Updates to the Kane situation

[Chief Walking Stick]

Bullshit. Get off your fucking high horse. For weeks I and others were called "rape supporters" and "rapists" for daring to defend Kane's innocence - in fact, it's continued to this day.

You and other "moderators" have always let it slide.

Why are you always so angry bropist?

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Bullshit. Get off your fucking high horse. For weeks I and others were called "rape supporters" and "rapists" for daring to defend Kane's innocence - in fact, it's continued to this day.

You and other "moderators" have always let it slide.

Or maybe it's because you were full on the innocent train with the same amount of evidence you were accusing those who you've claimed said guilty.

 

[italianbeef]

Or maybe it's because you were full on the innocent train with the same amount of evidence you were accusing those who you've claimed said guilty.

I was on the "he's innocent until proven guilty" train.

You know, like the criminal justice system works.

When evidence came to light that appeared to exonerate him, suddenly we were told to disregard all news reported to date because it just wasn't trustworthy.

Convenient.

 

[Novak]

Someone needs to get banraped. That is all.

 

[BlackHawkPaul]

Sound familiar?



How about this?

It was a big story until it turned in Kane's favor. Now Grim (and others) is no longer interested.

Ask BlackhawkPaul if it was him who closed the last thread when he wakes up.

Wait, what did I do? I rarely ever close a thread. Maybe merge, because people are too lazy to see that they've created similar threads, but I'm not going to quell a discussion (I should nuke this thread due to the fact that a couple of posters like to see wheels spin in mud rather than to move it forward--but there's nothing to move it forward at the moment).
Why are you quoting a poster "stu grimson?" Was that post from these boards? Or another site?
What exactly is your argument again (besides the obvious)?

After 2000 posts in one thread one would probably realize that the debate is moot since we'll never have concrete evidence of what occurred.

 

[bamainatlanta]

Ass and titties fellas, ass and titties.

 

[Novak]

Ass and titties fellas, ass and titties.

Another rape supporter.... sheesh

 

[BlackHawkPaul]

Depends on which side they chose, doesn't it.

This thread has pretty much followed this form for weeks:

Leak reflecting bad on Kane, "uh-oh, doesn't look good"

Leak reflecting bad on Kane, "uh-oh, doesn't look good"

Leak reflecting bad on Kane, "uh-oh, doesn't look good"

Leak reflecting bad on Kane, "uh-oh, doesn't look good"

Leak reflecting bad on accuser, "well, you just can't believe these leaks. let's stop talking about this until we know something for realz"

This has been the stance of most rational people since day 1.
Don't pick a side because the information will not be 100% on either.
I've been mostly vocal on the fallout around this incident. My observations are how people use a case like this to either victim bash or make the accused look guilty. The camps choose their sides and it becomes an internet flaming war, just like this thread.

I compare it to a Choose Your Own Adventure with pages missing, yet people are trying to determine the climax.

 

[LordKOTL]

They seem pretty clear in what they are alleging she said. She either said it, or they completely made it up.

Shortly after she and her friend arrived at Kane’s home on Old Lakeshore Road, the accuser alleges that she went by herself into another room, where Kane followed her, overpowered her and raped her, the sources said.

I find it odd how suddenly after the whole case blew up, none of what has been leaked is no longer credible to some here.

None of that is proof positive that her allegation is "Patrick Kane raped me". Those same "sources" also said this case was a virtual slam-dunk against Kane.

If you looked at my stance from day 1, it's been to not jump to a conclusion without a large number of facts--and I was more on *your* end of the argument than some others that thought Kane sexually assaulted her; you know, because of uNreliable sources and clickbait TMZ reporting. Right now the facts are stating that it's highly unlikley that Kane did anything to her. Which is fine. What I see now the fact that exactly what and who she accused of was never verified publically--everything that fingers her as a gold digger is a jump to a conclusion, not hard fact.

Just because Kane is most likely innocent of any sex crime does not mean that she wasn't raped. If there's proof positive that she is lying then yeah, I'll change my stance.

 

[DMelt36]

I compare it to a Choose Your Own Adventure with pages missing, yet people are trying to determine the climax.

Excellent reference here.

 

[MassHavoc]

I compare it to a Choose Your Own Adventure with pages missing, yet people are trying to determine the climax.

Sounds like what got Kane into this mess... hiiiyooo....

 

[Tjodalv]

Best CCS Hawks thread ever? (and by best I mean worst, and by thread I mean shitshow, and by ever I mean...well, yeah, ever)

 

[DMelt36]

Best CCS Hawks thread ever? (and by best I mean worst, and by thread I mean shitshow, and by ever I mean...well, yeah, ever)

It's certainly in the running.

 

[xer0h0ur]

As a bandwagon Hawks fan from this dynasty, I am proud to have been a part of this shit show. Carry on men. Carry on.

 

[italianbeef]

Wait, what did I do?

Absolutely nothing to stop the trolling that goes on from one user in every single thread.

Why are you quoting a poster "stu grimson?" Was that post from these boards? Or another site?

Grimson's non-trolling alter-ego on HFBoards. He doesn't troll there because they have something called "moderators" who don't allow it.

After 2000 posts in one thread one would probably realize that the debate is moot since we'll never have concrete evidence of what occurred.

If the case doesn't go to grand jury, we'll have concrete evidence of what did NOT happen. In fact, the DNA results pretty much paint that picture already.

 

[Novak]

HFboards sound like a gr8 place to be. If it's so gr8 though, why are you here and not there? Come on iBeef

 

[DMelt36]

Though it's not as important, one thing on Kane from a hockey perspective ...

I heard them say during the broadcast Wednesday night that Kane was off the ice for 7 weeks in the summer while all of this was going on. Comparatively speaking, I read/heard that Seabrook said he was only off for about two weeks before he got back into his training for this season. Wonder if Kane's legs start to get heavy by the end of the season due to not having a proper offseason training regimen.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

Absolutely nothing to stop the trolling that goes on from one user in every single thread.



Grimson's non-trolling alter-ego on HFBoards. He doesn't troll there because they have something called "moderators" who don't allow it.



If the case doesn't go to grand jury, we'll have concrete evidence of what did NOT happen. In fact, the DNA results pretty much paint that picture already.

LOL that's not me, moron.

I have had my account on HFBoards for over 11 years without being banned unlike you. There is no need to troll over there because they have something called "moderators" who ban idiots like you.

 

[Novak]

Though it's not as important, one thing on Kane from a hockey perspective ...

I heard them say during the broadcast Wednesday night that Kane was off the ice for 7 weeks in the summer while all of this was going on. Comparatively speaking, I read/heard that Seabrook said he was only off for about two weeks before he got back into his training for this season. Wonder if Kane's legs start to get heavy by the end of the season due to not having a proper offseason training regimen.

He seemed off last night a bit. I wonder if he's still knocking off some raperust?

 

[DMelt36]

He seemed off last night a bit. I wonder if he's still knocking off some raperust?