Patrick Kane: [Updated] D.A. Decides Not to Prosecute; NHL Determines Claims "Unfounded"

[Hoss]

How? And, what other ways does the system suppress potential victims?

It's unfair, in my opinion, that the accused gets the benefit of the doubt and the accuser doesn't. The amount of proof of rape is also somewhat difficult. These people were often just permanently damaged by something that a person did and they have to subject their genitals to extreme examination and recount it many times. This is a hurdle some simply cannot cross. It's a humiliating process for the victims.

I do not have solutions for that, because it's likely the only way to be sure you're not putting innocent individuals in jail and ruining their lives forever.

 

This is another reason I don't believe speculation about the validity of the accusers' remarks are fair (aside from a "we don't know that Kane did this") because the discussion afterwards is the one part of the process we CAN control. It affords the victims one "benefit of the doubt" and avoids one step of proof she wouldn't need to jump have otherwise. This is more applicable to those assuming that she is a horrible thing/person (none on these boards), but I feel that to fair to expect that of those questioning her claims extensively.

Edited August 7, 2015 by Hoss

[drnkirishone]

Yes. Every poster who is theorizing that the accusation could be false. Because that theory is based on a bias towards not believing in the validity of rape accusations in general. Especially considering the complete lack of actual information we have here. 

 

These thoughts that people have. The things that they say. It all comes from somewhere. The desire to theorize and create narratives whereby the accuser in this situation is dishonest comes from somewhere. Tell me, what is that somewhere in this case? What thoughts do I need to have to bring me to a point where I should be willing to accuse the accuser? Give me the thought process. 

you are wrong on the first part. just because someone is theorizing that the accusation could be false does not make them biased against accusations in general.

to the second part my last reply I said why I run thru scenarios in my head of why it could be fake. I am already leaning on the he is guilty side of the fence and my brain knows that it is wrong to make that judgement without the facts. So i am trying to stay openminded until the info comes out.

does that explain it or am i going to be labeled as a women hating victim blame in this 50/50 divide?

[JJFIVEOH]

couple things.

 

one, no a minor can not legally be in a bar without a parent or guardian. i think there are loopholes thou with respect to bars with restaurants. but there is also limits on the times of day/night also

 

I do not agree with the idea that the adult should be held sole responsibility for verification of the age of a minor. At some point (and no I do not know exactly where that point is at) there has to be some blame on the minor if they lied about their age.

 

if you want to believe the victim/accuser without any of the facts available yet that is your right. but don't try and shame others for questioning possible motives over any or all aspects of the situation. the wrongfully accused can have lives ruined as quickly as the victims.

 

Having said that last part I am leaning towards blaming Kane and assuming his guilt. I know it is not fair to assume his guilt. YET! so i balance that out in my head by thinking on reasons and scenarios where he may not be at fault.

 

Good post

[nfreeman]

Yes. Every poster who is theorizing that the accusation could be false. Because that theory is based on a bias towards not believing in the validity of rape accusations in general. Especially considering the complete lack of actual information we have here.

 

These thoughts that people have. The things that they say. It all comes from somewhere. The desire to theorize and create narratives whereby the accuser in this situation is dishonest comes from somewhere. Tell me, what is that somewhere in this case? What thoughts do I need to have to bring me to a point where I should be willing to accuse the accuser? Give me the thought process.

It's not based on a bias against rape accusers. It's based on the need to prove an allegation before you believe that someone committed a despicable act and decide to put him in jail.

 

If I call the cops and tell them that lightsabre broke into my house and stole my dog, should you be out in jail immediately, with the world on notice that you're a thief? Or should the cops investigate and determine whether my accusation is true?

[darksabre]

you are wrong on the first part. just because someone is theorizing that the accusation could be false does not make them biased against accusations in general.

to the second part my last reply I said why I run thru scenarios in my head of why it could be fake. I am already leaning on the he is guilty side of the fence and my brain knows that it is wrong to make that judgement without the facts. So i am trying to stay openminded until the info comes out.

does that explain it or am i going to be labeled as a women hating victim blame in this 50/50 divide?

 

You shouldn't be making any judgments because we have no facts. We have nothing upon which to build doubt against the accusation. There is no need to "run through scenarios" unless you desire to find ways to find doubt without facts. And the word desire is key here. You desire to find scenarios in which doubt is supported. Why? Is it fun? Is it a challenge? Like doing a crossword? 

[drnkirishone]

It's not based on a bias against rape accusers. It's based on the need to prove an allegation before you believe that someone committed a despicable act and decide to put him in jail.

 

If I call the cops and tell them that lightsabre broke into my house and stole my dog, should you be out in jail immediately, with the world on notice that you're a thief? Or should the cops investigate and determine whether my accusation is true?

anyone steals my dog and i break their legs..... you don't mess with a mans best friend

[WildCard]

Yes. Every poster who is theorizing that the accusation could be false. Because that theory is based on a bias towards not believing in the validity of rape accusations in general. Especially considering the complete lack of actual information we have here. 

 

These thoughts that people have. The things that they say. It all comes from somewhere. The desire to theorize and create narratives whereby the accuser in this situation is dishonest comes from somewhere. Tell me, what is that somewhere in this case? What thoughts do I need to have to bring me to a point where I should be willing to accuse the accuser? Give me the thought process. 

Because people believe there is a possibility he is innocent means we have Freudian tendencies towards misogyny and suppression? 

 

It's unfair, in my opinion, that the accused gets the benefit of the doubt and the accuser doesn't. The amount of proof of rape is also somewhat difficult. These people were often just permanently damaged by something that a person did and they have to subject their genitals to extreme examination and recount it many times. This is a hurdle some simply cannot cross. It's a humiliating process for the victims.

I do not have solutions for that, because it's likely the only way to be sure you're not putting innocent individuals in jail and ruining their lives forever.

That's the nature of an accusation, it comes with the burden of proof. If the accused didn't receive the benefit of the doubt, I could make any claim against anyone I want, slander their name and drag the entire thing through courts, without a lick of proof. IMO, that doesn't sound right.

 

As for the process of rape examinations, I agree, it is terrible. But other than our fundamental disagreement on the burden of proof, I don't see many ways in which the system can be improved. Maybe have home-rape kits? I know that sounds terrible, and shouldn't be necessary, but it would reduce the humiliation. The only problem would be the legitimacy would be questioned in court. 

[darksabre]

It's not based on a bias against rape accusers. It's based on the need to prove an allegation before you believe that someone committed a despicable act and decide to put him in jail.

 

If I call the cops and tell them that lightsabre broke into my house and stole my dog, should you be out in jail immediately, with the world on notice that you're a thief? Or should the cops investigate and determine whether my accusation is true?

 

So now we're worried about maybe believing that Kane committed a rape? Why? Maybe he did? Right now he's innocent and not in jail. So your statement is groundless. 

 

How do you have the nerve of comparing a breaking and entering to a rape? 

[JJFIVEOH]

[darksabre]

Because people believe there is a possibility he is innocent means we have Freudian tendencies towards misogyny and suppression? 

 

That's the nature of an accusation, it comes with the burden of proof. If the accused didn't receive the benefit of the doubt, I could make any claim against anyone I want, slander their name and drag the entire thing through courts, without a lick of proof. IMO, that doesn't sound right.

 

As for the process of rape examinations, I agree, it is terrible. But other than our fundamental disagreement on the burden of proof, I don't see many ways in which the system can be improved. Maybe have home-rape kits? I know that sounds terrible, and shouldn't be necessary, but it would reduce the humiliation. The only problem would be the legitimacy would be questioned in court. 

 

He's innocent at this very moment. Do I need to follow that up by casting unsubstantiated doubt upon the accuser? 

[drnkirishone]

You shouldn't be making any judgments because we have no facts. We have nothing upon which to build doubt against the accusation. There is no need to "run through scenarios" unless you desire to find ways to find doubt without facts. And the word desire is key here. You desire to find scenarios in which doubt is supported. Why? Is it fun? Is it a challenge? Like doing a crossword? 

right cause we humans are known for our non rush to judgement.... it is almost like you did not bother to read what i wrote. I am doing so to try and stay open minded on this because I already find myself assuming his guilt.

[WildCard]

He's innocent at this very moment. Do I need to follow that up by casting unsubstantiated doubt upon the accuser? 

I got into the same thing with Aud. Presuming he's innocent and having a doubt about the accuser's claim are, IMO, the same act. 

[darksabre]

right cause we humans are known for our non rush to judgement.... it is almost like you did not bother to read what i wrote. I am doing so to try and stay open minded on this because I already find myself assuming his guilt.

 

Why do you need to balance his assumed guilt with assumed doubt of the accuser? Why not accept that you have a tendency to believe he is guilty and leave it at that? 

[Hoss]

Good post

Universal sign of "I agree."

 

Universal sign of "I disagree."

[darksabre]

I got into the same thing with Aud. Presuming he's innocent and having a doubt about the accuser's claim are, IMO, the same act. 

 

They are not. Legally. They are not the same thing. 

[WildCard]

They are not. Legally. They are not the same thing. 

The reason there are tests and investigations done into the accuser's claim is to test it's validity; that is the same thing as doubting it. 

[JJFIVEOH]

The problems arise when people start drawing lines.

[7+6=13]

I hope I dont' offend anyone by saying this, but I think calling every case Rape should be revisited.  I understand that most of the states consider those under 18 are incapable of consenting to sex - but it just seems too broad of a law.  

 

If a 17 year old women/girl looks older and maybe in some cases says she's older - I find it difficult to determine how for example a 24-26 year old man could difinitively know wrongdoing. 

[drnkirishone]

Why do you need to balance his assumed guilt with assumed doubt of the accuser? Why not accept that you have a tendency to believe he is guilty and leave it at that? 

because as you, me, and others have said. We have very little information. because a accusation like this can ruin his life regardless of guilt or innocence. because I have become untrusting in human nature the older I get, so I tend to not believe anything someone tells me when there can be good reasons to lie.

[darksabre]

The reason there are tests and investigations done into the accuser's claim is to test it's validity; that is the same thing as doubting it. 

 

No it is not. That is called fact finding. You're applying doubt where it does not apply. 

 

When the accused is tried, he is found either Guilty or Not Guilty. He is not found Innocent. He's presumed innocent. Presumed innocence is doubt in its wholest form. Kane, presumed innocent, has all of the benefit of the doubt. It is wholly his. And subsequently the accusation carries no weight at the time it is made. It is subject to the full weight of the accused's granted presumed innocence. There is no reason to attempt to cast more doubt upon something that already is being subjected to the full force of doubt.

 

As facts are gathered, we chip away at that doubt. We add merit to the accusation until such a time as we've eliminated doubt. We doubt the accusation up until the time that we fully do not. 

 

So when someone wants to craft a narrative about a rape accuser lying, what they're doing is piling on. Accusing the accuser is pointless. The accuser is starts from the bottom. How much lower do you need to push them? 

 

[Huckleberry]

I think to much focus is going on the age of the girl here, the prosecutor involved doing cases mostly about under 17 year old girls is very worrysome.

And the girl lying about her age can help the accused case.

 

But in the end its a rape case, and no matter what the age is, there might be some proof coming from the rape kit if she resisted enough.   Personally i don't think it looks very good for patrick kane.

Edited August 7, 2015 by Heimdall

[...]

If the girl/woman is under-aged, then the accusation of rape is lodged by the parents, because the girl (then) is, indeed, under-aged. Not because it wasn't so-called consensual. If there wasn't consent, then we would also have some sort of kidnapping accusation as well, which we don't as far as I know.

 

If it was an of-age rape in his home, we'd likely be seeing accusations of unlawful imprisonment to accompany the rape accusation.

 

If he's charged, we'll have a lot more to go on, obviously.

[That Aud Smell]

A few things (without quotes because mobile phone):

 

@PA: I agree and appreciate the echoing of the idea that, in all likelihood, coming forward is among the bravest things this woman's done, and, confidentiality laws notwithstanding, she now risks immense scrutiny. (And, no, this does not imply Kane's guilt.)

 

More generally, I think that hewing to the concepts of due process is admirable in this discussion, but ultimately unnecessary. This is a frickin message board, not a court of law. Go ahead and theorize. Hypothesize. Rely on past personal experiences. Rely on plausible rumours. Shoot, go ahead and speculate. Or invoke Constitutional concepts (just don't consider them dispositive here).

 

Also more generally, the idea that one of Kane and the accuser is *lying* is a faulty paradigm.

 

On further reflection, my professed tendency to *believe* the victim in re a sexual assault is more directed to the emotional and spiritual than the factual or clinical.

 

Someone upthread mentioned a blackout or brownout on the part of Kane. That strikes me as entirely possible here. If that's the case, his ability to defend himself is compromised.

[Weave]

I hope I dont' offend anyone by saying this, but I think calling every case Rape should be revisited.  I understand that most of the states consider those under 18 are incapable of consenting to sex - but it just seems too broad of a law.  

 

If a 17 year old women/girl looks older and maybe in some cases says she's older - I find it difficult to determine how for example a 24-26 year old man could difinitively know wrongdoing. 

 

Under 17.  This premise is ridiculous.

Edited August 7, 2015 by weave

[Aud Fellow]

I imagine its because of the age we live in (or hopefully it's because it just goes without mentioning), but why is Kane involved with a woman/girl like this?

 

Don't give me the macho "boys will be boys", or "how can he know how old she is"! At some point we need to hold folks accountable for their actions, athletes and celebrities included. Poor decisions will lead to bad results. Save it for your wife