Kane legal drama in Buffalo IV (no hearsay, verifiable sources only)

[Salvaged Ship]

Did anyone see the story with Jagr sleeping with an 18 year old model who took a selfie of them while he was sleeping then tried to extort him? It shows there are women out there gold digging. Not saying that is what is happening with Kane but those who just assume he is guilty should realize there are women who try to do these things.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Did you read the article (link below), BroadwayJay? The headline and lead paragraph says resolution, then the rest of the article goes from formal agreement to civil resolution to settlement. Given what you said above, do you read between the lines something I must be blind to?

Yes, I see that "resolution" part. First things first, the language we use is "disposition", but that's down here in the City they might say "resolution" upstate for all I know.

I mean, you have to remember that there are three parties here: (1) Kane, the would-be defendant; (2) Complainant, the accuser; (3) the People, the prosecuting body (district attorney).

A civil settlement would be between 1 and 2, but not binding in any way on 3.

A disposition would be between 1 and 3, but could be done without any input from 2 (although that would be uncommon).

There is really no reason for a disposition right now since there is no arrest and no prosecution. Even if a civil settlement were to be reached, it wouldn't stop the DA from continuing the case.

Reporters are just reporters, they aren't lawyers and they either don't receive correct information or they interpret correct information incorrectly. I can't blame them for that, they're asked to be experts on all sorts of fields with only a few paragraphs to explain it. Law can be difficult to explain, although it appears this reporter seem to think he's got it figured out. I don't think I agree.

 

[wafflecones]

I think the timing of that reporter's tweet is significant too since after his article was published an article from the Suntimes came out saying that Cambria (Kane's lawyer) had denied any settlement talks what so ever. Right after Cambria's quotes came out the reporter posted that tweet...it seemed a little like back peddling to me.

It would be very interesting to know who is leaking the "settlement talk/resolution" narrative.

 

[Glacial]

I think the timing of that reporter's tweet is significant too since after his article was published an article from the Suntimes came out saying that Cambria (Kane's lawyer) had denied any settlement talks what so ever. Right after Cambria's quotes came out the reporter posted that tweet...it seemed a little like back peddling to me.

It would be very interesting to know who is leaking the "settlement talk/resolution" narrative.

Indeed. I thought it was the Tribune that printed the settlement talks claim that Kane's lawyer quickly refuted though. They revised the article, but I can't remember if they printed a formal retraction or not. And the odd part is Kane's lawyer had mentioned there were no settlement talks a day or so earlier, meaning the paper either didn't do their homework and ran outdated news (that's happened before) or they knowingly published something false because someone wanted it to be. It's really hard to tell what the motives might be because in this ongoing news story, we've seen newspapers get incredibly sloppy in their reporting (hello Buffalo paper and first reporter) and with whatever the heck happened in the locker room in the middle of last season, one of the sports radio hosts in Chicago outright said their station was avoiding really talking about it because the Blackhawks didn't want them to talk about it and they don't want to lose access to the team/locker room/arena. Said station has been tending to avoid talking about the latest reported news but extensively covered all the earlier damning information that came out (enough that the station could seem to have a partisan position on the Kane matter). And somewhere else, I read/heard about how influential the Blackhawks were with sports media. Once I heard that, it started becoming easy to notice reporters walking on eggshells around the team and topics the team is involved in, something you don't see with other Chicago teams. I'm not sure if it's just a kind of power a multi-championship team accumulates or if it's intrinsic to the team of this era (I can't recall how the media handled the Bulls in the mid-late 90s).

 

[BHFan]

To me, "settlement" talks means a financial settlement. I think resolution simply means, you don't have enough evidence, don't bother with the grand jury, let's let this guy get back to his life and move on.

If this is true, then Cambria is correct in saying he hasn't been involved in "settlement" talks. He has probably been pushing for a resolution, though.

 

[LordKOTL]

Um, I think he was referring to a condom. It's an old slang term, since so many are found on the beach.

ah, I stand corrected. Never heard that before.

Yes, I have been reading Roger's Profanisaurus.

But if he was wearing a condom, chances are that there would still be some sort of DNA on the victims private regions and her undergarments.

A hair (unless Kane likes to manscape) or dead skin cells near her privates or on her underwear would likely appear on a rape kit. The fact that neither seems to be present is good news for Kane.

Again, this is something we don't know and possibly never will (or maybe even want to know). If he goes Brazillian all you might have are skin cells, And that makes getting his DNA less likley than if you have a full on hair with follicle.

And again, there's the foreign object angle--which is still rape (playing Devil's advocate here).

Most condoms have spermicide on them and I know they test for that in a rape kit. And there was no spermicide mentioned.

I think Kane and his lawyers wouldn't be surprised at all by the DNA results. They knew exactly what would be in the report because Kane didn't forcibly rape her and it looks like he didn't have intercourse with her at all. Kane is one of only two people who actually know what happened that night and he's maintained his innocence all along, as has his lawyer. I can't imagine how she got to forcible rape in this case and how they're so far apart on their stories. But I'm starting to believe that Kane is on the right side of this and she might have ulterior motives.

Her side hasn't come out with anything in the press to counter the DNA report. And they always have something to counter once Kane's side leaks something. DNA under the fingernails can come from casual contact. They didn't say blood or tissue under the fingernails, but I don't know if that's usual for them to distinguish between the two. And a scratch on her thigh could come from running into a end table on her way out.

Can we just get the DA to move fast on this and clear it before the actual season starts? That would be nice.

1st off: There was no menion of positive or negative spermicide--it could be one thing that the police/DA are holding tightly to their vest regardless of a test-positive or test-negative.

2nd: Let's assume that this news story is exactly what it appears to be and that there is no evidence of penetration. It still doesn't mean Kane can't be guilty of a lesser charge. Again playing Devil's advocate.

 

[Sarava]

Ok guys, thanks for the posts. We do need to stay away from posting about Sports Mockery stories. If this story (or any others for that matter), gets reported by other news organizations...then please feel free to come in/post about it.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Did anyone see the story with Jagr sleeping with an 18 year old model who took a selfie of them while he was sleeping then tried to extort him? It shows there are women out there gold digging. Not saying that is what is happening with Kane but those who just assume he is guilty should realize there are women who try to do these things.

There are plenty of stories about men who are rapists out there. It shows there are men out there who are rapists. Not saying that is happening with Kane but those who assume he is innocent should realize there are men who do these things.

I mean, that story has nothing to do with this.

 

[MR2010]

The reference to The Niagara Falls Reporter was legit.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CPhesyTUwAA-sD7.png:large

Edited to add: The story is on their website too: http://www.niagarafallsreporter.com/Stories/2015/SEP22/Kane.html

DNA Tests on Kane's Accuser Come Up Positive for Others, Not Kane

By Tony Farina
SEP 22, 2015

This newspaper has confirmed that DNA tests conducted on the 21-year-old woman who has accused hockey star Patrick Kane of raping her has found DNA evidence of at least one person and possibly one or two more in her genital area but no traces of any DNA from Kane.

Read the rest of the article at the link above.

 

[Sarava]

The reference to The Niagara Falls Reporter was legit.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CPhesyTUwAA-sD7.png:large

Yeah...

http://www.niagarafallsreporter.com/Stories/2015/SEP22/Sep22Final.pdf

So what do we make of this now? I'd feel more comfortable if another news organization reported this as well.

I wouldn't even know what to think if this is true. The article says she had 1 sample of DNA in her, with possibly an additional one or two more. But none are Kane. We're talking three completely different stories depending on if it's 1, 2 or 3 samples in her.

 

[BobbyJet]

Yeah...

http://www.niagarafallsreporter.com/Stories/2015/SEP22/Sep22Final.pdf

So what do we make of this now? I'd feel more comfortable if another news organization reported this as well.

I wouldn't even know what to think if this is true. The article says she had 1 sample of DNA in her, with possibly an additional one or two more. But none are Kane. We're talking three completely different stories depending on if it's 1, 2 or 3 samples in her.

I don't know how they could possibly know that, but if true it seems to speak volumes. I'll just leave it at that.

 

[deytookerjaabs]

Yeah, it will be easier to believe if we get some more coverage. Rain, rain, go away..

 

[Sarava]

I don't know how they could possibly know that but if true, it seems to speak volumes. I'll just leave it at that.

I can think of several possibilities. Some are unflattering to the accuser, others could mean she went through a horrible ordeal. We obviously need to be careful and not assume anything terrible about her.

 

[Killer Boots Man]

BroadwayJay -

Thanks a ton for your insight. I have a few quick questions, if I may...

Question 1:

I would think that the lack of DNA alone here would make a forcible rape conviction nearly impossible for a prosecutor to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt," but what effect do you think this, alone, has on the grand jury and their "reasonably certain a crime was committed" standard? I.e., is this fact, alone, enough to completely negate a grand jury indictment for forcible rape, knowing only what we know, without other facts coming to light?

Without knowing more, I think this lack of DNA fact, by itself, would almost be enough to prevent the grand jurors from being able to say that they are reasonably certain that a forcible rape occurred.

Question 2:

In light of the lack of DNA, what other facts or events do you think need to have occurred in order for the grand jury to conclude probable cause exists for a 'forcible rape' indictment?

Question 3:

In light of the lack of DNA, what other facts or events do you think need to have occurred in order for the grand jury to conclude probable cause exists for a 'sexual assault' indictment?

You are the man!

 

[Fortyfives]

The reference to The Niagara Falls Reporter was legit.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CPhesyTUwAA-sD7.png:large

Edited to add: The story is on their website too: http://www.niagarafallsreporter.com/Stories/2015/SEP22/Kane.html

DNA Tests on Kane's Accuser Come Up Positive for Others, Not Kane

By Tony Farina
SEP 22, 2015

This newspaper has confirmed that DNA tests conducted on the 21-year-old woman who has accused hockey star Patrick Kane of raping her has found DNA evidence of at least one person and possibly one or two more in her genital area but no traces of any DNA from Kane.

Read the rest of the article at the link above.

Wow, I am completely shocked at this development. If this is true the guy has been dragged through the mud for nothing.

 

[MR2010]

So what do we make of this now? I'd feel more comfortable if another news organization reported this as well.

The Niagara Falls Reporter has been very credible thus far. They had Kane attending camp before anyone else, and they also had Kane's attorney Paul Cambria denying all kinds of talks between the complainant's attorneys before other media sources, as well as saying Kane's counsel was very confident in his client's innocence all along.

 

[Sarava]

Wow, I am completely shocked at this development. If this is true the guy has been dragged through the mud for nothing.

One thing we need to keep in mind, is that we never actually heard the accuser's exact allegations. We've been working under the assumption that the initial report by Tim Graham that Kane was accused of forcible rape - is indeed what she alleged?

There's so much gray area here, that it's hard to make out much of anything.

 

[hisgirlfriday]

I can think of several possibilities. Some are unflattering to the accuser, others could mean she went through a horrible ordeal. We obviously need to be careful and not assume anything terrible about her.

Well stated.

It seems every story on this case raises more questions rather than providing answers.

 

[Sarava]

The Niagara Falls Reporter has been very credible thus far. They had Kane attending camp before anyone else, and they also had Kane's attorney Paul Cambria denying all kinds of talks between the complainant's attorneys before other media sources, as well as saying Kane's counsel was very confident in his client's innocence all along.

I agree with that.

 

[Salvaged Ship]

There are plenty of stories about men who are rapists out there. It shows there are men out there who are rapists. Not saying that is happening with Kane but those who assume he is innocent should realize there are men who do these things.

I mean, that story has nothing to do with this.

I only metioned the Jagr story to point out there are people out there with agendas who try to get money out of celebrities. Means nothing in regards to Kane except to point out a rush to judgement he is guilty is premature and there are those out there trying to get money. May not apply in this case, but we don't know. And if this DNA thing is true where his DNA is not present but others are it is really starting to smell fishy.

There are those out there who just assume he did it regardles of what comes out. Only pointing out a rush to judgement either way should be avoided.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

While the past 24 hours have been seemingly good for Kane regarding the potential for him being prosecuted for rape, the underlying news is still awful for two potential reasons:

1) The report above seems to indicate multiple assailants in an alleged sexual assault, which is just... awful, and something that I had a hunch about based on the conversations we've all been having and from the nebulous news we've been getting out of Buffalo. A lot of what came out always gave me the hunch that the parties involved might not know how many people were involved and whom.
2) If an attack did take place on Kane's property, he'd still be open to a massive civil suit as the the proprietor of the property where it allegedly took place and likely having been the one to invite all the parties involved to his home. This potential also explains why the Kane team have been very, very quiet, as even if they knew any criminal allegations wre bunk, we're still talking about a potentially massive civil suit.

Still awful all around.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

I only metioned the Jagr story to point out there are people out there with agendas who try to get money out of celebrities. Means nothing in regards to Kane except to point out a rush to judgement he is guilty is premature and there are those out there trying to get money. May not apply in this case, but we don't know. And if this DNA thing is true where his DNA is not present but others are it is really starting to smell fishy.

There are those out there who just assume he did it regardles of what comes out. Only pointing out a rush to judgement either way should be avoided.

If the last paragraph is all you intended then absolutely, I'm in total agreement.

 

[MR2010]

One thing we need to keep in mind, is that we never actually heard the accuser's exact allegations. We've been working under the assumption that the initial report by Tim Graham that Kane was accused of forcible rape - is indeed what she alleged?

There's so much gray area here, that it's hard to make out much of anything.

The Buffalo News has almost always used rape as the allegation in their stories, particularly that Kane followed the complainant into a room, overpowered her and raped her. Once or twice they have used sexual assault. The Chicago Tribune has used sexual assault with no detail, as well as the Chicago Sun-Times.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Question 1:

I would think that the lack of DNA alone here would make a forcible rape conviction nearly impossible for a prosecutor to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt,"

You'd think wrong. However, it certainly is not helpful to the prosecution.

but what effect do you think this, alone, has on the grand jury and their "reasonably certain a crime was committed" standard? I.e., is this fact, alone, enough to completely negate a grand jury indictment for forcible rape, knowing only what we know, without other facts coming to light?

The GJ wouldn't have to know about it. An indictment could come down with only the testimony of the accuser. It also depends on what her story would be.

Without knowing more, I think this lack of DNA fact, by itself, would almost be enough to prevent the grand jurors from being able to say that they are reasonably certain that a forcible rape occurred.

I mean, that's a factual question for an individual to ask oneself. It would give me pause, were I a grand juror but I'll never be a grand juror that's for sure.

Question 2:

In light of the lack of DNA, what other facts or events do you think need to have occurred in order for the grand jury to conclude probable cause exists for a 'forcible rape' indictment?

It isn't what facts we would need, but rather what facts we DON'T see. Conflicting stories are occasionally enough for a grand jury to return no true bill.

I mean, we don't know what her story is exactly it is only rumor but at this point it seems like the DA isn't particularly impressed with her version of events. And it seems like he hasn't been for some time.

Question 3:

In light of the lack of DNA, what other facts or events do you think need to have occurred in order for the grand jury to conclude probable cause exists for a 'sexual assault' indictment?

We don't have a sex assault statute in NY, we have a "sex abuse" statute but its substantially the same as the rape statute except "sexual contact" instead of "sexual intercourse". I'll get infracted if I define those terms so instead I'd advise that you google "NY Penal Code 130.00" and see it for yourself.

But if she told the police that it was a "forcible rape" the DA is not going to aim for a lesser count since he can't prove the forcible rape. You follow me? If the story changes, it leads to an adverse viewing by the DA; as it would with anyone and as it should.

 

[sharkhawk]

While the past 24 hours have been seemingly good for Kane regarding the potential for him being prosecuted for rape, the underlying news is still awful for two potential reasons:

1) The report above seems to indicate multiple assailants in an alleged sexual assault, which is just... awful, and something that I had a hunch about based on the conversations we've all been having and from the nebulous news we've been getting out of Buffalo. A lot of what came out always gave me the hunch that the parties involved might not know how many people were involved and whom.
2) If an attack did take place on Kane's property, he'd still be open to a massive civil suit as the the proprietor of the property where it allegedly took place and likely having been the one to invite all the parties involved to his home. This potential also explains why the Kane team have been very, very quiet, as even if they knew any criminal allegations wre bunk, we're still talking about a potentially massive civil suit.

Still awful all around.

Where do you get the gang rape from? From everything I've seen about the case there were 4 people at the house. Kane, his buddy, the complainant and her friend. If the stories we heard are true, the police have only taken DNA from Kane, so I don't see where even the buddy might have been accused.