Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Enter Search Term. Use arrows to navigate between autocomplete results. If no results appear, use Enter to do a full site search.
Forum Closure ×
Canucks Community
Forum Closure

Jake Virtanen banner still up at Rogers place ( article)

Rate this topic

cuporbust

By cuporbust
in Canucks Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

RU SERIOUS Canucks First-Line

RU SERIOUS

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Dazzle said:

What error?

 

It costs money to arrange people to take down specialized equipment like banners from arenas. There's probably permits required to operate in the area. Furthermore, they can just change it at the same time as when they put in a new banner.

 

What's the goddamn hurry?

 

Furthermore, Virtanen has NOT been convicted of anything. Why are you acting like he is a criminal?

At this point, the allegations are serious, but they are unproven in court. If the allegations had evidence remaining, criminal charges would have been laid already.

 

This is why we should not react emotionally to a situation. The amount of people automatically calling someone guilty before the evidence had even been presented is scary.

Look at this way.  If you had an underaged 14-17 y.o. daughter walking down the street with her girfriends next to Rogers Arena, would you like some beedy eyed alleged rapist from Abbotsford peering down on her?  What kind of sick parent would allow that?

 

................and BTW, you're correct that he has not been conviceted yet, so to appease you and be fair, I agree, that we should only call him an "ALLEGED psychopathic underage young girl serial sex abuser from Abbotsford" for now - until he's convicted and sentenced by the courts for these crimes he ALLEGEDLY commited.

but remember, where there's smoke (especially from multiple girls) there's likely fire!

 

I rest my case...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Vintage 1
  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dazzle Canucks Franchise Player

Dazzle

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, RU SERIOUS said:

Look at this way.  If you had an underaged 14-17 y.o. daughter walking down the street with her girfriends next to Rogers Arena, would you like some beedy eyed alleged rapist from Abbotsford peering down on her?  What kind of sick parent would allow that?

 

................and BTW, you're correct that he has not been conviceted yet, so to appease you and be fair, I agree, that we should only call him an "ALLEGED psychopathic underage young girl serial sex abuser from Abbotsford" for now - until he's convicted and sentenced by the courts for these crimes he ALLEGEDLY commited.

but remember, where there's smoke (especially from multiple girls) there's likely fire!

 

I rest my case...

You better not rest that case. In fact, you should return it from wherever you bought it from.

 

Jumping to conclusions is dangerous. When you form an opinion based on incomplete information, you are putting yourself in a dangerous spot of trying to 'justify' what you are thinking. We call this a confirmation bias.

 

Having multiple allegations against Virtanen is bad. Still, you would THINK there would be evidence to lay charges with seven people involved.  Where is it?

 

The criminal court requires heavy evidence for something to proceed. Hearsay is just not admissible evidence. Right now, this is just going to a civil case, where the two can sort their issues out.

This isn't to say Virtanen didn't do what he is accused of doing. This is to say we don't know.

Edited by Dazzle
  • Thanks 1
  • Cheers 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RU SERIOUS Canucks First-Line

RU SERIOUS

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Dazzle said:

You better not rest that case. In fact, you should return it from wherever you bought it from.

 

Jumping to conclusions is dangerous. When you form an opinion based on incomplete information, you are putting yourself in a dangerous spot of trying to 'justify' what you are thinking. We call this a confirmation bias.

 

Having multiple allegations against Virtanen is bad. Still, you would THINK there would be evidence to lay charges with seven people involved.  Where is it?

 

The criminal court requires heavy evidence for something to proceed. Hearsay is just not admissible evidence. Right now, this is just going to a civil case, where the two can sort their issues out.

This isn't to say Virtanen didn't do what he is accused of doing. This is to say we don't know.

Agree 100% and exactly why I said "he is an ALLEGED psychopathic underage young girl serial sex abuser from Abbotsford".

Thanks!

 

BTW, while we're on the subject of Jake  "The Ripper", crimes and unpleasent things,  you guys should catch a wiff of the Corpse Flower in Bloom at the Blodel conservatory in Q.E. Park.  Smells just like a hockey bag full  of "ALLEGED"victims from Abbotsford. Only in bloom for another 24-48 hours.

Edited by RU SERIOUS
  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
-DLC- Canucks Hall-of-Famer

-DLC-

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
37 minutes ago, RU SERIOUS said:

Agree 100% and exactly why I said "he is an ALLEGED psychopathic underage young girl serial sex abuser from Abbotsford".

Thanks!

 

BTW, while we're on the subject of Jake  "The Ripper", crimes and unpleasent things,  you guys should catch a wiff of the Corpse Flower in Bloom at the Blodel conservatory in Q.E. Park.  Smells just like a hockey bag full  of "ALLEGED"victims from Abbotsford. Only in bloom for another 24-48 hours.

Alleged.

 

She was 18, which is within the age of consent.  She didn't give consent according to her statement - but we shouldn't add our own narrative to her story.  She was a young woman and Jake a young man.  Doesn't excuse his actions in any way...just we don't need to make stuff up and add spin to the account of what (allegedly) happened.  

I am fully in victim's corners but we also have to be fair and factual and not make stuff up.

 

 

 

 

  • Cheers 3
  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Fred65 Canucks First-Line

Fred65

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, Dazzle said:

Notice how cuporbust has no interest in continuing this discussion and its new developments?

 

I think it's not farfetched to speculate that posters like him have a fetish of stirring up controversy.

Some posters are antagonists other want to challenge the norm, Cuporbust was the former in my mind, but I likely fall into the latter :)

Edited by Fred65
Link to comment
Share on other sites
alt kilgore Canucks Franchise Player

alt kilgore

Posted
Posted

Jake Jake Jake.

What could have been. He had this big oversized poster of himself beside the arena. He had extra love and support just because he was from the lower mainland. We'll never know if it was a case of just not being good enough, or if more hard work and dedication to his craft would have made a difference.  He was his own worst enemy.

 

Don't feel sorry for him. He has pocketed millions now, and he may even play again somewhere. Even in the NHL if he's not proven guilty.  If he is, and serves a probably light sentence, he could play in Europe or Russia. Even if he never plays again, he's earned a few million.  He can still be comfortable for the rest of his life.

 

See ya. Its been fun. Especially the whole "shotgun Jake" thing.

 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dazzle Canucks Franchise Player

Dazzle

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

Some posters are antagonists other want to challenge the norm, Cuporbust was the former in my mind, but I likely fall into the latter :)

Challenging the norm only makes sense if you don't stretch out the truth, while openly disregarding other 'perspectives' that seem to undermine your original position.

 

Simply being the black sheep for the sake of it is not a great strategy.

 

Someone like wallstreetamigo, for example, openly ignores evidence because it differs from his core beliefs. It's no surprise that he puts people on ignore when he 'lost' the arguments.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fred65 Canucks First-Line

Fred65

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Challenging the norm only makes sense if you don't stretch out the truth, while openly disregarding other 'perspectives' that seem to undermine your original position.

 

Simply being the black sheep for the sake of it is not a great strategy.

 

Someone like wallstreetamigo, for example, openly ignores evidence because it differs from his core beliefs. It's no surprise that he puts people on ignore when he 'lost' the arguments.

I quite enjoy wallstreet amigo mostly because we see the game/business through the same lens. I don't enjoy the cheerleaders or the sheep, I prefer to look and reach a decision based on what I see. Some times I'm wrong, that's inevitable. Some times what appears obvious is actually based on your own circumstances like the number of times over many years and season has simply been a repeat of earlier days or rosters. Some times you become impatient and overlook logic or facts. Like a few fans/poster I've been a fan for quite a long time and have seen the  Jocelyn Guevremonts of the roster come and go. Most posters still jump the gun and decalre prospects the next star when the odds are firmly against such a thing. :lol:

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...