Dube

[skilles]

Dillon Dube grew up in Golden, British Columbia. A small town where his dad worked for A cheese company and his grandmother taught him how to skate and his grandparents were heavily involved in his upbringing. This does not seem to at all be a matter of a privileged/poor upbringing.

[ratonmono2]

Dillon Dube grew up in Golden, British Columbia. A small town where his dad worked for A cheese company and his grandmother taught him how to skate and his grandparents were heavily involved in his upbringing. This does not seem to at all be a matter of a privileged/poor upbringing.

That's missing the point entirely. The issue here is the system that exists which perpetuates, enables, and covers up these scandals. Team Canada had a slush fund to cover these things. Not all of them were cases of consensual buggery. This is a decades and decades old problem. Is there a contradiction with teenage behavior and society's norms? Absolutely. What we need addressed is the culture and system built up around the sport which enables this sort of thing. We can't control or alter teenage brains, we absolutely can control and alter the environment which they are socialized into as part of being an athlete.

[skilles]

Dillon Dube grew up in Golden, British Columbia. A small town where his dad worked for A cheese company and his grandmother taught him how to skate and his grandparents were heavily involved in his upbringing. This does not seem to at all be a matter of a privileged/poor upbringing.

That's missing the point entirely. The issue here is the system that exists which perpetuates, enables, and covers up these scandals. Team Canada had a slush fund to cover these things. Not all of them were cases of consensual buggery. This is a decades and decades old problem. Is there a contradiction with teenage behavior and society's norms? Absolutely. What we need addressed is the culture and system built up around the sport which enables this sort of thing. We can't control or alter teenage brains, we absolutely can control and alter the environment which they are socialized into as part of being an athlete.

I'm gonna bet they were absolutely almost 100% "cases of consensual buggery"

They only difference between them and a lot of teen males is woman say yes more often.

I mean seriously what do you think is more likely?

1. Five elite male hockey players that have no problem finding hook ups but are all into gang raping women instead happen to be hanging out together

2. One female happen to be ok with hooking up with 5 elite star athletes?

Keep in mind I'm not assuming she lied or accusing her of it....the female judge did that not me.

Of course they have to have a fund to cover these things, they are trucking teenage boys around the world partying it up. I'm sure they cause all kinds of trouble.

I grew up with some guys that ended up having a very popular band, the only difference between them and most teeage/early 20s guys was women wanted to do crazy immoral things with them.

That is the problem with the star athlete "culture" women let them.

Women do immoral things to.

[Smith2Herr]

I believe the team started the turnaround when he arrived. He’s been fantastic in the playoffs. He’s a Center which we desperately need.

He was very young, and I believe he was not even convicted, although there was certainly some bad behavior in bad choices.

I would ask that, and even some of the older players have his behavior has been and if it looks like he’s learned and grown up, give him a second chance.

Here comes the “we all did dumb stuff at 19” crowd.

Right on cue.

This is extra hilarious/sad coming from an adult you of all people having twice asked this board to forgive you your behavior here.

Or has it been three times?

You can't make this up.

I think he's as big of a blowhard egomaniac dumb take writing guy as anyone but comparing his forum behavior and taking advantage of an intoxicated woman isn't even comparable.

Everyone was intoxicated

Which changes what exactly?

I don't know, you tell me? You brought up intoxication.

for the victim it changes the ability to be able to consent.. for the perpetrator it doesn't change a thing.

What makes A person the victim?

If you can't see how the girl was the victim in the situation we've got nothing else to discuss and you need a look in the mirror.

Even if there was no crime committed she was 100% the victim in this situation and any morally correct man would have removed her from the situation knowing she was drunk and even if she said she was OK with it.

At best the group took advantage of a comprised individual and should ashamed of themselves for doing it regardless if she said she was OK with it.

Oh I disagree completely, if all parties were willing she is just as responsible for her drunken bad choices as they are IMO.

To be honest I can't even wrap my head around why you would think if they all got drunk and did it together anyone is more guilty than the others.

Because there were 5 of them and 1 of her.. this should not be a difficult thing to understand...

Right. It certainly wasn’t a difficult thing to understand for the judge in Dube’s case. He found the accuser's charge not credible and not reliable. So not difficult at all.

[DawgDad]

The judge was a woman, Maria Carroccia.

From wikipedia, a quote from her:

"Although the slogan "Believe the victim" has become popularized of late, it has no place in a criminal trial. To approach a trial with the assumption that the complainant is telling the truth is the equivalent of imposing a presumption of guilt on the person accused of sexual assault and then placing a burden on him to prove his innocence. That is antithetical to the fundamental principles of justice enshrined in our constitution and the values underlying our free and democratic society."[84][85]

Keep in mind this is in Canada.

[Smith2Herr]

The judge was a woman, Maria Carroccia.

From wikipedia, a quote from her:

"Although the slogan "Believe the victim" has become popularized of late, it has no place in a criminal trial. To approach a trial with the assumption that the complainant is telling the truth is the equivalent of imposing a presumption of guilt on the person accused of sexual assault and then placing a burden on him to prove his innocence. That is antithetical to the fundamental principles of justice enshrined in our constitution and the values underlying our free and democratic society."[84][85]

Keep in mind this is in Canada.

My bad. Thought I remembered judge being referred to as “he.” Why do you say, “Keep in mind this is Canada”? Just curious.

[Walter Sobchak00]

Here comes the “we all did dumb stuff at 19” crowd.

Right on cue.

This is extra hilarious/sad coming from an adult you of all people having twice asked this board to forgive you your behavior here.

Or has it been three times?

You can't make this up.

I think he's as big of a blowhard egomaniac dumb take writing guy as anyone but comparing his forum behavior and taking advantage of an intoxicated woman isn't even comparable.

Everyone was intoxicated

Which changes what exactly?

I don't know, you tell me? You brought up intoxication.

for the victim it changes the ability to be able to consent.. for the perpetrator it doesn't change a thing.

What makes A person the victim?

If you can't see how the girl was the victim in the situation we've got nothing else to discuss and you need a look in the mirror.

Even if there was no crime committed she was 100% the victim in this situation and any morally correct man would have removed her from the situation knowing she was drunk and even if she said she was OK with it.

At best the group took advantage of a comprised individual and should ashamed of themselves for doing it regardless if she said she was OK with it.

Oh I disagree completely, if all parties were willing she is just as responsible for her drunken bad choices as they are IMO.

To be honest I can't even wrap my head around why you would think if they all got drunk and did it together anyone is more guilty than the others.

Because there were 5 of them and 1 of her.. this should not be a difficult thing to understand...

Right. It certainly wasn’t a difficult thing to understand for the judge in Dube’s case. He found the accuser's charge not credible and not reliable. So not difficult at all.

Seriously what the [fork] is wrong with you people.. it shouldn't matter if she said she was 100% willing.. anyone that has a moral compass knows that they were taking advantage of a drunk woman and they should have at a minimum left but really removed her from the situation.

You people are what's wrong with the world.

[DawgDad]

The judge was a woman, Maria Carroccia.

From wikipedia, a quote from her:

"Although the slogan "Believe the victim" has become popularized of late, it has no place in a criminal trial. To approach a trial with the assumption that the complainant is telling the truth is the equivalent of imposing a presumption of guilt on the person accused of sexual assault and then placing a burden on him to prove his innocence. That is antithetical to the fundamental principles of justice enshrined in our constitution and the values underlying our free and democratic society."[84][85]

Keep in mind this is in Canada.

My bad. Thought I remembered judge being referred to as “he.” Why do you say, “Keep in mind this is Canada”? Just curious.

I best not answer that, crosses a line moving away from hockey and the facts of this case.

[Smith2Herr]

This is extra hilarious/sad coming from an adult you of all people having twice asked this board to forgive you your behavior here.

Or has it been three times?

You can't make this up.

I think he's as big of a blowhard egomaniac dumb take writing guy as anyone but comparing his forum behavior and taking advantage of an intoxicated woman isn't even comparable.

Everyone was intoxicated

Which changes what exactly?

I don't know, you tell me? You brought up intoxication.

for the victim it changes the ability to be able to consent.. for the perpetrator it doesn't change a thing.

What makes A person the victim?

If you can't see how the girl was the victim in the situation we've got nothing else to discuss and you need a look in the mirror.

Even if there was no crime committed she was 100% the victim in this situation and any morally correct man would have removed her from the situation knowing she was drunk and even if she said she was OK with it.

At best the group took advantage of a comprised individual and should ashamed of themselves for doing it regardless if she said she was OK with it.

Oh I disagree completely, if all parties were willing she is just as responsible for her drunken bad choices as they are IMO.

To be honest I can't even wrap my head around why you would think if they all got drunk and did it together anyone is more guilty than the others.

Because there were 5 of them and 1 of her.. this should not be a difficult thing to understand...

Right. It certainly wasn’t a difficult thing to understand for the judge in Dube’s case. He found the accuser's charge not credible and not reliable. So not difficult at all.

Seriously what the [fork] is wrong with you people.. it shouldn't matter if she said she was 100% willing.. anyone that has a moral compass knows that they were taking advantage of a drunk woman and they should have at a minimum left but really removed her from the situation.

You people are what's wrong with the world.

Speaking of overly judgmental (donkey)(censored), I hear the Taliban are looking for a few good men. You should give em a call.

[Walter Sobchak00]

I think he's as big of a blowhard egomaniac dumb take writing guy as anyone but comparing his forum behavior and taking advantage of an intoxicated woman isn't even comparable.

Everyone was intoxicated

Which changes what exactly?

I don't know, you tell me? You brought up intoxication.

for the victim it changes the ability to be able to consent.. for the perpetrator it doesn't change a thing.

What makes A person the victim?

If you can't see how the girl was the victim in the situation we've got nothing else to discuss and you need a look in the mirror.

Even if there was no crime committed she was 100% the victim in this situation and any morally correct man would have removed her from the situation knowing she was drunk and even if she said she was OK with it.

At best the group took advantage of a comprised individual and should ashamed of themselves for doing it regardless if she said she was OK with it.

Oh I disagree completely, if all parties were willing she is just as responsible for her drunken bad choices as they are IMO.

To be honest I can't even wrap my head around why you would think if they all got drunk and did it together anyone is more guilty than the others.

Because there were 5 of them and 1 of her.. this should not be a difficult thing to understand...

Right. It certainly wasn’t a difficult thing to understand for the judge in Dube’s case. He found the accuser's charge not credible and not reliable. So not difficult at all.

Seriously what the [fork] is wrong with you people.. it shouldn't matter if she said she was 100% willing.. anyone that has a moral compass knows that they were taking advantage of a drunk woman and they should have at a minimum left but really removed her from the situation.

You people are what's wrong with the world.

Speaking of overly judgmental (donkey)(censored), I hear the Taliban are looking for a few good men. You should give em a call.

Overly juidgemental, you're defending 5 guys that took advantage of a drunk woman.. reading how you think that's ok to do to a woman you'd fit right in withe the Taliban.

[SameOldBlues]

This is extra hilarious/sad coming from an adult you of all people having twice asked this board to forgive you your behavior here.

Or has it been three times?

You can't make this up.

I think he's as big of a blowhard egomaniac dumb take writing guy as anyone but comparing his forum behavior and taking advantage of an intoxicated woman isn't even comparable.

Everyone was intoxicated

Which changes what exactly?

I don't know, you tell me? You brought up intoxication.

for the victim it changes the ability to be able to consent.. for the perpetrator it doesn't change a thing.

What makes A person the victim?

If you can't see how the girl was the victim in the situation we've got nothing else to discuss and you need a look in the mirror.

Even if there was no crime committed she was 100% the victim in this situation and any morally correct man would have removed her from the situation knowing she was drunk and even if she said she was OK with it.

At best the group took advantage of a comprised individual and should ashamed of themselves for doing it regardless if she said she was OK with it.

Oh I disagree completely, if all parties were willing she is just as responsible for her drunken bad choices as they are IMO.

To be honest I can't even wrap my head around why you would think if they all got drunk and did it together anyone is more guilty than the others.

Because there were 5 of them and 1 of her.. this should not be a difficult thing to understand...

Right. It certainly wasn’t a difficult thing to understand for the judge in Dube’s case. He found the accuser's charge not credible and not reliable. So not difficult at all.

Seriously what the [fork] is wrong with you people.. it shouldn't matter if she said she was 100% willing.. anyone that has a moral compass knows that they were taking advantage of a drunk woman and they should have at a minimum left but really removed her from the situation.

You people are what's wrong with the world.

She’s not going to sleep with you.

[skilles]

This is extra hilarious/sad coming from an adult you of all people having twice asked this board to forgive you your behavior here.

Or has it been three times?

You can't make this up.

I think he's as big of a blowhard egomaniac dumb take writing guy as anyone but comparing his forum behavior and taking advantage of an intoxicated woman isn't even comparable.

Everyone was intoxicated

Which changes what exactly?

I don't know, you tell me? You brought up intoxication.

for the victim it changes the ability to be able to consent.. for the perpetrator it doesn't change a thing.

What makes A person the victim?

If you can't see how the girl was the victim in the situation we've got nothing else to discuss and you need a look in the mirror.

Even if there was no crime committed she was 100% the victim in this situation and any morally correct man would have removed her from the situation knowing she was drunk and even if she said she was OK with it.

At best the group took advantage of a comprised individual and should ashamed of themselves for doing it regardless if she said she was OK with it.

Oh I disagree completely, if all parties were willing she is just as responsible for her drunken bad choices as they are IMO.

To be honest I can't even wrap my head around why you would think if they all got drunk and did it together anyone is more guilty than the others.

Because there were 5 of them and 1 of her.. this should not be a difficult thing to understand...

Right. It certainly wasn’t a difficult thing to understand for the judge in Dube’s case. He found the accuser's charge not credible and not reliable. So not difficult at all.

Seriously what the [fork] is wrong with you people.. it shouldn't matter if she said she was 100% willing.. anyone that has a moral compass knows that they were taking advantage of a drunk woman and they should have at a minimum left but really removed her from the situation.

You people are what's wrong with the world.

I'm not "defending" anyone, I'm treating it like a woman had the same capability as the men had to make better choices.

[Walter Sobchak00]

I think he's as big of a blowhard egomaniac dumb take writing guy as anyone but comparing his forum behavior and taking advantage of an intoxicated woman isn't even comparable.

Everyone was intoxicated

Which changes what exactly?

I don't know, you tell me? You brought up intoxication.

for the victim it changes the ability to be able to consent.. for the perpetrator it doesn't change a thing.

What makes A person the victim?

If you can't see how the girl was the victim in the situation we've got nothing else to discuss and you need a look in the mirror.

Even if there was no crime committed she was 100% the victim in this situation and any morally correct man would have removed her from the situation knowing she was drunk and even if she said she was OK with it.

At best the group took advantage of a comprised individual and should ashamed of themselves for doing it regardless if she said she was OK with it.

Oh I disagree completely, if all parties were willing she is just as responsible for her drunken bad choices as they are IMO.

To be honest I can't even wrap my head around why you would think if they all got drunk and did it together anyone is more guilty than the others.

Because there were 5 of them and 1 of her.. this should not be a difficult thing to understand...

Right. It certainly wasn’t a difficult thing to understand for the judge in Dube’s case. He found the accuser's charge not credible and not reliable. So not difficult at all.

Seriously what the [fork] is wrong with you people.. it shouldn't matter if she said she was 100% willing.. anyone that has a moral compass knows that they were taking advantage of a drunk woman and they should have at a minimum left but really removed her from the situation.

You people are what's wrong with the world.

I'm not "defending" anyone, I'm treating it like a woman had the same capability as the men had to make better choices.

No you're ignoring the fact the woman wasn't on equal footing as the men, there weren't 5 of her and she wasn't teammates and friends with anyone in the room.

[skilles]

Everyone was intoxicated

Which changes what exactly?

I don't know, you tell me? You brought up intoxication.

for the victim it changes the ability to be able to consent.. for the perpetrator it doesn't change a thing.

What makes A person the victim?

If you can't see how the girl was the victim in the situation we've got nothing else to discuss and you need a look in the mirror.

Even if there was no crime committed she was 100% the victim in this situation and any morally correct man would have removed her from the situation knowing she was drunk and even if she said she was OK with it.

At best the group took advantage of a comprised individual and should ashamed of themselves for doing it regardless if she said she was OK with it.

Oh I disagree completely, if all parties were willing she is just as responsible for her drunken bad choices as they are IMO.

To be honest I can't even wrap my head around why you would think if they all got drunk and did it together anyone is more guilty than the others.

Because there were 5 of them and 1 of her.. this should not be a difficult thing to understand...

Right. It certainly wasn’t a difficult thing to understand for the judge in Dube’s case. He found the accuser's charge not credible and not reliable. So not difficult at all.

Seriously what the [fork] is wrong with you people.. it shouldn't matter if she said she was 100% willing.. anyone that has a moral compass knows that they were taking advantage of a drunk woman and they should have at a minimum left but really removed her from the situation.

You people are what's wrong with the world.

I'm not "defending" anyone, I'm treating it like a woman had the same capability as the men had to make better choices.

No you're ignoring the fact the woman wasn't on equal footing as the men, there weren't 5 of her and she wasn't teammates and friends with anyone in the room.

I'm not ignoring anything, I'm taking the courts word that she is lying and they didn't make her do anything she didn't want to do.

[Walter Sobchak00]

Which changes what exactly?

I don't know, you tell me? You brought up intoxication.

for the victim it changes the ability to be able to consent.. for the perpetrator it doesn't change a thing.

What makes A person the victim?

If you can't see how the girl was the victim in the situation we've got nothing else to discuss and you need a look in the mirror.

Even if there was no crime committed she was 100% the victim in this situation and any morally correct man would have removed her from the situation knowing she was drunk and even if she said she was OK with it.

At best the group took advantage of a comprised individual and should ashamed of themselves for doing it regardless if she said she was OK with it.

Oh I disagree completely, if all parties were willing she is just as responsible for her drunken bad choices as they are IMO.

To be honest I can't even wrap my head around why you would think if they all got drunk and did it together anyone is more guilty than the others.

Because there were 5 of them and 1 of her.. this should not be a difficult thing to understand...

Right. It certainly wasn’t a difficult thing to understand for the judge in Dube’s case. He found the accuser's charge not credible and not reliable. So not difficult at all.

Seriously what the [fork] is wrong with you people.. it shouldn't matter if she said she was 100% willing.. anyone that has a moral compass knows that they were taking advantage of a drunk woman and they should have at a minimum left but really removed her from the situation.

You people are what's wrong with the world.

I'm not "defending" anyone, I'm treating it like a woman had the same capability as the men had to make better choices.

No you're ignoring the fact the woman wasn't on equal footing as the men, there weren't 5 of her and she wasn't teammates and friends with anyone in the room.

I'm not ignoring anything, I'm taking the courts word that she is lying and they didn't make her do anything she didn't want to do.

The court case, not making her do something she didn't want to do has absolutely nothing to do with the guys not doing what was right.

Would you have this conversation on a Facebook page where your name was out there?

[skilles]

I don't know, you tell me? You brought up intoxication.

for the victim it changes the ability to be able to consent.. for the perpetrator it doesn't change a thing.

What makes A person the victim?

If you can't see how the girl was the victim in the situation we've got nothing else to discuss and you need a look in the mirror.

Even if there was no crime committed she was 100% the victim in this situation and any morally correct man would have removed her from the situation knowing she was drunk and even if she said she was OK with it.

At best the group took advantage of a comprised individual and should ashamed of themselves for doing it regardless if she said she was OK with it.

Oh I disagree completely, if all parties were willing she is just as responsible for her drunken bad choices as they are IMO.

To be honest I can't even wrap my head around why you would think if they all got drunk and did it together anyone is more guilty than the others.

Because there were 5 of them and 1 of her.. this should not be a difficult thing to understand...

Right. It certainly wasn’t a difficult thing to understand for the judge in Dube’s case. He found the accuser's charge not credible and not reliable. So not difficult at all.

Seriously what the [fork] is wrong with you people.. it shouldn't matter if she said she was 100% willing.. anyone that has a moral compass knows that they were taking advantage of a drunk woman and they should have at a minimum left but really removed her from the situation.

You people are what's wrong with the world.

I'm not "defending" anyone, I'm treating it like a woman had the same capability as the men had to make better choices.

No you're ignoring the fact the woman wasn't on equal footing as the men, there weren't 5 of her and she wasn't teammates and friends with anyone in the room.

I'm not ignoring anything, I'm taking the courts word that she is lying and they didn't make her do anything she didn't want to do.

The court case, not making her do something she didn't want to do has absolutely nothing to do with the guys not doing what was right.

Would you have this conversation on a Facebook page where your name was out there?

I probably shouldn't have this conversation anywhere to be honest, to many crazy people in this world.