Anonymous Blackhawks player from 2010 team suing team for sexual assault by a coach

[tarheelhockey]

am i being overly cynical or is there potentially a huge difference between “we will share the results with you” and “we will publish the report we commissioned”?

Interesting observation. They definitely are not exactly the same thing.

 

[Hanji]

am i being overly cynical or is there potentially a huge difference between “we will share the results with you” and “we will publish the report we commissioned”?

Well said. Anything less than the disclosure of the full report will be questionable. Let's see where Wirtz goes with this.

 

[vandymeer13]

Uh. Did you see the texts that Incognito sent to Martin about his sister? I doubt you ever said anything like that to your friends...

I said some of his text were questionable but he still looked out for Martin and they hung out all the time away from football. And yes me and my friends have said some brutal things to each other, not like that but questionable to people who would look from the outside looking in. Martin wasn't man enough to go up to him to tell him to stop. Or one of the coaches at worse. Instead he sits out and cries about it. That's why he was given the nickname the big wierdo. He grew up a rich kid who was always bigger and more athletic then his peers and was never picked on until he got to the NFL. And he couldn't handle that and the fact he was playing horribly.

 

[Hanji]

I said some of his text were questionable but he still looked out for Martin and they hung out all the time away from football. And yes me and my friends have said some brutal things to each other, not like that but questionable to people who would look from the outside looking in. Martin wasn't man enough to go up to him to tell him to stop. Or one of the coaches at worse. Instead he sits out and cries about it. That's why he was given the nickname the big wierdo. He grew up a rich kid who was always bigger and more athletic then his peers and was never picked on until he got to the NFL. And he couldn't handle that and the fact he was playing horribly.

You do realize Incognito is a freakin lunatic with some serious aggression problems, in and outside of football. There's no way Martin wouldn't have gotten wind of this.

 

[Brightwing]

am i being overly cynical or is there potentially a huge difference between “we will share the results with you” and “we will publish the report we commissioned”?

How about we wait and see?

I can imagine several scenarios where they can't share everything some employees said or did because those employees have privacy rights too. When a corporation messes up they don't name every single person involved for a reason.

 

[Voight]

This is how I feel as well. Kane and Sharp are under no more obligation than Boynton in this situation, so if Boynton is calling them out he should also be calling himself out, first. Which he seems to have indirectly done without realizing it.

Boynton is only calling them out because he has zero to lose. Same with Sopel and Dowell.

Not saying I don't believe them but easy for them to spew whatever they want given there is no repercussions.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Martin wasn't man enough to go up to him to tell him to stop. Or one of the coaches at worse. Instead he sits out and cries about it. That's why he was given the nickname the big wierdo. He grew up a rich kid who was always bigger and more athletic then his peers and was never picked on until he got to the NFL. And he couldn't handle that and the fact he was playing horribly.

This just flat-out is not how adults interact with each other. There is absolutely zero expectation that you will be "picked on" in your working environment, and zero onus on you to be "man enough" to confront the person doing it. The onus is on THEM not to be a complete psychopath, and on the organization as a whole not to tolerate that kind of foolishness.

This is exactly the kind of toxicity that predators like Graham James and Brad Aldrich take advantage of so they can do pretty much anything they want to a guy without facing actual consequences.

 

[MartyOwns]

am i being overly cynical or is there potentially a huge difference between “we will share the results with you” and “we will publish the report we commissioned”?

i think that's a fair point, but he's probably just trying to cover his ass. there could be criminal elements to the findings, where it would not be in the best interest to disclose that. as well as privacy concerns if parties are named.

but in general, i think it's more than fair to be skeptical considering the mishmosh way this came to light and the horrifying details that have already come out.

This just flat-out is not how adults interact with each other. There is absolutely zero expectation that you will be "picked on" in your working environment, and zero onus on you to be "man enough" to confront the person doing it. The onus is on THEM not to be a complete psychopath, and on the organization as a whole not to tolerate that kind of foolishness.

This is exactly the kind of toxicity that predators like Graham James and Brad Aldrich take advantage of so they can do pretty much anything they want to a guy without facing actual consequences.

very good point.

 

[bucks_oil]

Calling out Kane, Sharp et al (and really Toews should answer) is the equivalent of saying your core leaders knew about this and did nothing.

When you're in a leadership position, you do that - you lead, stand up and challenge things to make it right - even if it isn't pretty.

Not disagreeing, but... can someone catch me up on what didn't happen and what should have happened?

I haven't read the whole thread, but the player brought it up to Aldrich's supervisor. The senior brass were made aware and Aldrich was dismissed that summer.

Obviously it is terrible that the Blackhawks gave Aldrich a reference and it happened again. That's inexcusable.

And hopefully the team looked after the player and gave him the necessary support (did that happen?). Was he supported in pressing charges? The team should have helped there as well.

But what else are people expecting the players to have done. It sounds like it was widely known, not a secret... Aldrich was quietly dismissed... are people expecting that the players should have outed Aldrich publicly?

Do we know whether the victim wanted this news to come out more publicly?

Other than the bolded team responsibilities above, I'm just not sure what more people expect of the players in particular?

 

[tarheelhockey]

Not disagreeing, but... can someone catch me up on what didn't happen and what should have happened?

I haven't read the whole thread, but the player brought it up to Aldrich's supervisor. The senior brass were made aware and Aldrich was dismissed that summer.

Obviously it is terrible that the Blackhawks gave Aldrich a reference and it happened again. That's inexcusable.

And hopefully the team looked after the player and gave him the necessary support (did that happen?). Was he supported in pressing charges? The team should have helped there as well.

But what else are people expecting the players to have done. It sounds like it was widely known, not a secret... Aldrich was quietly dismissed... are people expecting that the players should have outed Aldrich publicly?

Do we know whether the victim wanted this news to come out more publicly?

Other than the bolded team responsibilities above, I'm just not sure what more people expect of the players in particular?

As far as support for the player, the lawsuit claims (and former staff have corroborated) that the matter was declared a non-issue by senior brass and zero action was taken to move forward with any kind of response. Allegedly, the team's mental skills coach convinced the player that he had provoked Aldrich and that he himself was responsible for what happened. One could infer that this was a message directed from management through the coach to the player, but that is not specifically alleged. The organization declined to forward the matter to police, and provided no apparent support for the player to do so either (whether the active discouragement he received from a member of the coaching staff is connected to those decisions, or not, is a matter of inference for now). Effectively the organization's decision was at best that the player needed to help himself and at worst that he better not try to help himself.

The player claims that after the incident was suppressed by management, the other players turned on him and made a mockery of his situation. Of course that's simply an allegation and we don't have a lot of information to go on right now since evidence has yet to be introduced. AFAIK no other player has backed up his claim in this specific area.

But the reaction from certain individuals (notably Toews) that this whole thing was unknown to the rest of the roster, that has been shot down by other members of the team and created an impression that there was perhaps an active willingness by the players to go along with the organizational cover-up and assist in silencing the issue. That's what's creating a lot of the backlash against the players, moreso than a belief that they should have personally gone public.

The total picture, when combined with subsequent failure to alert future employers or governing bodies to the situation, is one of an organization working to keep the issue quiet and players/coaches receiving the message that the allegations were not to be taken seriously. The Blackhawks' defense against that allegation amounts to "we were not legally required to do otherwise".

 

[DingerMcSlapshot]

Boynton is only calling them out because he has zero to lose. Same with Sopel and Dowell.

Not saying I don't believe them but easy for them to spew whatever they want given there is no repercussions.

Spew whatever??? They're most like telling the truth.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Spew whatever??? They're most like telling the truth.

Interesting how that post glossed over the fact that while they have “zero to lose” by lying (a questionable claim in the first place), they also have zero to gain from a false accusation.

When someone has zero to lose OR gain, then the default is usually to tell the truth. Lying pointlessly in that context is simply a bunch of risky work with no payoff, and would imply some sort of mental problem.

 

[RoyalRed]

This just flat-out is not how adults interact with each other. There is absolutely zero expectation that you will be "picked on" in your working environment, and zero onus on you to be "man enough" to confront the person doing it. The onus is on THEM not to be a complete psychopath, and on the organization as a whole not to tolerate that kind of foolishness.

This is exactly the kind of toxicity that predators like Graham James and Brad Aldrich take advantage of so they can do pretty much anything they want to a guy without facing actual consequences.

Sooooo you don't believe in standing up for yourself?

 

[bucks_oil]

As far as support for the player, the lawsuit claims (and former staff have corroborated) that the matter was declared a non-issue by senior brass and zero action was taken to move forward with any kind of response. Allegedly, the team's mental skills coach convinced the player that he had provoked Aldrich and that he himself was responsible for what happened. One could infer that this was a message directed from management through the coach to the player, but that is not specifically alleged. The organization declined to forward the matter to police, and provided no apparent support for the player to do so either (whether the active discouragement he received from a member of the coaching staff is connected to those decisions, or not, is a matter of inference for now). Effectively the organization's decision was at best that the player needed to help himself and at worst that he better not try to help himself.

The player claims that after the incident was suppressed by management, the other players turned on him and made a mockery of his situation. Of course that's simply an allegation and we don't have a lot of information to go on right now since evidence has yet to be introduced. AFAIK no other player has backed up his claim in this specific area.

But the reaction from certain individuals (notably Toews) that this whole thing was unknown to the rest of the roster, that has been shot down by other members of the team and created an impression that there was perhaps an active willingness by the players to go along with the organizational cover-up and assist in silencing the issue. That's what's creating a lot of the backlash against the players, moreso than a belief that they should have personally gone public.

The total picture, when combined with subsequent failure to alert future employers or governing bodies to the situation, is one of an organization working to keep the issue quiet and players/coaches receiving the message that the allegations were not to be taken seriously. The Blackhawks' defense against that allegation amounts to "we were not legally required to do otherwise".

Oophh... that's an ugly look for the organization.

One can see how the players might have lacked the courage to do something about it... it would have required upsetting the same power dynamic that was suppressing the victim... and all the easier to turn a blind eye if the coach had already moved on and the player was less a part of the team by the time the incident became well known. Not excusing it, but you can see how that might have happened.

Thanks for the recap. Much appreciated.

 

[letsgrowcactus]

Oophh... that's an ugly look for the organization.

One can see how the players might have lacked the courage to do something about it... it would have required upsetting the same power dynamic that was suppressing the victim... and all the easier to turn a blind eye if the coach had already moved on and the player was less a part of the team by the time the incident became well known. Not excusing it, but you can see how that might have happened.

Thanks for the recap. Much appreciated.

A big part of calling out the players is not what they did/didn't do in 2010 (though if they truly harassed the victim in the following seasons, that's 100% on them). I mean, you'd have hoped the team leaders would do something, but if the management and possibly coaching were strongly pushing a different narrative, I can see why they didn't do more. It was 2010, the idea of sexual assault (especially on a man) was not taken seriously enough, they just won their first Cup, guy was fired, I can see how they decided "problem solved". Deeply disagree with it, but I can understand it.
The problem is they're denying it now, despite multiple testimonies from different guys in the organization that this happened and "everybody knew". If true (and at this point I'm inclined to believe it until we get some very strong evidence to the opposite), it's another wall of silence and they're still protecting the management and/or other involved.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Sooooo you don't believe in standing up for yourself?

How did you get that out of what I wrote?

I'll repeat, verbatim:

There is absolutely zero expectation that you will be "picked on" in your working environment
There is absolutely zero onus on you to be "man enough" to confront the person doing it.
The onus is on THEM not to be a complete psychopath, and on the organization as a whole not to tolerate that kind of foolishness.

This does not mean "I don't believe in standing up for myself". It means whether someone stands up for themselves or not, whether they stand up for themselves in a specific way or not, they are not the cancerous element in this picture. The cancerous element is having a grown-ass man exploit his standing within the organization to get his jollies by abusing newcomers for no good reason.

 

[DingerMcSlapshot]

Interesting how that post glossed over the fact that while they have “zero to lose” by lying (a questionable claim in the first place), they also have zero to gain from a false accusation.

When someone has zero to lose OR gain, then the default is usually to tell the truth. Lying pointlessly in that context is simply a bunch of risky work with no payoff, and would imply some sort of mental problem.

Zero to lose is false. Lying has consequences in public opion and the Courts/Investigations.

 

[Pucklington]

Sooooo you don't believe in standing up for yourself?

You shouldn't need to stick up for yourself in a work environment. Especially after you have been a victim of sexual assault.

What type of toxic workplace do you work in?

 

[swerdnase]

But the reaction from certain individuals (notably Toews) that this whole thing was unknown to the rest of the roster, that has been shot down by other members of the team and created an impression that there was perhaps an active willingness by the players to go along with the organizational cover-up and assist in silencing the issue. That's what's creating a lot of the backlash against the players, moreso than a belief that they should have personally gone public.

Toews never said that it was unknown to the rest of the roster. His quote was, “I don’t know who the player (that talked to The Athletic) is, but it kind of annoyed me because it seemed like it fed the fire a little bit. When that player commented that everybody on the team knew, that wasn’t true. As far as I know, some guys may have caught whispers of it and some guys were clueless until the next year. I don’t think that was an accurate statement.”

Toews' claim is that he didn't hear about things until after Aldrich was already gone and that it was unclear if he had been fired or left on his own accord. That seems to back up what Jake O'Dowell stated. “It’s foggy to me,” Dowell said in an interview. “I remember after Brad was let go after 2010 we started to hear some rumblings, but I don’t know how much truth there was to it." If that is actually the case, and Boynton and Sopel are misremembering the timeline, disregarding the alleged name calling etc., what were players to do? Aldrich was already gone.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Toews never said that it was unknown to the rest of the roster. His quote was, “I don’t know who the player (that talked to The Athletic) is, but it kind of annoyed me because it seemed like it fed the fire a little bit. When that player commented that everybody on the team knew, that wasn’t true. As far as I know, some guys may have caught whispers of it and some guys were clueless until the next year. I don’t think that was an accurate statement.”

Toews' claim is that he didn't hear about things until after Aldrich was already gone and that it was unclear if he had been fired or left on his own accord. That seems to back up what Jake O'Dowell stated. “It’s foggy to me,” Dowell said in an interview. “I remember after Brad was let go after 2010 we started to hear some rumblings, but I don’t know how much truth there was to it." If that is actually the case, and Boynton and Sopel are misremembering the timeline, disregarding the alleged name calling etc., what were players to do? Aldrich was already gone.

You're right, I misrepresented him in the way I phrased that. I should have said 'unknown to some members of the team'.

There's an apparent conflict between Boynton's take (specifically Sharp and Kane were definitely aware) and any idea that Toews was not aware, given that these players realistically had to have talked amongst themselves about something this explosive. It's just a bit much to think that this was discussed among that core group but not ever with Toews.

So I guess part of what people are reacting to here is, if Toews knew about it, then why did he feel the need to make that comment? What was the point of saying 'some guys were clueless until the next year' if he and all these other core members were talking about it? It's probably not fair to jump to the conclusion that he was trying to minimize it or wash his hands of responsibility, but that conclusion is kind of hanging out there as a low-hanging explanation for an otherwise odd direction to take his answer.

 

[ClydeLee]

You're right, I misrepresented him in the way I phrased that. I should have said 'unknown to some members of the team'.

There's an apparent conflict between Boynton's take (specifically Sharp and Kane were definitely aware) and any idea that Toews was not aware, given that these players realistically had to have talked amongst themselves about something this explosive. It's just a bit much to think that this was discussed among that core group but not ever with Toews.

So I guess part of what people are reacting to here is, if Toews knew about it, then why did he feel the need to make that comment? What was the point of saying 'some guys were clueless until the next year' if he and all these other core members were talking about it? It's probably not fair to jump to the conclusion that he was trying to minimize it or wash his hands of responsibility, but that conclusion is kind of hanging out there as a low-hanging explanation for an otherwise odd direction to take his answer.

It can seem like everybody knows to someone. I'm pretty sure Sopels clarified or actual to TSN comments said it was a hushed thing talked about around the team for 2-3 days.

It seems people took the step ahead of Sopel/Boynton saying it seems was like almost everyone knew to a definitive, EVERYONE KNEW, but thats not a confirmation.

It's also very selective of who has talked or been claimed to know, other than Boynton naming Kane, it's been all veterans in this discussion. And Boynton didn't contrast anything like Toews comments. But he is contrasting Dowell, since he claimed Dowell told him but Dowell doesn't remeber that. So is one lying or one remembering wrong?

It's all a needing to hear more to actually know what was known or not. But hopefully the announcement gets more players working with the law firm and they stay truthful and release the info.

 

[vandymeer13]

This just flat-out is not how adults interact with each other. There is absolutely zero expectation that you will be "picked on" in your working environment, and zero onus on you to be "man enough" to confront the person doing it. The onus is on THEM not to be a complete psychopath, and on the organization as a whole not to tolerate that kind of foolishness.

This is exactly the kind of toxicity that predators like Graham James and Brad Aldrich take advantage of so they can do pretty much anything they want to a guy without facing actual consequences.

You dont work in a blue collar job or factory I take it? Because it's pretty much like a sports team and guys ribbing on each other constantly. Watch rescue me. That's basically how my work place acts.

 

[vandymeer13]

You do realize Incognito is a freakin lunatic with some serious aggression problems, in and outside of football. There's no way Martin wouldn't have gotten wind of this.

Oh well aware incognito is a messed up individual. Great football player but out there. What do you mean by saying Martin wouldnt have gotten wind of this? That incognito was a tough guy and would of beat him up? Probably would of happened but he would of been respected in the room and probably stopped being picked on as much. The coaches even told incognito and pouncey to toughen him up.

 

[Mr Positive]

A big part of calling out the players is not what they did/didn't do in 2010 (though if they truly harassed the victim in the following seasons, that's 100% on them). I mean, you'd have hoped the team leaders would do something, but if the management and possibly coaching were strongly pushing a different narrative, I can see why they didn't do more. It was 2010, the idea of sexual assault (especially on a man) was not taken seriously enough, they just won their first Cup, guy was fired, I can see how they decided "problem solved". Deeply disagree with it, but I can understand it.
The problem is they're denying it now, despite multiple testimonies from different guys in the organization that this happened and "everybody knew". If true (and at this point I'm inclined to believe it until we get some very strong evidence to the opposite), it's another wall of silence and they're still protecting the management and/or other involved.

That and maybe the players were simply lied to about exactly what was going on. I could see players believing that there was no crime because no one was charged with anything and the Hawks org said it was settled.

 

[tarheelhockey]

You dont work in a blue collar job or factory I take it? Because it's pretty much like a sports team and guys ribbing on each other constantly. Watch rescue me. That's basically how my work place acts.

There is a difference between “ribbing each other” and sending a guy texts saying you’re going to gang rape his sister.

I don’t care what kind of environment you’re talking about, literally ANY environment, that’s miles over the line and there is absolutely zero onus on the target of that stuff to be the one to change his behavior.