Updates to the Kane situation

[Chief Walking Stick]

Why does the media hate da Kaner so much???

Thats a messy avatar u have.

Do u find it weird/creepy that IB has an avatar of a child?

 

[DMelt36]

SportsMockery takes a shot at the Chicago media. They also cite the article I believe I did in the main thread (that got closed) referencing how unreliable the 2-8% number is.

http://sportsmockery.com/2015/08/chicago-media-has-already-classified-patrick-kane-as-guilty/

Those morons keep whining about the Chicago media because several members of that media have blasted (and rightfully so, IMO) that stupid fucking website for continuing to serve as a shitty tabloid that spreads completely unfounded rumors.

Remember when all that Patrick Sharp stuff was happening during the season? Those assholes posted this:

Here’s a list of rumors currently being circulated, which appear to be mostly untrue

And then proceeded to list nine fucking rumors even though they'd already said they were "mostly untrue."

That's around the time I decided that website wasn't worth the time.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

Those morons keep whining about the Chicago media because several members of that media have blasted (and rightfully so, IMO) that stupid fucking website for continuing to serve as a shitty tabloid that spreads completely unfounded rumors.

Remember when all that Patrick Sharp stuff was happening during the season? Those assholes posted this:



And then proceeded to list nine fucking rumors even though they'd already said they were "mostly untrue."

That's around the time I decided that website wasn't worth the time.

Can u please ban this rape supporting asshat?

 

[CRM 114]

Can u please ban this rape supporting asshat?

Don't bother asking. I already tried.

 

[DMelt36]

I'll just ban all of you at once. It'll be fun.

 

[DMelt36]

I swear to God I'll pistol whip the next poster who says "ban"

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

ban

 

[DMelt36]

ban

 

[Samurai]

I swear to God I'll pistol whip the next poster who says "ban"

This has been going on (dry) for years.

:marshmallow::marshmallow::marshmallow:

 

[Tater]

Can we ban whoever changed the Hawks icon to Toews with a headband?

 

[HeHateMe]

Can we ban whoever changed the Hawks icon to Toews with a headband?

I think that's hilarious.

 

[biscuit_in_the_basket]

SportsMockery takes a shot at the Chicago media. They also cite the article I believe I did in the main thread (that got closed) referencing how unreliable the 2-8% number is.

http://sportsmockery.com/2015/08/chicago-media-has-already-classified-patrick-kane-as-guilty/

Perhaps if they were not a rumourmongering "media" site that throws 100 piles of wet Jello to the wall to see what sticks, they may not feel the need to defend themselves in this "I'm taking the ball and going home" manner.

 

[BlackHawkPaul]

Perhaps if they were not a rumourmongering "media" site that throws 100 piles of wet Jello to the wall to see what sticks, they may not feel the need to defend themselves in this "I'm taking the ball and going home" manner.

A legit journalistic site would at least add the names of the authors to the article for what we call journalistic integrity.

Can we ban whoever changed the Hawks icon to Toews with a headband?

No.
Whoever did that is amazing.

 

[italianbeef]

Nope, I support that the judicial system will find the real truth (which probably won't ever happen) in this ordeal.

You support that they will do something that probably won't ever happen?

I reference the stats because some have made the "false reports" seem like a normal occurrence when in reality it's probably the least likely of anything to happen involving a rape case.

This 2-8% thing is being thrown around without context, and context is everything.

The linked academic study actually concludes that false rape allegations occur at a rate of 2 to 10 percent, but leave aside the typo. Readers could easily interpret the above paragraph to mean that when a woman files a complaint about sexual assault, then an assault did in fact occur over 90 percent of the time. That interpretation is wrong.

A “false” rape allegation is provably false – meaning, for example, that the accused has a bulletproof alibi or the accuser eventually recants. In many of the cases examined by the authors of the study, there was simply not enough evidence to bring charges. A rape might have occurred, but it might not have. Such cases are not classified as false.

Specifically, in their analysis of sexual-assault cases at a large university, the authors found that 5.9 percent of cases were provably false. However, 44.9 percent cases “did not proceed” – meaning there was insufficient evidence, the accuser was uncooperative, or the incident did not meet the legal standard of assault. An additional 13.9 percent of cases could not be categorized due to lack of information. That leaves 35.3 percent of cases that led to formal charges or discipline against the accused. So there is obviously a lot of uncertainty here, a lot of he-said/she-said when allegations are filed. It would be a mistake to conclude, on the basis of the existing evidence, that nine out of ten assault claims are genuine.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/416536/how-common-are-false-rape-charges-really-jason-richwine

 

[Shantz My Pants]

So 5.9 were provably false which is the number going around. 44.9% didn't proceed to charges which doesn't mean an assault happened, it was just very hard to prove it.


Sent from my Texas Instrument Calculator

 

[biscuit_in_the_basket]

A legit journalistic site would at least add the names of the authors to the article for what we call journalistic integrity.

And there is that too.

 

[italianbeef]

So 5.9 were provably false which is the number going around. 44.9% didn't proceed to charges which doesn't mean an assault happened, it was just very hard to prove it.

Yes, proving a negative is very difficult. It doesn't mean that in the other 94.1% an assault occurred, as the article cited. That's all I'm saying.

People are using the number of provably false to imply that, however.

 

[italianbeef]

Fair enough. I had only heard of that site this past week and don't really follow any other Chicago sports other than the Hawks.

Which means I'll need someone to remind me to remove the price tag from my new Cubs jersey before going to the parade if they break the curse.

 

[HeHateMe]

According to some stats, rape rarely actually happens, and it's even more rare when a pro athlete is the accused. Brb, looking for the article but I'm pretty sure it was from a legit sports blog about rape.

 

[Toast88]

Nope, I support that the judicial system will find the real truth (which probably won't ever happen) in this ordeal.

I reference the stats because some have made the "false reports" seem like a normal occurrence when in reality it's probably the least likely of anything to happen involving a rape case.


Sent from my Texas Instrument Calculator

That's irrelevant. It's beyond irrelevant.

Just because something is rare, you can't use that rarity to connect dots on a specific case. Otherwise, we might as well just jail all accused rapists and deny them due process because, you know, false allegations are extremely rare.