Anonymous #1 1d

What’s it gonna take for you to understand that Hockey Canada is notorious for sweeping their players’ shit under the rug, screwing over dozens of innocent girls in the process?

0

Anonymous #2 1d

Hockey Canada did not put him on trial. The Canadien government did. And since you wanna talk about sweeping things under the rug, answer me about Nichuskin… who didn’t even go to trial

3

Anonymous #1 1d

Me when I intentionally misunderstand what someone says. Everyone knows Hockey Canada didn’t put him on trial. Everyone also knows Hockey Canada has a proclivity for paying victims off in exchange for silence. Also, both are wrong? So is Stan Bowman and Coach Q and Patrick Kane and Ian Cole? I’m saying none of them should get away with their crimes.

0

Anonymous #2 1d

Okay, then why is VGK the only team that gets called out? I don’t even like them, but where’s the hate for the Avs, Blackhawks, Ducks, Canes, Mammoth, Oilers, Panthers, Red Wings, etc.? You can’t seriously say that they paid this girl off for her silence when she was anything but silent. Why can you just not accept that in this particular case, the facts were not there

6

Anonymous #1 1d

Bruh, call them all out! Gut the league if you have to. No predator deserves the success these men have considering the actions they’ve committed. And no, E.M. didn’t stay silent — good. But we know they tried to keep her quiet. And she’s in the minority. Most victims will never report their assault because of people like you. Why can’t you just believe a victim instead of siding with a multimillionaire athlete who sees you as nothing more than a paycheck?

1

Anonymous #2 1d

Shut the fuck up. I know what a victim acts like because I am a victim. That is not how a victim acts, both in the moment and after. She did an incredible disservice to real victims. She saw the opportunity for a money grab and took it. And bro, I’m telling YOU to call them all out because YOU are the one who’s upset about it

5

Anonymous #1 1d

And by “people like you”, I’m referring to those who invalidate what any victim went through. And there was evidence, just not enough. Much like a certain OJ Simpson case, of whom was also found not guilty.

0

Anonymous #2 1d

The only evidence pointed to her being the aggressor. She masturbated in front of them, said “who’s gonna come fuck me” and called them pussies for not wanting to do it. I certainly wasn’t acting like that when I got assaulted 🤷‍♂️

3

Anonymous #1 1d

I’m sorry to hear that you went through that. I’m sure you’re a lovely person IRL. Victims aren’t monoliths and she could’ve revoked consent at any point, and they had the capacity to put an end to things but chose not to.

1