Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Jake Virtanen found NOT GUILTY!

Rate this topic


HKSR

Recommended Posts

Just now, Shayster007 said:

A coping mechanism for a brain trying to deal with a traumatic experience?  It's actually not peticularly uncommon for victims to lean in closer to abusers after a traumatic experience to try to rationalize past experiences. We obviously don't know what happened for sure, but I can tell you that how she handled the situation after wasn't as crazy as it sounds if you have some training and education on how humans handle trauma. 

When I was younger I had a gf who had a bad experience with a doctor,  she never went back there again. She cried a lot about it.

  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Vinny in Vancouver said:

If it's just based on the testimony in this trial, yes. But if you go through the various posts on Jake's reported behaviour off-ice over the years, you may re-think that reaction.

Nothing for me to re-think..That's all I'm basing it on because that's what it was all about. Character flaws for sure but he wasn't on trial for his off-ice character but was for factual testimony and her testimony had a lot of flaws in it. A jury of his peers 4 women and 8 men in Canada's Supreme Court found him not guilty. She still has a chance in Civil Court where the burden of proof is a lot lower. I really don't understand if everything was as she said why did she stay with him for the rest of the night? and not leave immediately after the supposed sexual assault. Doesn't make sense to me. She also said she didn't know how much money hockey players make. Really..You live under a rock? Why go to Civil court then? She even went to a game a couple of days later after saying she hated him. Very conflicting actions and a sad situation for all involved.

Edited by Redline
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Shayster007 said:

A coping mechanism for a brain trying to deal with a traumatic experience?  It's actually not peticularly uncommon for victims to lean in closer to abusers after a traumatic experience to try to rationalize past experiences. We obviously don't know what happened for sure, but I can tell you that how she handled the situation after wasn't as crazy as it sounds if you have some training and education on how humans handle trauma. 

Could this be why so many rapists aren’t even tried, and when they are they are often acquitted?  The jurors cannot understand the behaviour of the victim because the victim was behaving after severe trauma, and the jurors cannot relate, so they question the validity of her testimony?  

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Could this be why so many rapists aren’t even tried, and when they are they are often acquitted?  The jurors cannot understand the behaviour of the victim because the victim was behaving after severe trauma, and the jurors cannot relate, so they question the validity of her testimony?  

its also how coaches and priests get away with it too. 

  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mordekai said:

Jake was a 18yr old with loads of money. People on here can trash him all you want but his position with all the temptation is not an easy one to control. 

Really?  When it comes to resisting temptation, EP says "hold my beer"  correct that "hold my Shirley Temple"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was always going to be the likely outcome. Simply not enough actual evidence to prove anything  

 

Does it prove that he didn't do it? No. But if there is a reasonable doubt that he did, it wouldn't have been right to take his freedom away. It's better that a potentially guilty person walk than a potentially innocent person be convicted.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Could this be why so many rapists aren’t even tried, and when they are they are often acquitted?  The jurors cannot understand the behaviour of the victim because the victim was behaving after severe trauma, and the jurors cannot relate, so they question the validity of her testimony?  

Yes and no. Is some situations it could play out exactly like you described. In many more situations it's much simpler then that. A victim can have a massive range of emotions they can experience after trauma. Some of the most common include a wide variance of shame.

 

A victim may feel embarrassed, like they are to blame, they will be crucified and not believed, or many other complex emotions. This is one of the reasons why the overwhelming majority of sexual assaults are never even reported to police, let alone get to the point where courts have any say.

 

In many cases it takes the victim a very long time, if ever, before they come forward. At that point in time any physical evidence is gone and there is rarely concrete evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt. Another reason why even once they get to the court so few are actually convicted. Once a victim comes forward, they enter what can be years of reliving a traumatic experience with a 12% chance they will even see the justice they are seeking. That's why I keep repeating this was the most likely outcome for this case. There was statistically an 88% chance Jake would be found not guilty based off the type of crime he was being accused of.

Edited by Shayster007
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Shayster007 said:

A coping mechanism for a brain trying to deal with a traumatic experience?  It's actually not peticularly uncommon for victims to lean in closer to abusers after a traumatic experience to try to rationalize past experiences. We obviously don't know what happened for sure, but I can tell you that how she handled the situation after wasn't as crazy as it sounds if you have some training and education on how humans handle trauma. 

" not peticularly uncommon for victims to lean in closer to abusers after a traumatic experience to try to rationalize past experiences." 

 

Where are you getting this from? So if I had a freak accident at some restaurant, I'd want to visit that restaurant 3 days later? Or if someone's hit by a car, they would want to go visit and see the driver? 

 

Common sense would be to stay away from the abuser to avoid getting abused again or to avoid trigger the painful memories you probably dont want to bring up. 

Edited by Drakrami
  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Drakrami said:

" not peticularly uncommon for victims to lean in closer to abusers after a traumatic experience to try to rationalize past experiences." 

 

Where are you getting this from? So if I had a freak accident at some restaurant, I'd want to visit that restaurant 3 days later? Or if someone's hit by a car, they would want to go visit and see the driver? 

 

Common sense would be to stay away from the abuser to avoid getting abused again or to avoid trigger the painful memories you probably dont want to bring up. 

I work in a field of healthcare that deals with both emotional and physical trauma. I'm getting it from my education in said healthcare, as well as what I teach my students at the post secondary level. Are you asking for my particular courses or textbooks or is my training and experience in both working and teaching trauma responses sufficient?

 

If you care to do some reading Niwako Yamwaki wrote some interesting papers on the exact mechanism I'm referring too.

 

 

Edited by Shayster007
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hockeygod77 said:

 sign him to minimum contract..no worse than kane who has new chance..i think if jake can get  stronger and just be bit more focused it could be a good re signing..what happened is history...most good players have some trouble...nba stars nil stars baseball you have guys with big egos no brain at times but great talent...kevin durant donaldson tiger woods etc...these guys are only human...women sometimes act too much too..so not easy for star players that have limited social time and are just plain horny...

haahahah go away, hes garbage and will always be, JR/alvin will never resign him ....so jake fanboys can fanboy with the KHL were he will probably end up or quit hockey alltogether lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

This was always going to be the likely outcome. Simply not enough actual evidence to prove anything  

 

Does it prove that he didn't do it? No. But if there is a reasonable doubt that he did, it wouldn't have been right to take his freedom away. It's better that a potentially guilty person walk than a potentially innocent person be convicted.

This. Unless there are cameras, an eye witness or a confession, these kinds of charges are always a huge challenge to prove. Even if one manages to show ill character of the accused, or can show physical damage, it's still up to that reasonable doubt. In this particular case, supposedly she claimed a couple of things which were not possible, which then obviously added question to her own story. It was a loss waiting to happen.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, kloubek said:

This. Unless there are cameras, an eye witness or a confession, these kinds of charges are always a huge challenge to prove. Even if one manages to show ill character of the accused, or can show physical damage, it's still up to that reasonable doubt. In this particular case, supposedly she claimed a couple of things which were not possible, which then obviously added question to her own story. It was a loss waiting to happen.

Yeah, where's the security footage from the hotel and the elevator. Before and after footage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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