Toronto Passions

Report: Five members of Canada’s 2018 WJC team told to surrender to London Police

Previous Thread Next Thread
F

Fun For All

Well-known member
Feb 9, 2014
11,827
6,016
113
boobtoucher said:
1: A Hockey Canada rep, or one of the team sponsors, was buying the girl drinks at the bar, and Wing-manning for McLeod.
2: She tried to ditch him at the bar, and he followed her to the bathroom.
3: 7 or 8 players saw what was going on/were in the room and didn't step up
4: Her dad called Hockey Canada the day (or days) after, and a HC exec tipped the players off that an investigation was happening, allowing the players to get their story straight.
5: London police coaxed the girl to just "let us talk to them" rather than pressing charges.

Total failure from every player involved, Hockey Canada, and London police.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Get your children OUT of Hockey Canada programming. Their system is set up to cover up abuse (as shown in (4)), and in this case, they actively encouraged a sexual assault (as shown in (1)).
Click to expand...
I'm a little suspicious of the London Police motives to not move forward...I think someone got to them to drop it...How could they listen to this story and let it go?

This is from the London Police Services website...it's interesting that they publish it but didn't appear to follow it...

 
K

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
28,404
9,502
113
Room 112
Fun For All said:
The conspiracy theory in me thinks someone got to the London Police and persuaded them to let it go...how could anybody now that reads what happened not think crimes had occurred?

Maybe those Cops were just terrible and put it all on the "consent" video.

Now, a conviction doesn't seem so uphill...it seems probable.
Click to expand...
I don't see it that way. The woman didn't say no and she wasn't too drunk to not be able to consent. The onus was on her to say no I don't want this. No I am leaving. She says she didn't do that because she feared what they may do. To me that's not enough to warrant a sexual assault conviction.
What these guys did was immoral but it wasn't illegal. The guy I blame the most is McLeod for texting guys saying come to the room.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jalimon
The Oracle

The Oracle

Pronouns: Who/Cares
Mar 8, 2004
27,984
56,329
113
On the slopes of Mount Parnassus, Greece
K Douglas said:
.
What these guys did was immoral but it wasn't illegal. The guy I blame the most is McLeod for texting guys saying come to the room.
Click to expand...
From what I can gather Formenton is his roommate. If I recall the text was about a 3 way. So he texts Formenton his proposition but Formenton invites the rest...Just my guess at this point. It's quite possible he texts all his teammates as well.

As a Sens fan I can tell you Formenton had a bright career ahead of him. He was the fastest player they had with good size and he would go to the net...He torpedoed his hockey career in a few hours. He's involved in construction now.
 
F

Fun For All

Well-known member
Feb 9, 2014
11,827
6,016
113
K Douglas said:
I don't see it that way. The woman didn't say no and she wasn't too drunk to not be able to consent. The onus was on her to say no I don't want this. No I am leaving. She says she didn't do that because she feared what they may do. To me that's not enough to warrant a sexual assault conviction.
What these guys did was immoral but it wasn't illegal. The guy I blame the most is McLeod for texting guys saying come to the room.
Click to expand...
I disagree with almost everything...it was absolutely sexual assault. The Onus was NOT on her to say NO, the onus was on the players to make sure they had consent, that is law! She was drinking all night, I'm thinking she was drunk. She tried leaving a couple of times and they stopped her. If you think she consented to all that and it wasn't sexual assault you have a pretty high bar.

So in your world you can start fondling a women until she says NO...really?

Read this from the London Police Services website.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mandrill and boobtoucher
F

Fun For All

Well-known member
Feb 9, 2014
11,827
6,016
113
The Oracle said:
From what I can gather Formenton is his roommate. If I recall the text was about a 3 way. So he texts Formenton his proposition but Formenton invites the rest...Just my guess at this point. It's quite possible he texts all his teammates as well.

As a Sens fan I can tell you Formenton had a bright career ahead of him. He was the fastest player they had with good size and he would go to the net...He torpedoed his hockey career in a few hours. He's involved in construction now.
Click to expand...
No, he texted everybody, Carter Hart replied "I'm in"....10 players showed up. McLeods invite was what got him the "party to an offence" charge
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: The Oracle
B

boobtoucher

Well-known member
May 25, 2021
567
810
93
K Douglas said:
I don't see it that way. The woman didn't say no and she wasn't too drunk to not be able to consent. The onus was on her to say no I don't want this. No I am leaving. She says she didn't do that because she feared what they may do. To me that's not enough to warrant a sexual assault conviction.
What these guys did was immoral but it wasn't illegal. The guy I blame the most is McLeod for texting guys saying come to the room.
Click to expand...
That's not at all what she said in testimony: She tried to get away at the bar, she tried to leave several times

E.M. says she tried to get dressed and to leave the hotel several times, but each time she did, someone would put their arm around her and tell her to stay, guide her away from the door.

She felt physically sick, like she wanted to throw up, but couldn’t.

“I felt like I had no option. They kept bringing me back,” E.M. testifies. “I couldn't think straight with the pressure and everyone in the room.”

At one point, she said someone noticed she was crying and she heard someone saying, “Oh, she’s crying. Don’t let her go.”

At the end of the night, McLeod wanted her to perform oral sex on him, she says. As she did, E.M. says, some men were slapping her butt as hard as they could and she told them to stop because it was hurting so much.
Click to expand...

The laws are pretty straightforward: Enthusiastic consent until the end, which can be withdrawn at any time.

IF she says "hey I'd like to stop" mid thrust, it's over. or it's assault.

PROVING the laws is usually pretty difficult, but between the drinks, the coverup, and the texts after, it's pretty tough going for the defendants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mandrill
onomatopoeia

onomatopoeia

Bzzzzz.......Doink
Jul 3, 2020
22,816
18,371
113
Cabbagetown
'E.M.' allegedly received $3.5 Million Canadian Dollars from Hockey Canada, so the evening was less traumatic for her than it might have been.

Perhaps she has some past history of having sex with multiple guys she just met? Something like that might be inadmissible in a Canadian criminal court.
 
onomatopoeia

onomatopoeia

Bzzzzz.......Doink
Jul 3, 2020
22,816
18,371
113
Cabbagetown
boobtoucher said:
...The laws are pretty straightforward: Enthusiastic consent until the end, which can be withdrawn at any time.

IF she says "hey I'd like to stop" mid thrust, it's over. or it's assault....
Click to expand...
Consent cannot be withdrawn "at any time".

It can't be withdrawn before being offered, and it can't be withdrawn after the fact. For most men, the 'window of opportunity' to withdraw consent would be fleeting.

If a man and woman hook up for a consensual one night stand, and he ghosts her the next afternoon, some people would consider that to be sexual assault, (including some statisticians with an agenda, who arbitrarily define sexual assault to include 'sex with regret').

The classic case of consent withdrawn during the act is the 1991 William Kennedy Smith trial

My understanding of the evidence is that Smith and 'the blue dot woman' began consensual sex near the Kennedy compound in Florida. In mid act, he called her by the wrong name, and she changed her mind. He didn't stop in mid thrust. Smith was acquitted.

It's really difficult to convict an accused where consent is withdrawn in mid act. The accused is not going to testify, and the defense attorney is going to ask if consent was given, but won't ask if/when it was withdrawn. Not many juries would unanimously render a guilty verdict from a scenario like that.
 
mandrill

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
80,358
104,977
113
K Douglas said:
I don't see it that way. The woman didn't say no and she wasn't too drunk to not be able to consent. The onus was on her to say no I don't want this. No I am leaving. She says she didn't do that because she feared what they may do. To me that's not enough to warrant a sexual assault conviction.
Click to expand...
There's no legal onus on the girl to say "no, I'm leaving".

If her consent isn't clear and unambiguous, it's rape.

K Douglas said:
What these guys did was immoral but it wasn't illegal. The guy I blame the most is McLeod for texting guys saying come to the room.
Click to expand...
Not a valid statement of the law.
 
mandrill

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
80,358
104,977
113
onomatopoeia said:
'E.M.' allegedly received $3.5 Million Canadian Dollars from Hockey Canada, so the evening was less traumatic for her than it might have been.

Perhaps she has some past history of having sex with multiple guys she just met? Something like that might be inadmissible in a Canadian criminal court.
Click to expand...
They don't have that kind of evidence. If they did, they would already have motioned the judge to allow it in and the 1st defence attorney would be hitting the witness with it.
 
mandrill

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
80,358
104,977
113
From what I can see, the defence is a 1-trick pony - that the girl wanted a gang bang and was okay with it and then felt guilty or felt like cashing in.

So far, the girl seems believable and reasonable. If she gets bullied and denounced for 3 days by 5 different defence lawyers, that jury is going to lose any shred of sympathy for the guys and start to feel really bad for the girl.

The defence better start thinking of another angle of attack.
 
K

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
28,404
9,502
113
Room 112
Fun For All said:
I disagree with almost everything...it was absolutely sexual assault. The Onus was NOT on her to say NO, the onus was on the players to make sure they had consent, that is law! She was drinking all night, I'm thinking she was drunk. She tried leaving a couple of times and they stopped her. If you think she consented to all that and it wasn't sexual assault you have a pretty high bar.

So in your world you can start fondling a women until she says NO...really?

Read this from the London Police Services website.

Click to expand...
A video shown to the court with the timestamp of 3:25 a.m. shows E.M., who is dressed, respond to a male voice that says, “You’re OK with this, right? You’re OK with this?” with, “Yeah, I’m OK.’”

n the video shown after that, with a 4:26 a.m. timestamp, E.M. appears to be wearing only a towel in front of her body and says to the camera, “This was all consensual. I enjoyed it. Are you filming this?” She then adds, "You are so paranoid. I’m so sober — that’s why I can’t do this right now."

Sounds like consent to me at 3:25 am. What she was consenting to remains to be clarified.
And for the record I believe that unwanted sexual touching is sexual assault. And if she tried to leave and the coerced her into staying against her will that is sexual assault. But her just saying that without any corroboration doesn't make it true.
 
F

Fun For All

Well-known member
Feb 9, 2014
11,827
6,016
113
K Douglas said:
A video shown to the court with the timestamp of 3:25 a.m. shows E.M., who is dressed, respond to a male voice that says, “You’re OK with this, right? You’re OK with this?” with, “Yeah, I’m OK.’”

n the video shown after that, with a 4:26 a.m. timestamp, E.M. appears to be wearing only a towel in front of her body and says to the camera, “This was all consensual. I enjoyed it. Are you filming this?” She then adds, "You are so paranoid. I’m so sober — that’s why I can’t do this right now."

Sounds like consent to me at 3:25 am. What she was consenting to remains to be clarified.
And for the record I believe that unwanted sexual touching is sexual assault. And if she tried to leave and the coerced her into staying against her will that is sexual assault. But her just saying that without any corroboration doesn't make it true.
Click to expand...
Have you not followed this at all???? The video was dealt with to her at the trial and was explained away and its not gonna be a factor.

You should read more about the trial before commenting here on it.
 
B

boobtoucher

Well-known member
May 25, 2021
567
810
93
onomatopoeia said:
Consent cannot be withdrawn "at any time".

It can't be withdrawn before being offered, and it can't be withdrawn after the fact. For most men, the 'window of opportunity' to withdraw consent would be fleeting.

If a man and woman hook up for a consensual one night stand, and he ghosts her the next afternoon, some people would consider that to be sexual assault, (including some statisticians with an agenda, who arbitrarily define sexual assault to include 'sex with regret').

The classic case of consent withdrawn during the act is the 1991 William Kennedy Smith trial

My understanding of the evidence is that Smith and 'the blue dot woman' began consensual sex near the Kennedy compound in Florida. In mid act, he called her by the wrong name, and she changed her mind. He didn't stop in mid thrust. Smith was acquitted.

It's really difficult to convict an accused where consent is withdrawn in mid act. The accused is not going to testify, and the defense attorney is going to ask if consent was given, but won't ask if/when it was withdrawn. Not many juries would unanimously render a guilty verdict from a scenario like that.
Click to expand...
What. The. Fuck.

You basically said what i said: concentrate can be withdrawn any time during the act.

Then you brought in a MGTOW defense of "it's only rape if she feels guilty afterwards"

Then you cited a US case.

Big "Divorced Dad" energy here.

Canadian laws are clear, and in this case, it ain't looking good for the rapists.
 
B

boobtoucher

Well-known member
May 25, 2021
567
810
93
onomatopoeia said:
'E.M.' allegedly received $3.5 Million Canadian Dollars from Hockey Canada, so the evening was less traumatic for her than it might have been.

Perhaps she has some past history of having sex with multiple guys she just met? Something like that might be inadmissible in a Canadian criminal court.
Click to expand...
Gross.

You know there's a difference between civil and criminal law, right?

She reported the crime at the time. The police blew her off. She reported it to Hockey Canada. They paid her off to keep it quiet. Using the registration fees of all families/ players.

When someone leaked about hockey Canada's slush fund, the London police reopened the case and found a bunch of "new" evidence. She's not bringing charges in this case, the crown is.
 
F

Fun For All

Well-known member
Feb 9, 2014
11,827
6,016
113
boobtoucher said:
Gross.

You know there's a difference between civil and criminal law, right?

She reported the crime at the time. The police blew her off. She reported it to Hockey Canada. They paid her off to keep it quiet. Using the registration fees of all families/ players.

When someone leaked about hockey Canada's slush fund, the London police reopened the case and found a bunch of "new" evidence. She's not bringing charges in this case, the crown is.
Click to expand...
I’ll tell ya, I think there was some funny business going on on why the London Police dropped the first investigation
 
onomatopoeia

onomatopoeia

Bzzzzz.......Doink
Jul 3, 2020
22,816
18,371
113
Cabbagetown
boobtoucher said:
What. The. Fuck.

You basically said what i said: concentrate can be withdrawn any time during the act.
Click to expand...
You said
boobtoucher said:
Enthusiastic consent until the end, which can be withdrawn at any time.
Click to expand...
which isn't correct. I said nothing about concentrate being withdrawn.
boobtoucher said:
Then you brought in a MGTOW defense of "it's only rape if she feels guilty afterwards"

Then you cited a US case.

Big "Divorced Dad" energy here.

Canadian laws are clear, and in this case, it ain't looking good for the rapists.
Click to expand...
Your words, not mine.
 
B

boobtoucher

Well-known member
May 25, 2021
567
810
93
  • Like
Reactions: mandrill
You must log in or register to reply here.
Ashley Madison
Previous Thread Next Thread
Toronto Escorts
Top Bottom