Quoting: A_Habs_fan
not really, this situation was the catalyst for the changes at Hockey Canada, whether the player involved are guilty or not, hockey Canada using funds to pay for people's silence is unacceptable, and there's a reason why the public and sponsors wanted answers. I don't think anyone will say the changes at hockey Canada weren't warranted if it turns out these people are innocent
Criminal and civil proceedings are different in many ways, as I am sure you know. But there two separate issues related here….one is public right to know, another is public right to influence.
1. Should these types of cases be allowed to be settled out of court like any other civil case? Or should public interest force all parties, including victims, to publicly identify themselves? Should Hockey Canada, or any entity really, cover liability for their members? Should liability insurance be disallowed? If one seeking damages is then unable to recover them from individuals responsible, has justice been done?
2. Should external pressure or ‘catalysts for change’ or public opinion have an impact on civil cases? Should they have an impact on criminal cases? What if criminal investigations are inconclusive, but the public wants a guilty verdict? What if trial by jury finds innocence and public wants a guilty verdict? What if victim says innocent, public says guilty?
…sometimes the ‘change’ isn’t always for the better. Maybe a bunch of people with pitchforks can overturn the system…but I don’t think they will like the alternative.
But what do I know