RWMc1 Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 13 minutes ago, HKSR said: I must be blind. Where are those words in that article?? Lol! Here's the one I quoted from. https://www.markerzone.com/news/?49920&s=11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 6 minutes ago, RWMc1 said: Here's the one I quoted from. https://www.markerzone.com/news/?49920&s=11 Ah there it is. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 (edited) 40 minutes ago, gurn said: With out criminal charges I know of no legal way to force him to stay. The criminal charges aren't gonna happen, in all likelihood. There's a reason why she's going civil. Edited July 31, 2021 by Dazzle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 (edited) I think Virtanen will end up doing boatloads of blow or drink himself silly wherever he ends up. The young man needs an intervention now. Edited August 7, 2021 by Me_ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 3 hours ago, RWMc1 said: Things changed after 7 more women came forward with complaints. Did you notice that? Have not heard of more women coming forward, where did you hear that, nothing comes up on search? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 3 hours ago, King Heffy said: Might not even be allowed out of the country at this rate due to the flight risk. He hasn’t been charged, unless he is, they cannot prevent him from traveling. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guntrix Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 Y’all gotta pin the survivorstoriesproject post so people don’t keep asking about where the info’s coming from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guntrix Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 (edited) On 7/26/2021 at 11:19 PM, 250Integra said: Bump. It’s the original source that broke the first story. And for the record, 1+7=8. Eight women have now come forward re/ Jake Virtanen. Edited July 31, 2021 by guntrix 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted August 7, 2021 Share Posted August 7, 2021 If there are multiple accusers, not sure how relevant this is. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted August 7, 2021 Share Posted August 7, 2021 2 hours ago, -DLC- said: If there are multiple accusers, not sure how relevant this is. 20 years old. Loads of money. No drugs or alcohol were involved. Not a good look. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted August 7, 2021 Share Posted August 7, 2021 15 minutes ago, -DLC- said: If there are multiple accusers, not sure how relevant this is. But I believe in a fair process and this information is part of that? Even if the source is in his corner. More than one accuser now! This just gets worse. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted August 7, 2021 Share Posted August 7, 2021 2 hours ago, -DLC- said: If there are multiple accusers, not sure how relevant this is. interesting follow up tweet: 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted August 7, 2021 Share Posted August 7, 2021 10 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: interesting follow up tweet: It's hard to come to terms with this. What a mess. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violator Posted August 7, 2021 Share Posted August 7, 2021 57 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: interesting follow up tweet: What's a sealing order? With how it pertains to this case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted August 7, 2021 Share Posted August 7, 2021 4 minutes ago, Violator said: What's a sealing order? With how it pertains to this case? depends: https://www.ppsc-sppc.gc.ca/eng/pub/fpsd-sfpg/fps-sfp/tpd/p3/ch04.html I would guess in this case the judge is trying to protect both Jake and his accuser from info being leaked. Both sides will have things to say that could be publicly damaging to both of them. So it looks like the accuser's side has decided to leak info which is too bad. If she's actually been abused this might hurt her case. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted August 7, 2021 Share Posted August 7, 2021 Perhaps the most damning evidence against Jake is that VforVirtanen has changed his name, and thereby shut down the church. So sad how all this has worked out, especially if he did anything close to what he has been accused of. Waste of a career, hope the partying was worth it. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4petesake Posted August 7, 2021 Share Posted August 7, 2021 22 minutes ago, Violator said: What's a sealing order? With how it pertains to this case? As best as I understand it: The public generally has a right to view court proceedings which includes viewing and making copies of court documents. A sealing order prevents this. A publication ban means simply that information cannot be made public and as far as I can tell there is no publication ban in place. The logical question is how did these journalists come to view or have access to information that was covered by the sealing order? Gemma Karstens-Smith says in her statement that she accessed the court documents, so how did she come to view them? The implication is that she accessed it through the victim. Her statement about no publication ban seems like a bit of a red herring. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted August 8, 2021 Share Posted August 8, 2021 5 hours ago, 4petesake said: As best as I understand it: The public generally has a right to view court proceedings which includes viewing and making copies of court documents. A sealing order prevents this. A publication ban means simply that information cannot be made public and as far as I can tell there is no publication ban in place. The logical question is how did these journalists come to view or have access to information that was covered by the sealing order? Gemma Karstens-Smith says in her statement that she accessed the court documents, so how did she come to view them? The implication is that she accessed it through the victim. Her statement about no publication ban seems like a bit of a red herring. This is how i see it too. If the documents are sealed, the reporter should not have been able to see them to report on them in the first place. There doesnt need to be apublication ban in place if the information reported on was under seal. It will be up to Virtanen's lawyer to make that argument and to outline what info was published that should not have been. If there is any, this reporter could be in trouble. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted August 8, 2021 Share Posted August 8, 2021 The deeper this goes and the more drama created as it goes along, the more I'm comfortable with the buyout. We don't need this around the team. Still saddened by the whole downfall of Jake with Vancouver. What could (and should) have been... 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted August 8, 2021 Share Posted August 8, 2021 (edited) 15 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said: This is how i see it too. If the documents are sealed, the reporter should not have been able to see them to report on them in the first place. There doesnt need to be apublication ban in place if the information reported on was under seal. It will be up to Virtanen's lawyer to make that argument and to outline what info was published that should not have been. If there is any, this reporter could be in trouble. That isn’t true at all. How could the reporter be in trouble when there isn’t a publication ban. They are allowed to report on any thing they want unless ordered by the courts not to. The agent is looking after Jake’s interests so is has no legal obligation to be fair or even truthful. It is pretty clear by the statement put out that they are at the very least being disingenuous by bending the truth by omitting a bunch of facts that put him in a bad light. There is other precise language that also gives hints. When they put in “to my understanding” that is simply a way to say something that isn’t necessarily true but to also not be able to be called out on outright lying. He is also making all sorts of unfounded public accusations against the complainant and reporter not founded in law while at the same time complaining about elements of the investigation into his client becoming public. He also details elements of the case himself while accusing the other side of being inappropriate by doing the same. It is nothing more than a PR document and a shot across the bow warning to the other potential accusers that they will be attacked publicly as money grubbing liars. Also, in these sorts of cases, unless it is a mandatory ban (as some elements of sexual assault cases always are) it is generally the accused’s counsel that asks for documents to be sealed so the public doesn’t see them and the judge doesn’t do that on their own. Sometime it is the complainant who requests it… but in sexual assault cases most of the time they are mostly protected by mandatory orders. Often it is only specific documents that are sealed and not everything related to the case. There are also a myriad of ways the source information can be given out that doesn’t break a sealing order. The sealing order only restricts public access to the actual court documents themselves and is no limit on anyone who has information sharing that publicly. Like if an accuser makes a statement that ends up in a sealed court record, that doesn’t mean they can’t talk about it elsewhere. Virtanen’s camp wouldn’t want the details to become public and only the outcome. Same as they would demand a gag order as part of any out of court settlement they might come to. Edited August 8, 2021 by Provost 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now