only because there is a reasonable case to suggest that he was 'accidentally guilty' - from wikipedia: " Martínez was suspended 80 games after testing positive for the performance–enhancing substance clomiphene, which he said in a statement that he had taken for fertility issues as he and his girlfriend are trying to have children.".
There seems to be eliminates of humiliation and degradation by slapping, spitting etc which are not sexual assault under the criminal code but seem to have angered the complainant.Read this article by tsn's Rick Westhead and tell me if you feel the same way.
If you think EM had inconsistencies in her story , there were plenty more inconsistencies in the players accounts.
Between what they told the police detectives and the investigation by Hockey Canada, makes them look like they were trying to cover up what actually happened. This was definitely not a consensual gang bang. They knew they did something wrong, and to me are guilty. Whether that can be proven in court is a different story.
Rick Westhead: 2022 statements from accused players won’t be heard at London hockey trial | TSN
Crown attorney argued during pre-trial hearings there were ‘many, many’ inconsistencies with what Michael McLeod, Alex Formenton and Dillon Dube told a Hockey Canada investigator in 2022 and their previous interviews with London police about alleged incident.
Maybe these guys might get a conditional sentence but are very unlikely to see any jail time.
More than likely, they will be found innocent as their wrongdoings were not criminal.
For the most part, the complainant and the defendants all had a “good time” with the complainant suffering from post coital and post fellatio remorse and Hockey Canada doing damage control with financial compensation.into the millions.
