Patrick Kane subject of police investigation V [READ MOD OP]

[Mr Pipe]

Ever heard of taxis? That is a pretty ridicule argument that you just wrote lol.

Yes I've heard of taxis. Taxis are not readily available everywhere in the country, and neither are services like Uber. You are correct that some people take taxis home, that seems to be the right thing to do.

What exactly is ridiculous about my argument? Is there no drunk driving because taxis exist? I don't understand. I think it's quite clear that people convicted of drunk driving did not take taxis home.

 

[sharkhawk]

Pretty sure a woman can give all the signs that she's wanting to have sex, but at ANY moment before or during, she decides she doesn't want to (ie: says "stop"), it can become rape. If he did anything to force her to continue even mid act, he'd be in trouble.

Yes, legally that is rape, and is both morally and ethically wrong. The problem is proving it a court of law. Absent witnesses, video or audio recordings, I don't see how you could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he didn't stop when that happened, or that the denial happened.

 

[Invictus12]

No, the exact quote from the Buffalo Times article was:

Okay thanks for clearing that up... Wasn't looking forward to scrolling back on pages for the link...

 

[bdub24]

I agree, I think my statement mustn't be coming off the way I intended without tone. I'm saying that based on some comments I've read in the past 5 threads over this, some people will never believe the woman isn't after money unless she's loaded.

AH - I took your initial post differently. But yes - they need to deal with the truth of the matter as it stands today. No indication of that being a motive right now.

 

[Cane mutiny]

I get what you're saying - but by law I think It's different... at least it is in the state where my girlfriend is barred.

My question is about NY... is it illegal to sleep with a girl who is drunk (even if she is all about it at the time), but the next day feels taken advantage of or that it was a mistake? I'm not asking about physical force, etc as that can obviously be something completely different... but just that simple question. Maybe there's not a simple answer though?

That's a rediculous law. How is someone supposed to know exactly how drunk another person is if they are visibly functional? That's almost impossible without giving a breathalyzer test. Just too stupid.

 

[Number8]

No you wouldn't.

Are you agreeing with me?

 

[Cane mutiny]

The NY penal code references a number of things that could constitute sexual assault: force, age (statutory), mental handicap, incapacitated (drugged), physically helpless (so intoxicated you can't communicate or passed out), caretaker status.

If you regret it but consented the night before, it's not rape.
If you're drunk but can communicate consent, it's not rape if you consent.
If you're so drunk you can't say no, and a person has unwanted sex with you, it's rape.

That's better. N.Y. got it down.

 

[pitcher]

When the entire bar owner's statement is pure conjecture about a woman who was supposedly hanging all over Kane, that is victim blaming. I don't have to be there to know when an article isn't written fairly.

The guy have been asking questions. The questions he has been asked are probably things like "did Kane was doing trouble in the bar", "was he drunk", "have you seen him with a girl", etc, etc. Questions to which he responded. He said himself that he doesn't know if it is the same girl, just that he saw a girl flirting with him, and specially that he has no way to know what happen after. How is that victim blaming exactly?

 

[Dying Alive]

That's a rediculous law. How is someone supposed to know exactly how drunk another person is if they are visibly functional? That's almost impossible without giving a breathalyzer test. Just too stupid.

I guess the best way to be sure is to not have sex with someone if you even suspect that they might be too intoxicated to know what they're doing. Someone can be functional and it can still be pretty clear that they're not in any state to make decisions. I mean, everybody wants to get laid, but sometimes you just have to use your common sense.

And the moment that someone says no, passes out, etc., stop.

 

[MadhouseOnMadison]

So does anyone with any legal expertise have an opinion on the woman's injuries and how they compare to a typical rape case?

I'm by no means downplaying the injuries she sustained or implying anything, but after reading her statement about Kane forcing himself on her I guess I was expecting something different.

But I'm just going off of Criminal Minds and SVU.

 

[Helistin]

I'm no expert but I would guess many rapes won't leave a scratch on the victim. Victim is too afraid to resist or fight back.

 

[sparxx87]

According to that Deadspin article, Kane's day with the Cup celebration was supposed to be at Sky Bar. I read somewhere else that they've catered his parties in the past. He clearly drinks there pretty regularly and probably spends a good bit of money. It doesn't mean that the bar owner is lying, obviously, but it does mean that he has a vested interest in Kane not being guilty in more ways than one - both in the sense that I don't think anyone would want an evening that ended in rape to have started in their establishment, and because apparently Kane was a pretty regular customer. I wouldn't hold him up as an example of an impartial party and if he were to be called to testify any lawyer worth a damn could probably show that pretty quickly.

I agree... But the bar owner claimed to have "no skin in the game" which isn't true.. That speaks to his credibility. As you said, he could very well be telling the truth and I disregard everything he said because it's on the premise of a lie...

If I begun a story with "when I used to be the lead singer of the Rolling Stones" and proceed to tell you a completely wild story that actually true with the exception of me being in the stones, the rest of my story is likely to be disregarded as well...

Bottom line, bar owner is a tool. He shouldn't have commented, but if he makes that choice, at least be honest.

 

[pitcher]

Yes I've heard of taxis. Taxis are not readily available everywhere in the country, and neither are services like Uber. You are correct that some people take taxis home, that seems to be the right thing to do.

What exactly is ridiculous about my argument? Is there no drunk driving because taxis exist? I don't understand. I think it's quite clear that people convicted of drunk driving did not take taxis home.

It has nothing to do with that. Your argument doesn't even make sense.

Saying that there is no similarities to decision taken while drunk between deciding to take a taxi or not, and deciding to go sleep with a stranger or not is completely ridiculous. It was the whole point I was making. Your argument which I said is ridiculous is that you claim that drunk driving is all about planning while drunk "sleeping" isn't. It doesn't even make any sense. Some people do plan to take their car, some doesn't. Sometimes it just happens that people think they are fine to go, but they aren't, etc. If you really use that as a argument, then how about planning to sleep or not to sleep with someone BEFORE going to the bar ? And how is it different?

I should say that I don't think that it excuses in any way real rape (which is imo when force is used and not consentual) at all. It was just a comment about the OT topics that was/is going on about how sleeping with someone who is drunk while you are not should instantly be considered rape. I don't live in USA so I don't know the laws there, and tbh I am not even sure how laws are in Canada, but if one party being drunk is all it takes for a rape to be called, than I better call a lawyer right now as I have been the drunk one in many situations

 

[loudi94]

I feel like the only way people would believe the woman isn't going after Kane here for his money is if someone outs her identity and she comes from money.

If all she wanted was money, she would have gone to a seedy lawyer and blackmailed him. No muss, no fuss.

 

[Cane mutiny]

Yeah, I saw that. There was some tweet from the bar owner saying "think we convinced him to bring the Cup" or something.

Still an absolute fool for making any comments to the press -- particularly as his comments could easily be construed as suggesting that the girl he was talking about was acting in a way that indicated she might be "looking for it".

Accordingly, if I was a young lady, I'd feel less than comfortable going into his bar.

May be the comments were made to investigators and got leaked to the press. And may be he was just telling the truth as he saw it. Why do so many people on this thread want Kane to be guilty? He could be, or not. Seems like the majority here are actually rooting for him to be guilty.

 

[dechire]

I'm not, but it's a little silly to think every rape consists of the guy(or girl) having their way while the victim lays there doing nothing.

Some fight back, some don't.

They said many not every and it appears you agree with them if you say that some do and some don't.

 

[Mattilaus]

I'm not, but it's a little silly to think every rape consists of the guy(or girl) having their way while the victim lays there doing nothing.

Some fight back, some don't. Some get injuries, some don't.

Probably why he said MANY rapes and not ALL rapes

 

[Helistin]

I'm not, but it's a little silly to think every rape consists of the guy(or girl) having their way while the victim lays there doing nothing.

Some fight back, some don't. Some get injuries, some don't.

I don't think I suggested that. Maybe I don't know how to type anymore , or you don't know how to read.
Anyways I agree.

 

[caymanmew]

I'm not, but it's a little silly to think every rape consists of the guy(or girl) having their way while the victim lays there doing nothing.

Some fight back, some don't. Some get injuries, some don't.

he did not say ever rape....

in this case Kane is much bigger and stronger then the girl and everyone knows it. Kane is a elite athlete in top shape and can easily overpower most people on this site.

the girl has nothing to gain from fighting other then more injuries. if she was not to drunk she might of realized that and not bothered physically fighting him.

 

[Rangediddy]

They said many not every and it appears you agree with them if you say that some do and some don't.

He made it sound like it was suspicious that she had injuries, as if it was faked.

If that's not what he was implying, then it was a completely random statement that doesn't contribute to the discussion.

Such as:

I'm not an expert, but I would guess most rapes involve a man and a woman.

 

[Son of Frostback]

I'm not, but it's a little silly to think every rape consists of the guy(or girl) having their way while the victim lays there doing nothing.

Some fight back, some don't. Some get injuries, some don't.

The word used was 'many', not 'all'. Intentional dis-ingenuity is for the trade boards.

 

[Felix Unger]

May be the comments were made to investigators and got leaked to the press. And may be he was just telling the truth as he saw it. Why do so many people on this thread want Kane to be guilty? He could be, or not. Seems like the majority here are actually rooting for him to be guilty.

They weren't leaked. He talked to the reporters, because he's a big fish in a small pond and thinks his speculation is newsworthy. What's disturbing isn't necessarily what he said. People tend to protect their friends and associates. What's disturbing that the Buffalo News thought Croce's speculations were newsworthy. Big fish makes news, apparently.

 

[Cane mutiny]

If all she wanted was money, she would have gone to a seedy lawyer and blackmailed him. No muss, no fuss.

Not true. Civil cases brought without criminal charges don't hold much weight. That's why they usually follow the criminal case, especially in high profile cases where there's a lot of money involved.

 

[dechire]

He made it sound like it was suspicious that she had injuries, as if it was faked.

If that's not what he was implying, then it was a completely random statement that doesn't contribute to the discussion.

Such as:

I'm not an expert, but I would guess most rapes involve a man and a woman.

Considering that someone on the last page directly asked about injuries in rape cases I'm assuming it was in response to that. Or any of the countless other comments in the last two parts about her injuries and how they may or may not relate to the case.

 

[HydroF]

If all she wanted was money, she would have gone to a seedy lawyer and blackmailed him. No muss, no fuss.

If she was doing this just for money she would not be a mentally stable individual. Level headed people in their right mind don't make fake rape accusations for money. We can't make assumptions or apply logic towards how a person like that would go about trying to do it.