Patrick Kane Rape Investigation

[Exile on Waveland]

Wow, not to get off topic, but that surprises me a lot.

 

Sadly, it doesn't surprise me at all. It's a tough crime to have clear cut evidence for in the first place, but then there's the added resistance of thinking the presence of a condom could mean it was rape, or if she's not (to be horribly blunt) torn up then, hey, it couldn't have been rape, right? It's a miracle anyone ever gets convicted over these sorts of crimes.

 

I wasn't clear. I meant specifically what he said about cases involving children.

 

Well, with children, i'd bet that they come forward far later than others. I have no idea, though.

 

Even when they come forward immediately it's rare. To be clear, I'm not talking about bruises on arms or legs from being held down or something--though that's pretty rare too--I'm specifically talking about vaginal injuries. Which are surprisingly rare, even in young girls.

 

 

And, yes, my job is often less than uplifting.

[Sammy Sofa]

or if she's not (to be horribly blunt) torn up then, hey, it couldn't have been rape, right?

 

I know that the State/prosecutors generally consider this to be a stumbling block, and take steps to mitigate it. That's why, with any good prosecutor, they'll introduce testimony about the rarity of physical damage (even when it hasn't been, and/or won't be, affirmatively asserted by the defendant). That's the only reason I actually know about this rarity, in the first place.

 

And, I have to admit, without having heard this testimony constantly, I likely would have been initially somewhat skeptical of rape/molest claims without physical damage. It's a good thing that the human body can absorb/heal but it does make these cases harder.

 

Interesting insight. Thanks.

[Sammy Sofa]

Wow, not to get off topic, but that surprises me a lot.

 

Sadly, it doesn't surprise me at all. It's a tough crime to have clear cut evidence for in the first place, but then there's the added resistance of thinking the presence of a condom could mean it was rape, or if she's not (to be horribly blunt) torn up then, hey, it couldn't have been rape, right? It's a miracle anyone ever gets convicted over these sorts of crimes.

 

I wasn't clear. I meant specifically what he said about cases involving children.

 

Well, with children, i'd bet that they come forward far later than others. I have no idea, though.

 

Even when they come forward immediately it's rare. To be clear, I'm not talking about bruises on arms or legs from being held down or something--though that's pretty rare too--I'm specifically talking about vaginal injuries. Which are surprisingly rare, even in young girls.

 

 

And, yes, my job is often less than uplifting.

 

Yeesh. That's terrible.

 

So much of the human response to trauma is to just basically shut down.

[Banedon]

WGRZ in New York reports a woman, who was with the accuser, has been subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury on Tuesday, September 8.

 

A woman accused Kane of raping her at his home in Hamburg, last month.

 

The accuser and another woman reportedly met with Kane at a bar, before they all went to his house.

 

Kane was never arrested or charged with a crime.

 

It's not clear how long the grand jury has been involved or if any other witnesses were subpoenaed.

 

http://wgntv.com/2015/09/04/patrick-kane-witness-subpoenaed-to-appear-before-grand-jury/

 

 

In other news, Jersey is a big bully.

[Brian707]

So does this new news mean that Kane being charged is more likely? To me it does

[kujay]

It seems a bad development that there's a grand jury, yes.

[Guest]

It seems a bad development that there's a grand jury, yes.

I would say yes because the burden of proof is so low to get an indictment, but I'm not a lawyer.

[kujay]

It seems a bad development that there's a grand jury, yes.

I would say yes because the burden of proof is so low to get an indictment, but I'm not a lawyer.

 

On the other hand, if it's a no bill then he's cleared criminally and it's a resolution. Of course a civil suit is always an option. And the league could still suspend him a shorter time just for being stupid.

 

The Trib article from yesterday suggested this DA typically sends high profile cases to a GJ regardless of whether he wants to prosecute the case. They made it sound like a CYA move.

[kujay]

It seems a bad development that there's a grand jury, yes.

I would say yes because the burden of proof is so low to get an indictment, but I'm not a lawyer.

 

On the other hand, if it's a no bill then he's cleared criminally and it's a resolution. Of course a civil suit is always an option. And the league could still suspend him a shorter time just for being stupid.

 

The Trib article from yesterday suggested this DA typically sends high profile cases to a GJ regardless of whether he wants to prosecute the case. They made it sound like a CYA move.

[biittner77]

If the Grand Jury indicts him, the DA has to bring it to trial, doesn't he? The idea that this is a CYA measure may just be the residue of public perception about what happened in Ferguson where the Grand Jury let the prosecutor off the hook in a case that he didn't want to bring to trial.

 

Is it possible that they're trying to get Kane to agree to some sort of plea deal that would avoid a messy trial, give at least a modicum of justice while still allowing the victim to make a civil suit leading to a settlement?

 

The lawyer signal is officially lit.

[jersey cubs fan]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[squally1313]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

From the article (about what everyone expected): "The reason for the delay appears to involve the possibility of ongoing settlement talks between attorneys for Kane and the victim, two of the sources said."

[Sammy Sofa]

Presumably the Kane camp started ramping up the offers to absurd levels out of panic.

 

I get the temptation of a ton of money and, especially, the reluctance of the victims in cases like this to go through the drawn out process of a very public trial, but damn, I am sick of these types of [expletive] getting away with it.

[ARCubsFan]

Ugh not gonna be able to root for Patrick Kane again

[Brian707]

Ugh not gonna be able to root for Patrick Kane again

 

 

I would not be surprised if he is traded

[Banedon]

Ugh not gonna be able to root for Patrick Kane again

 

 

I would not be surprised if he is traded

 

He has a no movement clause in his contract.

[UMFan83]

Ugh not gonna be able to root for Patrick Kane again

 

 

I would not be surprised if he is traded

 

He has a no movement clause in his contract.

 

Is he going to want to stay somewhere where he's obviously not wanted?

[Brian707]

Ugh not gonna be able to root for Patrick Kane again

 

 

I would not be surprised if he is traded

 

He has a no movement clause in his contract.

 

 

Right, but they can ask him to waive it.(not sure if he would)

[squally1313]

Presumably the Kane camp started ramping up the offers to absurd levels out of panic.

 

I get the temptation of a ton of money and, especially, the reluctance of the victims in cases like this to go through the drawn out process of a very public trial, but damn, I am sick of these types of [expletive] getting away with it.

 

It's been brought up before how historically, it's incredibly tough to reach a guilty verdict. There's a Blackhawks blog writer (also a lawyer) on Twitter at @regressedpdo that says it a lot better than I can, but there's a decent chance that the prosecution is encouraging a settlement to avoid the possibility that she has to go through a long, very difficult trial, and be left with nothing at the end of it.

[UMFan83]

Also my impression is that Kane got some bad legal advice or something. If there was a possibility of settlement from the start (and maybe there wasn't) Kane should have jumped on that. At least then you can try to argue that it was best for both parties to move on despite Kane's innocence. It might have helped him save some face and the story isn't in the news cycle for weeks.

 

Now it's pretty obvious Kane wants to settle to save him from potential jail time and jeopardizing his career and I'm not sure what other way you can look at it.

 

Perhaps Kane and his lawyers thought that there was a chance he could be vindicated, I don't know. But Kane knows what happened and had a good idea of what evidence was out there.

 

Either way we are like a week from training camp starting. Should be very interesting.

[jersey cubs fan]

Also my impression is that Kane got some bad legal advice or something. If there was a possibility of settlement from the start (and maybe there wasn't) Kane should have jumped on that. At least then you can try to argue that it was best for both parties to move on despite Kane's innocence. It might have helped him save some face and the story isn't in the news cycle for weeks.

 

Now it's pretty obvious Kane wants to settle to save him from potential jail time and jeopardizing his career and I'm not sure what other way you can look at it.

 

Perhaps Kane and his lawyers thought that there was a chance he could be vindicated, I don't know. But Kane knows what happened and had a good idea of what evidence was out there.

 

Either way we are like a week from training camp starting. Should be very interesting.

You are acting as if this is months into the process. It's still very early on. I can't imagine it would have looked better for him to show up with a suit case full of cash the day after being accused.

[Sammy Sofa]

Presumably the Kane camp started ramping up the offers to absurd levels out of panic.

 

I get the temptation of a ton of money and, especially, the reluctance of the victims in cases like this to go through the drawn out process of a very public trial, but damn, I am sick of these types of [expletive] getting away with it.

 

It's been brought up before how historically, it's incredibly tough to reach a guilty verdict. There's a Blackhawks blog writer (also a lawyer) on Twitter at @regressedpdo that says it a lot better than I can, but there's a decent chance that the prosecution is encouraging a settlement to avoid the possibility that she has to go through a long, very difficult trial, and be left with nothing at the end of it.

 

Oh yeah, I definitely understand that; too many tend to point as settlement as "proof" the accuser was just out to get money, but, like you said, it's typically their lawyers pushing them to settle because the odds of actually getting a conviction are so slim with something like this.

[Banedon]

I'm guessing Kane goes nowhere. There'll be a settlement, and those that want to believe that Kane is innocent are able to do so, while plenty of us struggle to watch a great player on our favorite team that we know is a gross human being.

[squally1313]

Also my impression is that Kane got some bad legal advice or something. If there was a possibility of settlement from the start (and maybe there wasn't) Kane should have jumped on that. At least then you can try to argue that it was best for both parties to move on despite Kane's innocence. It might have helped him save some face and the story isn't in the news cycle for weeks.

 

Now it's pretty obvious Kane wants to settle to save him from potential jail time and jeopardizing his career and I'm not sure what other way you can look at it.

 

Perhaps Kane and his lawyers thought that there was a chance he could be vindicated, I don't know. But Kane knows what happened and had a good idea of what evidence was out there.

 

Either way we are like a week from training camp starting. Should be very interesting.

 

Like I said in response to Nuts....it's very hard to get a guilty verdict in a rape case. That would give the girl and the prosecution reason to push for a settlement.

 

Looking at it from the other way though, if this went to court and Kane was cleared, because of those same reasons, it's likely his reputation and public image wouldn't change all that much. If he got cleared, would it change any of your opinions on him? If you're Kane, or Kane's team, maybe you accept that your reputation is tarnished, and move to get past it as quickly as possible (while, yes, eliminating any chance of a guilty verdict).

[Guest]

I'm guessing Kane goes nowhere. There'll be a settlement, and those that want to believe that Kane is innocent are able to do so, while plenty of us struggle to watch a great player on our favorite team that we know is a gross human being.

 

instead of just knowing that a certain anonymous percentage of players on our favorite team are awful human beings

 

i am so conflicted about sports these days