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

[Hoss]

You're giving them a pass for doing something stupid. The second somebody on here says that she shouldn't have gone back to his place, everybody piles on that poster. Go ahead and keep walking out in front of cars in the parking lot, it's OK. It's somebody else's fault when you get hit.

Dude. Seriously. Read this post again. You claim that you aren't placing the blame the. You go farther than you have yet.

Why is it stupid that she went to his house with friends? Also, we have no idea whose idea it was to go to his house. Maybe Kane invited her friend and she wanted to go with her friend? Going to somebody's house isn't stupid. Nobody is giving her a pass because there is no pass to be given. Going to an "after party" isn't stupid in this case.

 

THEN You legit just compared her being raped to getting hit in a parking lot. In your comparison you clearly state that it's the fault of the person that gets hit in that comparison. This is the first time you've explicitly said it was her fault. Just stop talking.

Edited August 10, 2015 by Hoss

[BuffaloBorn]

 I find it extremely unbelievable that Kane is alleged to rape someone when a few months he was saying how much he loves his girlfriend of 3 years. Why would Kane cheat on a girl of 3 years with a random girl at a bar? I know he has a reputation, but is this man really that shallow?  Drunk or not...

I find this whole story kind of sketchy and until more details come out I refuse to accept the narrative that "Kane clearly raped some girl" because it's all rumors at this point and I will not jump on that band-wagon,

Obviously rape is one of the most heinous and disgusting crime there is, and if he truly raped a girl, don't get me wrong, I fully condone castration; but until then- I will reserve my judgement.

Oh by the way, no charges were filed

[Hoss]

I find it extremely unbelievable that Kane is alleged to rape someone when a few months he was saying how much he loves his girlfriend of 3 years. Why would Kane cheat on a girl of 3 years with a random girl at a bar? I know he has a reputation, but is this man really that shallow? Drunk or not...

 

I find this whole story kind of sketchy and until more details come out I refuse to accept the narrative that "Kane clearly raped some girl" because it's all rumors at this point and I will not jump on that band-wagon,

 

Obviously rape is one of the most heinous and disgusting crime there is, and if he truly raped a girl, don't get me wrong, I fully condone castration; but until then- I will reserve my judgement.

 

Oh by the way, no charges were filed

You clearly aren't reserving judgement like you claim. You actually believe that him professing his love to a girlfriend lessens the chance that he rapes somebody? Nobody here is saying he clearly raped somebody, so there is no bandwagon to jump on that one.

 

On your last line: it's "charges haven't been filed."

Edited August 10, 2015 by Hoss

[JJFIVEOH]

Dude. Seriously. Read this post again. You claim that you aren't placing the blame the. You go farther than you have yet.

Why is it stupid that she went to his house with friends? Also, we have no idea whose idea it was to go to his house. Maybe Kane invited her friend and she wanted to go with her friend? Going to somebody's house isn't stupid. Nobody is giving her a pass because there is no pass to be given. Going to an "after party" isn't stupid in this case.

 

THEN You legit just compared her being raped to getting hit in a parking lot. In your comparison you clearly state that it's the fault of the person that gets hit in that comparison. This is the first time you've explicitly said it was her fault. Just stop talking.

 

You just might be the most arrogant, snide, condescending poster on this forum and you routinely put words into people's mouths. There isn't another poster on here that has gotten into more arguments with people over the years.  I've read right over most of your posts in the past because you just can't have a civilized conversation. I try sometimes to give it a chance and I usually end up regretting it.

 

I've said I wouldn't post here if I wasn't enjoying myself. Have a great afternoon.

[BuffaloBorn]

You clearly aren't reserving judgement like you claim. You actually believe that him professing his love to a girlfriend lessens the chance that he rapes somebody? Nobody here is saying he clearly raped somebody, so there is no bandwagon to jump on that one.

 

On your last line: it's "charges haven't been filed."

Yes, I think if he is in love with a girl of 3 years, statistically speaking, guys who stay in 3 year long relationships  generally don't cheat especially with some random girl at bar , drunk or not. When you make a 3 year commitment to a girl, and this goes for any man, you usually don't go to a bar to get laid common sense so i yes i " actually believe" him having a girlfriend of 3 years who he proclaimed his love to lessens the chance that any man would do something so shallow as to cheat with some random girl at a bar,

 

, and yes i agree with your point that charges haven't been filed, so what's your point? dude you don't have to be such an ass about it

Hey Hoss, you have a lot of posts. Proud of you bro, I can tell you use your free time very wisely

[That Aud Smell]

Tank4: My remark about dancing around the matter of sl_ut shaming wasn't directed to you per se. The fact that you took it that way, well.

[drnkirishone]

I skipped most of the last few pages. Just wanted to add a piece about the whole flirting and previous behavior and what you expect when "going home".

 

If she had no intention of sleeping with him and she accepted an invitation to take this party to his house. She is either niave or stupid if she was surprised he wanted to have sex. However it is still her right to say no and kanes responsibility to leave her alone.

To me this is similar to the smartgirl 101 stuff in regard to accepting drinks. Do I blame a girl for getting roofied? No. But damn it don't put yourself in vulnerable situations. Use common sense.

 

Having said this. If the story is true that she had a friend there and more people were there partying it sounds like she took precautions.

[qwksndmonster]

Dude. Seriously. Read this post again. You claim that you aren't placing the blame the. You go farther than you have yet.

Why is it stupid that she went to his house with friends? Also, we have no idea whose idea it was to go to his house. Maybe Kane invited her friend and she wanted to go with her friend? Going to somebody's house isn't stupid. Nobody is giving her a pass because there is no pass to be given. Going to an "after party" isn't stupid in this case.

 

THEN You legit just compared her being raped to getting hit in a parking lot. In your comparison you clearly state that it's the fault of the person that gets hit in that comparison. This is the first time you've explicitly said it was her fault. Just stop talking.

To expand on what Hoss is saying here:  Even if a girl flirts with a guy really hard at the bar and they're making out, dancing sexily, and she decides to go home with him there should be no percieved unspoken promise of sex.  Both people are aware that sex is a possibility, but it's an incredibly personal connection to make with someone (not everyone feels this way, alas).  If the girl goes home with the guy intending to have sex with him and changes her mind (sobering up, just wanna cuddle and talk, whatever), she is within her rights to do so.  That's not her being at fault for putting herself at risk to be raped, that's her trying to have agency in her sex life.

Edited August 10, 2015 by immerman

[TrueBlueGED]

So has SDS but so far neither one of them have questioned my posts in an attempt to clarify what might be a misunderstanding between us. I can't read their minds, I can't explain to them what they might not understand about my posts. Freeman might but SDS won't. He's already thrown in a couple digs at me and then ignored any follow up comments, not to mention he's been on me since the say I got here.

 

I think you need to understand the difference between 'rape' and 'sex'. See, you tell me that there might be misunderstandings and then you go and throw in the "she should have some reasonable expectation of being raped".........Nowhere have I said that and several times I've explained the difference. You're throwing in words in an attempt to discredit anything I've said. You claim I'm doing a poor job of expressing my views, yet you go and throw out something I never even mentioned. Try paying attention to what I've said instead of what you hoped I said.

 

And despite the pushback and criticism of my posts, I think I've been relatively civil with everybody here. If I've said anything awful, I'd certainly love for anybody to refresh my memory and I'll be glad to address it.

You said that if a woman meets a guy at a bar and goes home with him, she shouldn't be surprised when something bad happens. In the context of this entire conversation as well as your own post, what in the hell is "something bad" supposed to mean if not sexual assault? Surely you're not going to try to argue that what you really meant is she shouldn't be surprised to lose the $30 in her purse.

[Taro T]

I know you deleted your post asking the question, but I'll give this a shot anyway.

 

 

 

If we're not trying to attach some sort of blame to a victim, what exactly are are we giving them a pass for?

I know I'm going to regret jumping in here, but with brownouts rolling through it looks like I've got a few minutes to kill between trips to the basement to make sure it isn't flooding.

 

I may be misreading what JJ and some other posters are saying (and I'm not going anywhere near the parents / teenage girl thing from a few days ago) but with posts regarding whether it was a good idea to go to Kane's house that evening; I'd like to believe that is all that they are saying / mean when they say that. In hindsight, at minimum, it was a poor decision. Is it such a poor decision that she gains any responsibility for an attack? NO. That is a separate issue from culpability for a rape (if a rape did in fact occur). If she was raped, that is 100% on a guy that should spend many unpleasant years behind bars. (Rather than picking up victims in them.)

 

To say it was a poor decision to go to his house (especially in hindsight) is accurate. Does that put any of the responsibility for the rape itself (again, if she was raped, and we don't have reason to believe she wasn't at this point) on her? No.

 

Rape &/or sexual assault is a HIGHLY charged issue. If my wife or nieces were raped, I would want to kill the SOB. Because it is such a highly charged issue and elicits very emotional responses (heck, we've had at least 1 poster accuse 1/2 of the population of being misogynists), it is very tender ground to trod. I don't believe that the posters that have said it was a poor decision to go back to Kane's house meant anything more than just that. I'd also state that going to a celebrity's house with at least 1 friend is on the surface a less poor decision on it's face than many of us have made in our own youth with far less negative consequences than apparently happened on this occassion. But just because many of us have done dumber things, and people go to after parties all the time without incident, doesn't mean that going to the house of someone you apparently just met very late at night after drinking is not foolish.

 

Like I said, probably gonna regret this one.

[woods-racer]

I know I'm going to regret jumping in here, but with brownouts rolling through it looks like I've got a few minutes to kill between trips to the basement to make sure it isn't flooding.

 

I may be misreading what JJ and some other posters are saying (and I'm not going anywhere near the parents / teenage girl thing from a few days ago) but with posts regarding whether it was a good idea to go to Kane's house that evening; I'd like to believe that is all that they are saying / mean when they say that. In hindsight, at minimum, it was a poor decision. Is it such a poor decision that she gains any responsibility for an attack? NO. That is a separate issue from culpability for a rape (if a rape did in fact occur). If she was raped, that is 100% on a guy that should spend many unpleasant years behind bars. (Rather than picking up victims in them.)

 

To say it was a poor decision to go to his house (especially in hindsight) is accurate. Does that put any of the responsibility for the rape itself (again, if she was raped, and we don't have reason to believe she wasn't at this point) on her? No.

 

Rape &/or sexual assault is a HIGHLY charged issue. If my wife or nieces were raped, I would want to kill the SOB. Because it is such a highly charged issue and elicits very emotional responses (heck, we've had at least 1 poster accuse 1/2 of the population of being misogynists), it is very tender ground to trod. I don't believe that the posters that have said it was a poor decision to go back to Kane's house meant anything more than just that. I'd also state that going to a celebrity's house with at least 1 friend is on the surface a less poor decision on it's face than many of us have made in our own youth with far less negative consequences than apparently happened on this occassion. But just because many of us have done dumber things, and people go to after parties all the time without incident, doesn't mean that going to the house of someone you apparently just met very late at night after drinking is not foolish.

 

Like I said, probably gonna regret this one.

It's unfortunate that you seemed to find it necessary to put the last line in your post for fear of a personal attack because you gave a personal reflection of an alleged crime.

[Neo]

You've nailed it.  Thought process is why people speculate.  It's sure as hell why I speculate.

 

I love thinking.  Period.  I try not constrain myself in what I think, I only constrain myself in how I act (most of the time).  For example, I have often thought what would happen if while walking randomly down the street I just punched someone in the face.  I've never done this mind you because my respect towards others has always won out over the pure speculation of events that would occur should I initiate that action.

 

Likewise, I find fascination in the machinations of people. The act itself could be absolutely despicable but I am curious as to why it happened.  The human brain goes a long way to interfere with the balance that nature has so carefully crafted. The actions of people are fascinating and knowing that there is a chance of some kind of strange sub-plot out there is what draws people in.  Most of the time it's straightforward.  If you think about rape cases, most of them never even enter our minds.  There could have been someone raped in San Antonio last night and we'd not give it a second thought.  Now, this case involves a well known hockey player and happens to have occurred in a city that most of us all have a relationship with (even if it is just being a Sabres fan).  So we take on this added interest, moreover, we want to see who and what in the city are involved. it's like some kind of sick status update "Hey Look, we're capable of superstar athlete rape scenarios as well."  Sure it's a totally twisted status update, but the fact is that Buffalo now belongs to that fraternity.

 

So, I threw out there in my last post that I could speculate that someone could scheme to blackmail Patrick Kane basically by plotting to sleep with him and then claiming rape.  I'm in no way saying the person involved in this case did such a thing.

 

I also look at order of operations and the logical balance between them.

 

If Patrick Kane respected other human beings (I can't say he ONLY disrespects women) then he would not be in this situation.  It starts first with respecting the person you were in a relationship with. He could have thought about wanting to have sex with other women. He may have even speculated what it would be like. However, had his respect for others been stronger he would not have acted on it.  Even then, people slip up and cheat on the people they are in a relationship with.  I would speculate that it's easier to cheat when the sex is consensual.  Which brings me to the next point, he not only didn't respect his existing girlfriend and their relationship, but should he actually be guilty of forcing sex on this other woman he would not only clearly disrespected her but in addition have had so little respect for his GF that he was willing to rape another woman to have sex.  If I sit and speculate about that I find myself wanting to see Patrick Kane removed from the daily lexicon of society.  It's so abhorrently disgusting that I try not to speculate about how a brain could work that way.  I mean, clearly it can and I don't delude myself into thinking people are incapable of the actions.. I just wish they weren't.

 

I did have a couple of other thoughts to share.  Even though we are now reasonably certain (or 100% certain) that this does not involve a person incapable of consent. I had a thought surrounding that.  There is a discussion on how we would not hold that person accountable for their actions because they were under 17.  There were some analogies made and I believe they were all "not as serious" as rape.  However, if a 16 year old murders someone the court system is willing to consider trying them as an adult.  That is to say, assume in a random statutory rape case the underage person was willfully engaging in sex (despite the law not recognizing that).  The law says, that person cannot be treated as an adult and the adult is at fault.  Even if that 16 year old managed to create fake identification that was good enough to fool a staff trained at spotting fake identification (or are presumably actually checking) and enter an establishment and be in a setting that should not contain someone under the age of consent.  But, if that same person was strategic in their planning and carried out a murder the law allows for them to now be considered an adult.  In this entire situation please understand I am not saying that this person agreed to sex (regardless of the legal ability to do so).  Whereas a 16 year old who doesn't agree (regardless of their legal ability to do that as well) but was forced to have sex goes so far beyond just the statutory aspect of things.  (pure food for thought, speculation, and enlightened discussion).

 

Also, does EASports pull Kane from the upcoming NHL16 title?  You'd think they've started the RTM processes, the container printing, etc.  Glad I'm not the product manager on that game right now.

 

You had me at "hello".

[sicknfla]

I know I'm going to regret jumping in here, but with brownouts rolling through it looks like I've got a few minutes to kill between trips to the basement to make sure it isn't flooding.

 

I may be misreading what JJ and some other posters are saying (and I'm not going anywhere near the parents / teenage girl thing from a few days ago) but with posts regarding whether it was a good idea to go to Kane's house that evening; I'd like to believe that is all that they are saying / mean when they say that. In hindsight, at minimum, it was a poor decision. Is it such a poor decision that she gains any responsibility for an attack? NO. That is a separate issue from culpability for a rape (if a rape did in fact occur). If she was raped, that is 100% on a guy that should spend many unpleasant years behind bars. (Rather than picking up victims in them.)

 

To say it was a poor decision to go to his house (especially in hindsight) is accurate. Does that put any of the responsibility for the rape itself (again, if she was raped, and we don't have reason to believe she wasn't at this point) on her? No.

 

Rape &/or sexual assault is a HIGHLY charged issue. If my wife or nieces were raped, I would want to kill the SOB. Because it is such a highly charged issue and elicits very emotional responses (heck, we've had at least 1 poster accuse 1/2 of the population of being misogynists), it is very tender ground to trod. I don't believe that the posters that have said it was a poor decision to go back to Kane's house meant anything more than just that. I'd also state that going to a celebrity's house with at least 1 friend is on the surface a less poor decision on it's face than many of us have made in our own youth with far less negative consequences than apparently happened on this occassion. But just because many of us have done dumber things, and people go to after parties all the time without incident, doesn't mean that going to the house of someone you apparently just met very late at night after drinking is not foolish.

 

Like I said, probably gonna regret this one.

I think you are dead on with this. I am sure that there are many more that get exactly what is being said. A select handful like to argue and knock people down regardless the thread or topic.

[Neo]

I do not know if someone was raped, or not. I do not know if Kane raped someone, or not. I do not know if the victim of the alleged rape was 17, or not. I've considered dozens of scenarios. It's how I understand them. I am confident that my understandings would fall into any "he gets it" bucket any of us have. Considering out loud is a form of speculating. Considering out loud is not damning. Facts damn, or don't. I'm glad you all consider and speculate on any number of topics. It's why I come here. You inform me. You're all informing me on this most delicate and serious of topics. The animus pains me.

[K-9]

Yes, I think if he is in love with a girl of 3 years, statistically speaking, guys who stay in 3 year long relationships  generally don't cheat especially with some random girl at bar , drunk or not. When you make a 3 year commitment to a girl, and this goes for any man, you usually don't go to a bar to get laid common sense so i yes i " actually believe" him having a girlfriend of 3 years who he proclaimed his love to lessens the chance that any man would do something so shallow as to cheat with some random girl at a bar,

 

, and yes i agree with your point that charges haven't been filed, so what's your point? dude you don't have to be such an ass about it

Hey Hoss, you have a lot of posts. Proud of you bro, I can tell you use your free time very wisely

I'll wait for the process to play itself out with regard to Kane being charged with and/or guilty of anything, but just to be clear, raping a girl has nothing to do with "cheating" on your girlfriend. 

[darksabre]

I know I'm going to regret jumping in here, but with brownouts rolling through it looks like I've got a few minutes to kill between trips to the basement to make sure it isn't flooding.

 

I may be misreading what JJ and some other posters are saying (and I'm not going anywhere near the parents / teenage girl thing from a few days ago) but with posts regarding whether it was a good idea to go to Kane's house that evening; I'd like to believe that is all that they are saying / mean when they say that. In hindsight, at minimum, it was a poor decision. Is it such a poor decision that she gains any responsibility for an attack? NO. That is a separate issue from culpability for a rape (if a rape did in fact occur). If she was raped, that is 100% on a guy that should spend many unpleasant years behind bars. (Rather than picking up victims in them.)

 

To say it was a poor decision to go to his house (especially in hindsight) is accurate. Does that put any of the responsibility for the rape itself (again, if she was raped, and we don't have reason to believe she wasn't at this point) on her? No.

 

Rape &/or sexual assault is a HIGHLY charged issue. If my wife or nieces were raped, I would want to kill the SOB. Because it is such a highly charged issue and elicits very emotional responses (heck, we've had at least 1 poster accuse 1/2 of the population of being misogynists), it is very tender ground to trod. I don't believe that the posters that have said it was a poor decision to go back to Kane's house meant anything more than just that. I'd also state that going to a celebrity's house with at least 1 friend is on the surface a less poor decision on it's face than many of us have made in our own youth with far less negative consequences than apparently happened on this occassion. But just because many of us have done dumber things, and people go to after parties all the time without incident, doesn't mean that going to the house of someone you apparently just met very late at night after drinking is not foolish.

 

Like I said, probably gonna regret this one.

I never said it wasn't their fault being raped. I said it was their fault they didn't use common sense to avoid a situation like that altogether.

 

She voluntarily went to his house, with a witness...........................

 

It's a 'blame somebody else' society. Why not find a way to blame the driver for taking her there? Can we blame the beer company for having alcohol in their drinks? If she wasn't 21, let's find a way to blame the person that made the fake ID. Should we blame the bartender who doesn't have the benefit of testing each person's BAC before giving them another drink?

 

Personal responsibility................. it's an endangered species.

 

The problem here is you're giving JJ too much benefit of the doubt. Read this post from earlier where he claims that the alleged victim needed to be more personally responsible. That's a pretty strange statement is it not? That if she had been more responsible she'd have never even gone to the home of Patrick Kane, and that every subsequent act could have been avoided as a result. But that steps beyond "common sense" doesn't it? Assuming that going to Patrick Kane's house is on its face a dangerous idea is rather unreasonable for all parties involved no?

 

I think it sets out a slippery slope. What other things that are rather mundane should we avoid in order to ensure that nothing bad ever happens to us?

[inkman]

To expand on what Hoss is saying here: Even if a girl flirts with a guy really hard at the bar and they're making out, dancing sexily, and she decides to go home with him there should be no percieved unspoken promise of sex. Both people are aware that sex is a possibility, but it's an incredibly personal connection to make with someone (not everyone feels this way, alas). If the girl goes home with the guy intending to have sex with him and changes her mind (sobering up, just wanna cuddle and talk, whatever), she is within her rights to do so.

There is certainly no promise of sex but it's within reasonable expectations. Depending on conversation, it may be a foregone conclusion. I've hooked up more times than i care to admit and it's ended in intercourse 90% of the time. It's kinda what happens. Now these were all one on one situations. I think them leaving as a group is important.

[Taro T]

The problem here is you're giving JJ too much benefit of the doubt. Read this post from earlier where he claims that the alleged victim needed to be more personally responsible. That's a pretty strange statement is it not? That if she had been more responsible she'd have never even gone to the home of Patrick Kane, and that every subsequent act could have been avoided as a result. But that steps beyond "common sense" doesn't it? Assuming that going to Patrick Kane's house is on its face a dangerous idea is rather unreasonable for all parties involved no?

I think it sets out a slippery slope. What other things that are rather mundane should we avoid in order to ensure that nothing bad ever happens to us?

There absolutely is the possibility that people can miss an awful lot that life has to offer if they are worried about never having bad things happen. Not sure though that going to the house of a rich celebrity that has a bit of reputation for being a jerk extremely late at night after meeting said celebrity in a bar meets the definition of "rather mundane."

 

And as I'd said in my last post, going to the house of someone famous while you have at least 1 friend with you would not necessarily, on its face, be the stupidest thing a person has ever done.

[LastPommerFan]

Bite marks != rape. I've heard of scratch marks being present in rape as a struggle, but I can't really see biting being used to overpower someone

 

According to the News, she had scratch marks. They updated the story since I last read it to add that piece.

 

http://www.buffalonews.com/feed/new-details-emerge-in-allegations-against-nhl-star-patrick-kane-20150809

[LTS]

 

The problem here is you're giving JJ too much benefit of the doubt. Read this post from earlier where he claims that the alleged victim needed to be more personally responsible. That's a pretty strange statement is it not? That if she had been more responsible she'd have never even gone to the home of Patrick Kane, and that every subsequent act could have been avoided as a result. But that steps beyond "common sense" doesn't it? Assuming that going to Patrick Kane's house is on its face a dangerous idea is rather unreasonable for all parties involved no?

 

I think it sets out a slippery slope. What other things that are rather mundane should we avoid in order to ensure that nothing bad ever happens to us?

 

I disagree on it being a strange statement.

 

It is absolutely 100% true that if she does not make the decision to go back to his house that she would not have been raped there. It's not about expectation or who's to blame or common sense per se. It's about the inability of an act to occur when the preceding events do not take place to create the scenario for that act to occur. She is responsible for making a decision. It's a decision that each of us can ask ourselves "Would we do that?". I don't know that I would consider that decision to be something mundane however.

 

What is wrong to assign to her some level of expectation to be raped as a result of making that decision.

 

Everyone should take a moment and answer this simple question.

 

Until this story broke, what was the probability that you expected to see Patrick Kane being investigated for a rape charge?

 

Answer that, then go back and be the woman making a split second decision about going to his house.

[Huckleberry]

I know you weren't trying to help me, but this is the core of what I'm trying to get to. The rationale behind trying to find ways to excuse the accused rapist of things that are logically inexcusable. 

This and im actually bothered this thread has 22 pages already to, I mean we are looking towards atleast another year of this ######.

Now im not from buffalo like most of you guys, but unless this involves a player currently on our roster I really don't feel like we should be going on about this much longer.

Edited August 10, 2015 by Huckleberry

[darksabre]

I disagree on it being a strange statement.

 

It is absolutely 100% true that if she does not make the decision to go back to his house that she would not have been raped there. It's not about expectation or who's to blame or common sense per se. It's about the inability of an act to occur when the preceding events do not take place to create the scenario for that act to occur. She is responsible for making a decision. It's a decision that each of us can ask ourselves "Would we do that?". I don't know that I would consider that decision to be something mundane however.

 

What is wrong to assign to her some level of expectation to be raped as a result of making that decision.

 

Everyone should take a moment and answer this simple question.

 

Until this story broke, what was the probability that you expected to see Patrick Kane being investigated for a rape charge?

 

Answer that, then go back and be the woman making a split second decision about going to his house.

I can't really answer that question. I've never been around Patrick Kane. I don't know what cues he might give off.

 

The best I can do is assume the dude really likes to party. And if I like to party then maybe Patrick is a good candidate to party with.

 

But I don't think I can extrapolate that out to sexual predator. Not prior to the accusation.

[Hoss]

What is wrong to assign to her some level of expectation to be raped as a result of making that decision.

 

Everyone should take a moment and answer this simple question.

 

Until this story broke, what was the probability that you expected to see Patrick Kane being investigated for a rape charge?

 

Answer that, then go back and be the woman making a split second decision about going to his house.

To the bold: nobody should ever have to expect to be raped in this world. Obviously if you got on family watch dog and start knocking on those doors after midnight then MAYBE.

I can understand the arguments about a potential expectation of sex, but an exectation of rape? Never. I suspect that you meant an expectation is sex, right?

 

To the second part: I never would've randomly conjured a thought that Kane could be a rapist, but if you were to ask me which NHL players may be most likely he would be near the top considering past actions (none of which even compare to rape but are much more than most NHLers). But, as d1msabre (jk :P) pointed out, I have no clue what type of individual he is in person or when he is attracted to somebody/drunk.

 

One thing that's also not been said as far as I can see: is it crazy to think she may have had no idea about Kane's past actions? Who knows whether she is a sports/hockey fan or aware that Kane has a history of drunken stupidity.

Edited August 11, 2015 by Hoss

[ParkMeadow]

As an old guy, definitely in the grey beard category, and father of two daughters / grandfather of five beautiful girls, I'd like to make a few observations regarding this thread.

1. I read this forum almost daily because the discussions are generally well thought out, civil and far different (in a good way) than most other sports fan sites.

2. Almost every poster on this topic has correctly stated preemptively that rape is a heinous crime.

3. As best I can tell, there has been very little factual information released by the authorities about this case.

4. Some posters seem to have already formed strong opinions about what happened.

5. Ad hominem attacks of others based on differences of speculation on what may or may not have occurred have no place in an intelligent discussion.

6. I see no fault in urging young women to avoid putting themselves in risky situations; in fact I try to remind my loved ones of this often.

7. More importantly, I regularly teach my sons and grandsons to always treat women with respect and understand that no means no.

8. Rape is a violent and heinous crime.

 

We can only hope that as this case unfolds, justice will be served. In the meantime, I think that some here who have worked themselves into a lather about things others have said need to take a deep breath and wait to see what really happened.

That's my two cents. Now I'll go back to lurking.

[BagBoy]

This thread should be required reading for Sociology students. Not even kidding.