Vitamin JAY

Many Oilers fans that I know and that I like are suffering and angry now. They believe in their hearts that the Oilers have signed a rapist, and that many fans support this horrible act. Little wonder they are so upset. But there is one thing that might bring some relief. Go and read the judge’s verdict. It is easy to read and comprehend. The judge is a clear writer. She carefully describes the key elements of the case. For some people at least, the ruling will bring clarity. For some it will bring the understanding that, no, nobody supports rape, and no one supports having a rapist on the Oilers. What happened on that night in question was strange, tawdry, shallow and, in the end, miserable, as casual sex can be. But if you are humble before the facts perhaps you will find it does not add up to something that should turn you against your fellow fans and beloved team.

Lots to hate about the Vegas franchise. But giving a second chance to Carter Hart isn't one of them. The judge in the case didn't just find no guilt, she exonerated the accused. finding as a matter of fact there was no sexual assault, that the sex was consensual. If you're curious to know the facts of the Hart and his Hockey Canada teammates case, here is summary of the 11 key findings of fact in judge Maria Carroccia's ruling: 1. That Carroccia found the complainant, E.M., to be both unreliable and not credible in her testimony about the events of the night in question, June. 18, 2018 in London, Ontario. More than that, Carroccia found that E.M. had given her consent to the sex acts with the men that night. The Hockey Canada Five were always presumed innocent until found guilty under our system, but Carroccia’s finding does more than find them not guilty. It essentially exonerates them, though we will all likely agree that they acted in poor and immature fashion that night and needed to do more to treat E.M. with care. 2. The judge also found that the notion “believe all women” is a political slogan, but goes against fundamental Canadian values that work to ensure that no innocent person is found guilty without a fair trial. 3. That key video evidence from Jack’s Bar where E.M. met Michael McLeod and other Hockey Canada players that night forcefully and completely contradicts what E.M. said about the players initiating overt sexual contact on the dance flooor, and that E.M., in fact, put her hand on McLeod’s crotch area on the dance floor. 4. That key video evidence from the bar that night forcefully and completely contradicts what E.M. claimed about getting plied with drinks from the players. In fact, E.M. bought almost all of her own drinks. 5. That key video evidence contradicts what E.M. claimed about the players trying to separate her from her friends. 6. That key video evidence and E.M’s own testimony contradicts her claim that she was completely out of it that night due to alcohol consumption. 7. That E.M. had reasons to fabricate a false narrative based on numerous factors, including making things right with her own boyfriend. 8. There was repeated and consistent testimony, including from Crown witnesses Tyler Steenbergen and Brett Howden, that E.M. pushed for the players to engage with sex acts with her, and in the end Carroccia accepted this evidence as fact. 9. That there was numerous evidence of E.M.’s testimony been unreliable. 10. That E.M. had several opportunities to get dressed and to leave if she was fearful, but she left the bathroom where her clothes were and walked naked into the room full of players to continue on with their evening. This dynamic started after she had admittedly had consensual sex with McLeod. 11. That the players group chat the following day was not an effort to fabricate a story, but a group decision to simply tell the truth about what had happened with E.M.