Hockey Canada sexual assault trial verdict expected: What to know

7 comments
  1. “Consent cannot be obtained prior to or after the sexual act”

    I don’t know if I’m misreading something, but can someone educate me on this? Does that mean it has to be during?? Doesn’t make sense to me. Or maybe it’s a typo.

  2. The impact of this case goes well beyond hockey. The legal definition of consent would affect every sexual relationship in the country both in and out of wedlock. My lawyer will call your lawyer and make the arrangements…

  3. This is your friendly reminder that not guilty does not mean innocent. It means the burden of proof was not met and there could be a reasonable doubt.

    OJ Simpson was found not guilty and wrote a book on how he “would have done the crimes if he did it” (which was just the evidence from the trial)

  4. Guaranteed regardless of verdict, none will be playing in the NHL. Russia maybe but not the NHL.

  5. Remember kids: insufficient evidence to find them guilty ≠ nothing happened

  6. “In this case, I have found actual consent” by E.M., judge says. “I do not find the evidence of E.M. to be either credible or reliable.”

    Pretty strong statement here

Leave a Reply