NHL says the 5 players acquitted of sexual assault are ineligible to join league

[Big_G]

The NHL is barring five players acquitted of sexual assault from re-entering the league, announcing the decision in a statement on Friday. The five players — Michael McLeod, Dillon Dubé, Cal Foote, Alex Formenton and Carter Hart — were found not guilty of sexual assault charges on Thursday.

--snip--

With the Hockey Canada trial complete, the NHL has determined that the five players involved in the trial will be ineligible to play in the League — bluntly answering post-trial questions about the players' hockey futures.

"The allegations made in this case, even if not determined to have been criminal, were very disturbing and the behavior at issue was unacceptable. We will be reviewing and considering the judge's findings," the league said in Friday's statement. "While we conduct that analysis and determine next steps, the players charged in this case are ineligible to play in the League."

The NHL Players' Association quickly pushed back on the decision, releasing its own statement defending the players and saying that they are "addressing this dispute with the League."

"Dillon Dube, Cal Foote, Alex Formenton, Carter Hart, and Michael McLeod were acquitted of all charges by Justice Carroccia of the Ontario Superior Court," the NHLPA said. "After missing more than a full season of their respective NHL careers, they should now have the opportunity to return to work. The NHL’s declaration that the Players are 'ineligible' to play pending its further analysis of the Court's findings is inconsistent with the discipline procedures set forth in the CBA."

MORE

[mph6689new]

I am surprised to hear the NHL reaction is this with a “not guilty”, but I do not know the facts very well. If it was gross or lude acts, but legal and everyone involved consented, it’s hard to see how the NHL could say ineligible.

Interested t9 understand what happened and why this reaction.

[mph6689new]

This context helps some, if true.

Yesterday the NHL came out and claimed that these players are still ineligible while the NHL itself goes through the court findings. This is not surprising. The NHL has a big morality clause in their contracts and takes this various seriously before reinstating players… however there’s a lot of gray areas here because this instant happened before these players were under contract in the NHL. They were 18 years old..

Makes it sound like the NHL wants to investigate further before a final ruling. I can appreciate that.

[theograce]

MacT was convicted of killing a mother

…but that’s ok lol

[MikoTython]

MacT was convicted of killing a mother

…but that’s ok lol

You know, my thought as well. Tocchet was running a gambling ring. R Ramage killed Keith Magnusson, Quenneville's back in the league. They have strange, inconsistent, standards.

But ban the kids for life. Yeah.

[theograce]

MacT was convicted of killing a mother

…but that’s ok lol

You know, my thought as well. Tocchet was running a gambling ring. R Ramage killed Keith Magnusson, Quenneville's back in the league. They have strange, inconsistent, standards.

But ban the kids for life. Yeah.

ROR committed multiple offenses, lied to Police and slandered an innocent woman. But that’s ok too. Kappy arrested for driving wasted. Not severe enough.

If you’re found not guilty, you shouldn’t face judgment/discrimination

The fact a guy convicted of killed a young mother can be in the NHL is complete joke compared to this

[skilles]

Interesting concept to even consider not allowing players in the league because at some point in their lives they did something that some people find immoral.

[billybaseball]

If the NHL bans them then they will lose a very lucrative lawsuit. Absolutely no standing to ban these guys after the court case made it clear that it was not nearly as serious as first believed.

[smilinjoefission]

Canada has some weird statutes that might allow them to sue if they can't be reinstated in Canada since they were found Not Guilty...might get interesting.

[Pierre McGuire]

They will be eligible again. NHL just doing what it should do. Carter Hart won’t have any shortage of suitors.

[TAFKAP]

MacT was convicted of killing a mother

…but that’s ok lol

You know, my thought as well. Tocchet was running a gambling ring. R Ramage killed Keith Magnusson, Quenneville's back in the league. They have strange, inconsistent, standards.

But ban the kids for life. Yeah.

I'm not going to wade any deeper into this, as I have issues with this subject unrelated to this case. You're a good dude, and this is a touchy subject for a lot of people, for a lot of reasons. Let's try not to jump to conclusions, until there is a conclusion to jump to.

"While we conduct that analysis and determine next steps, the players charged in this case are ineligible to play in the League."

is nowhere near

"But ban the kids for life. Yeah."

[Army's Mom]

If the NHL bans them then they will lose a very lucrative lawsuit. Absolutely no standing to ban these guys after the court case made it clear that it was not nearly as serious as first believed.

The judge simply ruled the alleged victim's testimony was not enough to rely on. Given the time and inebriation, thats not all that surprising.

It doesnt mean there's "no standing" for other disciplinary processes like the League's. Amd while we dont know exactly what the League process entails, the PA hasn't sued to stop it - thst tells me the NHL hasn't overstepped yet.

The court ruling also doesnt "make it clear it wasn't as serious as first believed". These cases are notoriously difficult to prosecute, and this case shows why. I would caution against drawing any conclusions from this trial, which still may be appealed.

Why? For starters, the witnesses credibility goes both ways. If she was too inebriated for her account to be credible, she likely was too inebriated to give meaningful consent...

The NHL is likely more concerned with the actions of these players from the time they signed contracts to present as pertains to this case.

Did they cooperate with the investigation? Did they conspire to hide facts or obstruct the investigation? Did they destroy evidence? Did they manipulate witnesses?

None of those questions were relevant to the criminal case, but are absolutely fair game for a broader morals clause inquiry.

[billybaseball]

If the NHL bans them then they will lose a very lucrative lawsuit. Absolutely no standing to ban these guys after the court case made it clear that it was not nearly as serious as first believed.

The judge simply ruled the alleged victim's testimony was not enough to rely on. Given the time and inebriation, thats not all that surprising.

It doesnt mean there's "no standing" for other disciplinary processes like the League's. Amd while we dont know exactly what the League process entails, the PA hasn't sued to stop it - thst tells me the NHL hasn't overstepped yet.

The court ruling also doesnt "make it clear it wasn't as serious as first believed". These cases are notoriously difficult to prosecute, and this case shows why. I would caution against drawing any conclusions from this trial, which still may be appealed.

Why? For starters, the witnesses credibility goes both ways. If she was too inebriated for her account to be credible, she likely was too inebriated to give meaningful consent...

The NHL is likely more concerned with the actions of these players from the time they signed contracts to present as pertains to this case.

Did they cooperate with the investigation? Did they conspire to hide facts or obstruct the investigation? Did they destroy evidence? Did they manipulate witnesses?

None of those questions were relevant to the criminal case, but are absolutely fair game for a broader morals clause inquiry.

Did you follow the trial? My statement has little to do about the judgment. The trial made it very clear that their was no case to be made against the players. It's not just a he said/she said. Even worst case of what the prosecution claimed would have cleared the players. They claimed her consent and eagerness was just a defense mechanism because the presence of the players alone was threatening. That is a ridiculous claim. She also was not intoxicated. She didn't drink after the bar and there is video evidence that clearly shows that she was not intoxicated to the point that she couldn't give consent when leaving the bar. The other players showed up 2-4 hours after she got to the hotel room. The videos in the hotel room shows her perfectly sober with no signs at all of any intoxication.

BTW. The girl never wanted charges filed in the first place. The players should sue the crown for bringing up ridiculous charges against them

[MikoTython]

MacT was convicted of killing a mother

…but that’s ok lol

You know, my thought as well. Tocchet was running a gambling ring. R Ramage killed Keith Magnusson, Quenneville's back in the league. They have strange, inconsistent, standards.

But ban the kids for life. Yeah.

I'm not going to wade any deeper into this, as I have issues with this subject unrelated to this case. You're a good dude, and this is a touchy subject for a lot of people, for a lot of reasons. Let's try not to jump to conclusions, until there is a conclusion to jump to.

"While we conduct that analysis and determine next steps, the players charged in this case are ineligible to play in the League."

is nowhere near

"But ban the kids for life. Yeah."

I respect you as well, it really goes without saying. You know what you're talking about. I'm not actually very informed upon the total contour of this incident, but have a hard time seeing every single one of these kids banned. But, having said that, I've been wrong before.

[moose-and-squirrel]

I predict that if/when they become eligible, EDM signs Hart immediately

[BrummerStealsHome]

The NHL did a defensible thing here, and I agree with it.

If you want to argue with that, fine, but at least show you have some gray matter and argue about the real situation, and not the telephone version presented by many posters here. TAFKAP summed it up nicely earlier.