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

[qwksndmonster]

I can't seem to recall. Which troll has trouble distinguishing between your and you're?

All of them?

[JJFIVEOH]

I think JJ50's posts have been worse. 

 

How so? SDS didn't stick around to defend his harsh remarks about me. I'd like to hear why you think so. 

[Doohicksie]

New moniker for the Windy City and working title of the next Spike Lee joint about the gun violence in Englewood.  

 

The Southside barrio (in Ft Worth) is relatively peaceful.  More shootings in the Northside barrio (aka the Stockyards).  Interestingly, the Stockyards is a tourist district.  Don't stray too far away from the bright lights. 

 

We (the cycling group I ride with) were up in Stockyards when there was a shooting a block or two away.  Interesting juxtaposition of Wild West architecture and police helicopters.

[qwksndmonster]

How so? SDS didn't stick around to defend his harsh remarks about me. I'd like to hear why you think so. 

Because you kinda see things the way T4M does, except with you it sounds more genuine.

Edited August 10, 2015 by qwksndmonster

[Fidelio]

This is the comment everybody has been referring to. But you're right, Tank Jr., you never said that he expected sex. You said he SHOULD expect it, which is an entirely different suggestion insinuating that a man has a right to expect sex from somebody just because of the circumstances around their encounter.

 

You're rambling like crazy trying to make it seem like we're antibodies attacking what's new and different. That's not the case. You said what you said and it was disgusting. Leave or don't, but let's be adults when we say something that people find disturbing. You said it. If you have a problem with people disagreeing then okay but don't hurl insults while claiming you didn't say what you said.

 

What that means hoss, (even if i misstated it, or if it was simply misread) is that (in ones mind, which is the place expectations occur) one would deduce that two girls following him to his house from a bar, in the middle of the night that "SOMETHING" would happen... notice.. SOMETHING and SEX are not synonymous...  What I'm saying is not that KANE is endowed the right to sex due to the circumstances of the encounter but that he is within the confines of reason presented to him by the world we live in to except it...Expect: to look forward to; regard as likely to happen; anticipate theoccurrence or the coming of:..      Especially within the context of the larger point, there are no despicable implications.  

Again you are twisting my words to fit an idea you and others have formed even tho i explained my intention over and over again.  (Insert Hume Quote) And actually man... You are attacking me, and just because you can cleverly devise a way to wrap it doesn't make it civil, or adult like.   I strongly disagree with treating people the way that I and another commenter have been treated... Marginalizing them, refuting their opinions without proper consideration, and just plain throwing stones, using whatever they see fit as ammunition even if it doesn't make any sense or has no relevance..  Who are you telling to be an adult? Im merely responding to insults, and haven't resorted in my rebuttals until I became overwhelmed with irrational and unfair scrutiny.

[3putt]

I said I was a Criminal Minds junkie not a lawyer.

I thought as CM junkie you would remember that their profiles are based on the examination of the crime scene, the victim, the forensic evidence and other factors to compile a list of probable characteristics that the "unsub", i think is the term they use, will likely have.  it is a way of narrowing the pool of potential suspects to investigate and excluding those who don't match the profile.  Keep in mind that they know at the time of creating the profile that a crime has been committed and are trying to identify an unknown perpetrator.  In this instance, the commission of a crime by an identified subject is the matter under investigation in order to determine if a crime has in fact taken place, a profile is not very useful and as an aside inadmissible as evidence in court.  

 

Your "profile" was your supposition as to the occurrence of events, the condition of the actors, implied intent and knowledge of the actors and a determination of the culpability of the same.  You need to be a bit more discerning in viewing the TV show.  You missed important nuances.  The other tool they use is a timeline, or sequence of events that is corroborated by the physical evidence.  that is also supposition.  

 

Edit:  The current investigation is an attempt to determine the facts surrounding the events and to determine if a crime in fact occurred.  My original post was unclear as to that distinction.

Edited August 10, 2015 by 3putt

[TrueBlueGED]

Amazing to see how much dancing can be done around the matter of sl_ut shaming.

I really wish certain individuals would just come out and say it, rather than hiding behind "I'm not saying she deserved it, but...". Guess I shouldn't be surprised that those who internally hold such opinions are, at their core, cowards.

[Fidelio]

I can't seem to recall. Which troll has trouble distinguishing between your and you're?

 

It was serving an educational purpose until it got commandeered by buffoonery.

 

This is the epitome of my accusations.  

 

Really? Calling someone out who is responding to 20 people at a time trying to finish a lab for their spelling? 

And then the insult, buffoonery, after you just got done lecturing me over adult like conduct.

[shrader]

One of the killers on that show was a guy name Schrader from the Buffalo area.  They scarred me for life.

[Fidelio]

I really wish certain individuals would just come out and say it, rather than hiding behind "I'm not saying she deserved it, but...". Guess I shouldn't be surprised that those who internally hold such opinions are, at their core, cowards.

I hope your trolling.

[JJFIVEOH]

I really wish certain individuals would just come out and say it, rather than hiding behind "I'm not saying she deserved it, but...". Guess I shouldn't be surprised that those who internally hold such opinions are, at their core, cowards.

 

That's only fair if you've ignored much of what I've said. These are the kind of responses that have really turned this discussion into a free for all. Making these insinuations only makes matters worse, I thought you were better than that.

[Fidelio]

That's only fair if you've ignored much of what I've said. These are the kind of responses that have really turned this discussion into a free for all. Making these insinuations only makes matters worse, I thought you were better than that.

 Yea I'm exhausted from it.  It may be trolling, who knows.  Goodluck.. I really gotta get back to my Lab. 

Apologies to anyone i've offended, it wasn't my attention. 

I just can't accept bigotry in any from because truly, all such judgement is the same, and of the same essence.

Lastly, I am not a returning user. 

Enjoy the day.

[LTS]

Eeesh.  Gone for a weekend and this thread is filled with some good information and a lot of personal attacks.

 

I guess it's okay to make personal attacks.. in a thread that discusses a form of personal attack right?

 

A few quick things...

 

A scenario will present itself and that scenario will come with a set of potential outcomes.  Some will be more probable than the others.  Not everyone will be able to think of the same possible outcomes nor will they likely think of the same probably outcomes.  To presume that everyone operates from the same form of decision making and information processing capabilities is ignorant and irresponsible.  Proof? If we all did then we'd all think like Patrick Kane.. (do you think like Patrick Kane?)

 

There needs to be the ability to allow for possibilities in what could have transpired without it being a referendum on the person in question.  Anecdotal stories have merit because they prove that an outcome is possible, even if it is not probable.

 

It's not inconceivable to me that in the realm of human behavior that a woman could decide that she wants to try and lure Patrick Kane into having sex with her with the intention of then filing a rape charge with the hopes of the charge resulting in some kind of million dollar settlement.  If I were listing my top X of possible scenarios this probably doesn't make it into the list, but the news is rife with discussions on the despicable things humans will do.

 

That said, even if that were to happen, once, anywhere, at anytime, that does not mean that this particular woman, in this particular scenario should be accused, specifically, of having done that.  There should be the ability for a discussion that allows the scenario to exist without also simultaneously casting judgment on the specific people involved.  It's a fine line, there's no doubt.  It's almost like making a Law & Order episode if you will. Based on actual events but twisted to sound more dramatic and twisted.

 

Here's the simple bottom line that I am hoping we all adhere to.

 

Non-consensual sex is wrong. Period. There are no mitigating factors.

 

However, we don't know that there was non-consensual sex.  We know that someone has made an accusation that sex occurred and they did not consent to it. That is what we know about this particular case right?

 

Hopefully my points come across and are not totally disjointed.  It's not easy to spend over an hour reading this thread, at work (during lunch and then some I guess), while constantly waivering back and forth between I should say this or I should not say that or I should comment or I should not.

 

It's an important discussion, but with regards to the exact scenario this thread originally covered all we have is patience to learn what has or has not happened.  The philosophical discussion pieces are great mental exercises but being tied to this thread add a level of volatility that hampers the discussion. 

[sicknfla]

I thought as CM junkie you would remember that their profiles are based on the examination of the crime scene, the victim, the forensic evidence and other factors to compile a list of probable characteristics that the "unsub", i think is the term they use, will likely have. it is a way of narrowing the pool of potential suspects to investigate and excluding those who don't match the profile. Keep in mind that they know at the time of creating the profile that a crime has been committed and are trying to identify an unknown perpetrator. In this instance, the commission of a crime by an identified subject is the matter under investigation in order to determine if a crime has in fact taken place, a profile is not very useful and as an aside inadmissible as evidence in court.

 

Your "profile" was your supposition as to the occurrence of events, the condition of the actors, implied intent and knowledge of the actors and a determination of the culpability of the same. You need to be a bit more discerning in viewing the TV show. You missed important nuances. The other tool they use is a timeline, or sequence of events that is corroborated by the physical evidence. that is also supposition.

 

Edit: The current investigation is an attempt to determine the facts surrounding the events and to determine if a crime in fact occurred. My original post was unclear as to that distinction.

I think you are overanalyzing my post just a tad. That was way too much work on your part to critique my viewings of Criminal Minds. I get the legal process. I get the investigation part of it. I get that life isn't TV show.

 

I did, however, stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night so please don't push me on this.

Edited August 10, 2015 by sicknfla

[tom webster]

Wow, take the morning to actually do some work and things have really escalated, or is it deescalated? 

[qwksndmonster]

I think you are overanalyzing my post just a tad. That was way too much work on your part to critique my viewings of Criminal Minds. I get the legal process. I get the investigation part of it. I get that life isn't TV show.

 

I did, however, stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night so please don't push me on this.

I don't know why, but this really cracked me up :lol:

 

Thanks for taking time to stop and share your thoughts, LTS.  Always a pleasure.

[sicknfla]

 

Can you admit that you're speculating about rape scenarios for fun? [/quote

 

Speculating yes. For fun - no. Skip over my posts - it will be easier for you.

[darksabre]

 

Can you admit that you're speculating about rape scenarios for fun? [/quote

 

Speculating yes. For fun - no. Skip over my posts - it will be easier for you.

 

Then why speculate? What are you gaining from it? 

[sicknfla]

Then why speculate? What are you gaining from it?

You don't think law enforcement speculates? Of course they do. Then they investigate. So since I am not a detective working the case I will speculate until I know otherwise.

 

Is this unique? Am I doing something that nobody else does? Speculation is everywhere in all aspects of life. It is what we do. Especially on forums.

[Stoner]

Eeesh.  Gone for a weekend and this thread is filled with some good information and a lot of personal attacks.

 

I guess it's okay to make personal attacks.. in a thread that discusses a form of personal attack right?

 

A few quick things...

 

A scenario will present itself and that scenario will come with a set of potential outcomes.  Some will be more probable than the others.  Not everyone will be able to think of the same possible outcomes nor will they likely think of the same probably outcomes.  To presume that everyone operates from the same form of decision making and information processing capabilities is ignorant and irresponsible.  Proof? If we all did then we'd all think like Patrick Kane.. (do you think like Patrick Kane?)

 

There needs to be the ability to allow for possibilities in what could have transpired without it being a referendum on the person in question.  Anecdotal stories have merit because they prove that an outcome is possible, even if it is not probable.

 

It's not inconceivable to me that in the realm of human behavior that a woman could decide that she wants to try and lure Patrick Kane into having sex with her with the intention of then filing a rape charge with the hopes of the charge resulting in some kind of million dollar settlement.  If I were listing my top X of possible scenarios this probably doesn't make it into the list, but the news is rife with discussions on the despicable things humans will do.

 

That said, even if that were to happen, once, anywhere, at anytime, that does not mean that this particular woman, in this particular scenario should be accused, specifically, of having done that.  There should be the ability for a discussion that allows the scenario to exist without also simultaneously casting judgment on the specific people involved.  It's a fine line, there's no doubt.  It's almost like making a Law & Order episode if you will. Based on actual events but twisted to sound more dramatic and twisted.

 

Here's the simple bottom line that I am hoping we all adhere to.

 

Non-consensual sex is wrong. Period. There are no mitigating factors.

 

However, we don't know that there was non-consensual sex.  We know that someone has made an accusation that sex occurred and they did not consent to it. That is what we know about this particular case right?

 

Hopefully my points come across and are not totally disjointed.  It's not easy to spend over an hour reading this thread, at work (during lunch and then some I guess), while constantly waivering back and forth between I should say this or I should not say that or I should comment or I should not.

 

It's an important discussion, but with regards to the exact scenario this thread originally covered all we have is patience to learn what has or has not happened.  The philosophical discussion pieces are great mental exercises but being tied to this thread add a level of volatility that hampers the discussion. 

All very well said.

That's only fair if you've ignored much of what I've said. These are the kind of responses that have really turned this discussion into a free for all. Making these insinuations only makes matters worse, I thought you were better than that.

I'm sure he is. But this is an emotional topic and people have blind spots.

 

I also don't think you're a bad person who believes women who have been raped bear any responsibility. I do struggle to understand the points you're trying to make. You seem to be arguing that women can bear some responsibility for putting themselves at risk. Maybe, I don't know. I don't know how you can get there based on what little we know — if we know anything that's true — about this case.

[shrader]

You don't think law enforcement speculates? Of course they do. Then they investigate. So since I am not a detective working the case I will speculate until I know otherwise.

 

Is this unique? Am I doing something that nobody else does? Speculation is everywhere in all aspects of life. It is what we do. Especially on forums.

 

It doesn't seem right to lump in the educated speculation (for a lack of better terms) that law enforcement would do with the speculation that goes on here.  They are incredibly different things.  Some here will have more experience than others, but as a whole, what is done here is nothing more than a dart board.  I'm not trying to shoot down what goes on here, but one definitely serves a better purpose than the other.

[darksabre]

You don't think law enforcement speculates? Of course they do. Then they investigate. So since I am not a detective working the case I will speculate until I know otherwise.

 

Is this unique? Am I doing something that nobody else does? Speculation is everywhere in all aspects of life. It is what we do. Especially on forums.

You aren't answering my question. Why do you need to speculate? 

[Doohicksie]

You aren't answering my question. Why do you need to speculate? 

 

Because it's a freakin' internet forum.  That's reason enough.

[LGR4GM]

Why do we always take the bait?

I didn't this time and for that I would like a cookie.

[darksabre]

Because it's a freakin' internet forum.  That's reason enough.

 

I find it increasingly ironic that a number of people here are willing to speculate about the motivations of a possible rape victim, yet I'm the one being criticized for speculating about the motives of the posters here doing the speculating.

 

Y'all can't have it both ways. If you feel a duty to speculate about rape, then I feel a duty to speculate about you. It's only fair.