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

[Fidelio]

If it was my daughter and she was 21 and wasn't drunk, I wouldn't find anything irresponsible about any of it — even ending in consensual sex. Does responsibility only enter into the picture because of the rape? If not, you and at least one other poster sound downright puritanical.

 

---

If the News is accurate in reporting that she had a bite mark, isn't that pretty close to a smoking gun?

 

This hasn't been mentioned here, probably out of sensitivity. But we're pretty far down the rabbit hole now. And everyone has the same question in mind — did he do it?

 

Your manipulating unknowns and treating them as facts to suit your cause, like many here, and so this isn't a debate its more like a witch hunt.

As far as Im aware, we don't know her age, her behavior/demeanor at the club (definitively, and the credible rumors we do have suggest she was flagrantly flirting), her personality, her past,  where those bite marks came from, what the rape kit revealed, etc... mostly all of the circumstances of the incident,... and you have all already convicted Patrick Kane of rape in your minds and you are ardently and blindly defending any and all suggestion (no matter how reasonable) to the contrary with no regard for rationality or due course.  

To top this off, and ill say it ONE MORE TIME, I DIDNT SAY RAPE IS OK OR THAT SHE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR BEING RAPED IF IT HAPPENED, and BEFORE THIS I WASNT EVEN COMMENTING ON WHETHER THE RAPE OCCURRED OR NOT.. I'm just saying lets slow down and wait for the story to unfold before we hang the guy.

That is why we have this thing in our society called due process.. you know... innocent until proven guilty... because peoples emotional attachments and sensitivities (no matter how personal valid) cause them to make knee jerk assumptions and THAT is a dangerous, antiquated way of thinking/ being. 

Edited August 10, 2015 by Tank4Matthews16

[Sabres Fan in NS]

This is the closest to "she asked for it" that I've seen so far.

 

That first sentence convinced me that is what he thinks.  I didn't even read the rest.  Disgusting, indeed.

 

 

This hasn't been mentioned here, probably out of sensitivity. But we're pretty far down the rabbit hole now. And everyone has the same question in mind — did he do it?

 

We are far down that hole, is right.

 

Since we are not using so many words, as of yet, I will say that I have made up my mind in regards to your question above.

[MattPie]

Your manipulating unknowns and treating them as facts to suit your cause, like many here, and so this isn't a debate its more like a witch hunt.

As far as Im aware, we don't know her age, her behavior/demeanor at the club (definitively, and the credible rumors we do have suggest she was flagrantly flirting), her personality, her past,  where those bite marks came from, what the rape kit revealed, etc... mostly all of the circumstances of the incident,... and you have all already convicted Patrick Kane of rape in your minds and you are ardently and blindly defending any and all suggestion (no matter how reasonable) to the contrary with no regard for rationality or due course.  

To top this off, and ill say it ONE MORE TIME, I DIDNT SAY RAPE IS OK OR THAT SHE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR BEING RAPED IF IT HAPPENED, and BEFORE THIS I WASNT EVEN COMMENTING ON WHETHER THE RAPE OCCURRED OR NOT.. I'm just saying lets slow down and wait for the story to unfold before we hang the guy.

That is why we have this thing in our society called due process.. you know... innocent until proven guilty... because peoples emotional attachments and sensitivities (no matter how personal valid) cause them to make knee jerk assumptions and THAT is a dangerous, antiquated way of thinking/ being. 

 

First bold: Turns out, none of that matters. Again, how hard is this to understand?

 

Second bold: If you're saying she's not responsible, how does any of her behavior up to the point she said no matter?

 

General thought: I don't think anyone here has even suggested that he did it. I certainly don't know and don't have the facts to make a guess. I'm not sure who you're yelling at.

[Fidelio]

That first sentence convinced me that is what he thinks.  I didn't even read the rest.  Disgusting, indeed.

 

 

We are far down that hole, is right.

 

Since we are not using so many words, as of yet, I will say that I have made up my mind in regards to your question above.

Case in point.

[MattPie]

Case in point.

 

Of what? That one poster has made up his mind but isn't sharing that with anyone since he knows that it's speculation?

[Fidelio]

First bold: Turns out, none of that matters. Again, how hard is this to understand?

 

Second bold: If you're saying she's not responsible, how does any of her behavior up to the point she said no matter?

 

General thought: I don't think anyone here has even suggested that he did it. I certainly don't know and don't have the facts to make a guess. I'm not sure who you're yelling at.

We clearly aren't having a conversation.

 

First bold: It matters within the context of a simple conversation between two people that you are not considering (of course) to fit your point. 

Second Bold: Speak English

General Thought:  If you don't think your inferring or defense against anyone speaking in a way that even remotely resembles "not exactly what you wanna hear" is proof of your decision than I suggest some serious introspection.

Of what? That one poster has made up his mind but isn't sharing that with anyone since he knows that it's speculation?

 But he did share it.. With everyone.

[nfreeman]

This is the closest to "she asked for it" that I've seen so far.

 

I think JJ50's posts have been worse. 

[Fidelio]

Im speaking from a place of moderation and caution and getting blasted as if I had held the girl down and watched. 

Just because you can mask your feelings with tonal adjustments does not eradicate their existence. 

Of what? That one poster has made up his mind but isn't sharing that with anyone since he knows that it's speculation?

 

But just so you understand Mattpie lets  recap:

 

Weave: She was responsible because she went with a friend.

Tank: No, i disagree, thats not responsible.  And i think a lot of framing is going on here on top of some hypocrisy.

End scene.....

WAIT INCOMING

posters x5 : your disgusting, your saying rape is ok, how do you not understand that its not ok to force yourself on someone.

Need i continue?

[MattPie]

We clearly aren't having a conversation.

 

First bold: It matters within the context of a simple conversation between two people that you are not considering (of course) to fit your point. 

Second Bold: Speak English

General Thought:  If you don't think your inferring or defense against anyone speaking in a way that even remotely resembles "not exactly what you wanna hear" is proof of your decision than I suggest some serious introspection.

 But he did share it.. With everyone.

 

I thought we were having a debate, where I ask questions about your stance and you try to elaborate your thoughts. Except that you're not answering my questions.

 

I'll ask directly: if, as you stated, a woman is not responsible for being raped, why would her demeanor in a bar beforehand matter? Note that we're not talking specifically this case.

[shrader]

I do get a kick out of this idea that even though we have no idea who she is, we actually do know how she was behaving at the bar.  I know it was covered thoroughly upthread, but some (ok, one) still seem to think that the Croce comments have to be about the accuser.

[Fidelio]

Her demeanor at a bar ( in my most recent post) would only be a suggestive tool for investigators to take into account when examining the whole of the evidence in the absence of something concrete. 

If similar circumstantial evidence mounts up, i.e. she was throwing herself at him, has a history of manipulating, misbehavior , found to have made false claims etc, and in the end all the detectives have to go on is heresay, then it matters (in the pursuit of truth) because it becomes one persons word over another.  

I do get a kick out of this idea that even though we have no idea who she is, we actually do know how she was behaving at the bar.  I know it was covered thoroughly upthread, but some (ok, one) still seem to think that the Croce comments have to be about the accuser.

 

No one said they knew how she was behaving at the bar.

Her demeanor at a bar ( in my most recent post) would only be a suggestive tool for investigators to take into account when examining the whole of the evidence in the absence of something concrete. 

If similar circumstantial evidence mounts up, i.e. she was throwing herself at him, has a history of manipulating, misbehavior , found to have made false claims etc, and in the end all the detectives have to go on is heresay, then it matters (in the pursuit of truth) because it becomes one persons word over another.  

 

No one said they knew how she was behaving at the bar.

These are all what ifs, thats my whole point.

[3putt]

You haven't lived until you've had late-night dollar-a-piece street tacos out of a trailer like this in a true barrio.

 

So true, but unfortunately, here in Chiraq there is a greater than average chance of getting lead "poisoning" due the fact that street gangs are now trying to establish certain trucks as their property.  Many are closing up shop instead of being in the middle.  Shame.

[qwksndmonster]

T4M, please stop.  Admit that you're wrong.  Modern Rules of Engagement dictate that one should expect sex from a stranger?  On any given night, a person shouldn't even expect sex from their significant other.

[sicknfla]

Being the Criminal Minds junkie that I am I an ready to give my "profile" based on what we currently know.

 

The victim was most likely drunk and hanging out with the subject. The subject knowing that when he invites previous females back to his house is expecting sex - not a tour of his lovely home.

 

The victim, most likely drunk or not capable of making a sound decision agrees to go back to this house. The subject initiates what he came home for. The victim either allowed the subject to have sex with her - without her true consent - or told the subject NO. The subject, not used to being told no and always getting what he wants, proceeded anyways. In his eyes he probably felt it wasn't rape - more like "what did she think we were going to do". However, to his surprise what he did was wrong and should be arrested for it. However, it is so difficult to prove all of this he will most likely walk.

 

As always profiles can be wrong but this is what I am going with.

Edited August 10, 2015 by sicknfla

[That Aud Smell]

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

[Fidelio]

T4M, please stop.  Admit that you're wrong.  Modern Rules of Engagement dictate that one should expect sex from a stranger?  On any given night, a person shouldn't even expect sex from their significant other.

 

Your twisting my words, thats not what I said, its slanting, its out of context and its irrelevant to the point.  But your right, I should relent, and will soon, because rationality  has  clearly left this forum.

[MattPie]

Being the Criminal Minds junkie that I am I an ready to give my "profile" based on what we currently know.

 

The victim was most likely drunk and hanging out with the subject. The subject knowing that when he invites previous females back to his house is expecting sex - not a tour of his lovely home.

 

The victim, most likely drunk or not capable of making a sound decision agrees to go back to this house. The subject initiates what he came home for. The victim either allowed the subject to have sex with her - without her true consent - or told the subject NO. The subject, not used to being told no and always getting what he wants, proceeded anyways. In his eyes he probably felt it wasn't rape - more like "what did she think we were going to do". However, to his surprise what he did was wrong and should be arrested for it. However, it is so difficult to prove all of this he will most likely walk.

 

As always profiles can be wrong but this is what I am going with.

 

I think you're jumping the gun. Theoutline up to "NO" seems possible and maybe even likely. After that, speculation.

Edited August 10, 2015 by MattPie

[Fidelio]

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

 

Amazing how ones proclivities can warp his perception until it does not even slightly resemble reality.

Your making assumptions about me, my life and what  I feel based off of a comment that you misread. Good on you bud.

Being the Criminal Minds junkie that I am I an ready to give my "profile" based on what we currently know.

 

The victim was most likely drunk and hanging out with the subject. The subject knowing that when he invites previous females back to his house is expecting sex - not a tour of his lovely home.

 

The victim, most likely drunk or not capable of making a sound decision agrees to go back to this house. The subject initiates what he came home for. The victim either allowed the subject to have sex with her - without her true consent - or told the subject NO. The subject, not used to being told no and always getting what he wants, proceeded anyways. In his eyes he probably felt it wasn't rape - more like "what did she think we were going to do". However, to his surprise what he did was wrong and should be arrested for it. However, it is so difficult to prove all of this he will most likely walk.

 

As always profiles can be wrong but this is what I am going with.

 

Thank you for submitting an opinion and not including (explicitly or otherwise) character attacks. 

[sicknfla]

I think you're jumping the gun. Theoutline up to "NO" seems possible and maybe even likely. After that, speculation.

Total speculation on my part. Just think this is how it played out and will play out. I have absolutely zero evidence to why other than case history.

[3putt]

Being the Criminal Minds junkie that I am I an ready to give my "profile" based on what we currently know.

 

The victim was most likely drunk and hanging out with the subject. The subject knowing that when he invites previous females back to his house is expecting sex - not a tour of his lovely home.

 

The victim, most likely drunk or not capable of making a sound decision agrees to go back to this house. The subject initiates what he came home for. The victim either allowed the subject to have sex with her - without her true consent - or told the subject NO. The subject, not used to being told no and always getting what he wants, proceeded anyways. In his eyes he probably felt it wasn't rape - more like "what did she think we were going to do". However, to his surprise what he did was wrong and should be arrested for it. However, it is so difficult to prove all of this he will most likely walk.

 

As always profiles can be wrong but this is what I am going with.

That is not a profile that is supposition about a sequence of events.  

[darksabre]

This thread is a f*cking trainwreck. 

[sicknfla]

That is not a profile that is supposition about a sequence of events.

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

[Fidelio]

This thread is a f*cking trainwreck. 

I can't sense your level of sincerity through text, but please, elaborate.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

If this poster isn't someone who was previously banned, I will eat an item off of the Mighty Taco menu.

 

That other new poster sounds familiar, as well.

 

Oh, I hate Mighty.

[shrader]

That other new poster sounds familiar, as well.

 

 

 

The timing is awfully convenient for both.