Harry Paton

[Obinna]

Just now, Unnamed Trialist said:

The comparison would be that historically the courts have just assumed a woman was lying, such as when denouncing abuse. In rape cases it was assumed and even became legal precedent in many legal cultures, even today, that a women was guilty of provocation. In psychological analysis the case histories are full of women denouncing abuse and therapists explaining it away as fantasy. A woman was also assumed to be lying about specific physical ailments, many of which are still not recognised legally. 

The entire weight of the law, and the social system, is historically biased towards denying the validity of a woman's claims, whether of a legal, psychological or medical nature. 

So I think the parallel you are trying to draw doesn't work. 

The parallel I am drawing came from the heart. You should know what I am talking about. You and I have privately discussed such things in the past and you were sympathetic to them at the time.

A person of colour who has been in a situation where they were accused of something they were not guilty of because of the colour of their skin would relate to the comparison I made. And even if such a person were never in that situation, they would still be aware of that possibility.

I do see your point about how women's claims have historically not been taken seriously enough. It's a very valid point, but that doesn't invalidate the parallel I drew or the need in for presuming innocence before guilt. Presuming innocence until being proven guilty is a standard that everyone deserves. That doesn't invalidate the historical challenges women have had with having their claims go unheard. 

[Obinna]

7 minutes ago, Pottsy3 said:

I don't always agree with you UT, but thank you. Fuck ya. Leaving it at this.

 

Conviction is hard, and that case was an example where there was no conviction but you'd be hard pressed to suggest that he isn't a POS. 

Forums like these and twitter tend to side with whoever they feel most convenient (oftentimes the male in SA cases, and especially when it's a public figure that they'd have bias towards). My reply was to an initial comment (from another user) in which he claimed "due process" yet was making suggestions about why a women could be to blame. I get not wanting to jump to conclusions, but only a small fraction of assaults are false accusations, and that fraction feels like nothing compared to the frequency at which victims are blamed in trials with a heavy public following.

I can't speak to Twitter because I don't use it, but I take your word for it.

The bolded part is really speaks to the crux of the disagreement, however. What you are saying reads to me like "women could never be lying", because you followed it up with "stories about women lying are exaggerted". Like I said before, I am in no position to say whether that's accurate or not, but to question that is not equivalent to saying that any particular woman is lying and it certainly is not suggesting the women embroiled in this Paton thing is lying, but that's how Inglewood, RS and UT have painted my position and Shway's position on it. Nobody knows if she is or not and that's the honest truth of it.

I personally like to think in this case that both having their own truths on what happened. The courts will decide where the truth is and I hope they come to the right conclusion.

[Pottsy3]

12 minutes ago, Obinna said:

What you are saying reads to me like "women could never be lying", because you followed it up with "stories about women lying are exaggerted". Like I said before, I am in no position to say whether that's accurate or not, but to question that is not equivalent to saying that any particular woman is lying and it certainly is not suggesting the women embroiled in this Paton thing is lying, but that's how Inglewood, RS and UT have painted my position and Shway's position on it. Nobody knows if she is or not and that's the honest truth of it.

I think there may be something lost in translation. It's not like women's rights movements are meant to be literally taken as "women are always right and men are always wrong", and I'm not naive enough to believe that cases like these do not carry nuance. ie. obviously women CAN lie, but the issue I take is with the amount of sympathy given to accused versus accusers before trials unfold. There's people in this thread calling victim believers "white knights" but also trying to come up with excuses why the victim is likely at fault (not even talking about Shway or Obinna).

Anyways, victim blaming is oftentimes a gendered issue and statistically sexual assaults are very unlikely to go unfounded (which is what I was trying to get across when saying "lying is exaggerated"). The most recent Stats Canada results that I could find showed less than 1 in every 7 of reported sexual assaults are determined to be unfounded. A further statistical anomaly when we realize that only about 5% of sexual assaults go reported to police. My SO works in victimology, and so I'm unfortunately far too familiar with the barriers that victims have to jump through. Yes, men can also be victims of SA, but the statistics are disproportionately gendered and it has become commonplace to see colleagues in the space take the same side time and time again with cases of SA. (not saying either of you took a side btw, speaking in general).

[Obinna]

7 minutes ago, Pottsy3 said:

I think there may be something lost in translation. It's not like women's rights movements are meant to be literally taken as "women are always right and men are always wrong", and I'm not naive enough to believe that cases like these do not carry nuance. ie. obviously women CAN lie, but the issue I take is with the amount of sympathy given to accused versus accusers before trials unfold. There's people in this thread calling victim believers "white knights" but also trying to come up with excuses why the victim is likely at fault (not even talking about Shway or Obinna).

Anyways, victim blaming is oftentimes a gendered issue and statistically sexual assaults are very unlikely to go unfounded (which is what I was trying to get across when saying "lying is exaggerated"). The most recent Stats Canada results that I could find showed less than 1 in every 7 of reported sexual assaults are determined to be unfounded. A further statistical anomaly when we realize that only about 5% of sexual assaults go reported to police. My SO works in victimology, and so I'm unfortunately far too familiar with the barriers that victims have to jump through. Yes, men can also be victims of SA, but the statistics are disproportionately gendered and it has become commonplace to see colleagues in the space take the same side time and time again with cases of SA. (not saying either of you took a side btw, speaking in general).

I am glad you made this post. I think it's perfectly reasonable to take that issue, and it's understandable given your vantage point. And from my vantage point I hope you could see why I am quick to defend the concept of innocent before proven guilty (see my post on coloured people - and all people - deserving that right).

Unfortunately, both of our positions saw us butt heads on this particular issue, since defending the innocent before guilty concept can easily be interepted as excusing the very people we all take issue with - the abusers. I think myself and Shway have gone above and beyond to explain ourselves at this stage, so anyone going out of their way to characterize us negatively is doing so out of laziness or just malintent.

I feel even better about our exchanges now and I like how we were able to engage respectfully and honour our opposing viewpoints without trying to mischaracterize each other.

Cheers brother!

[El Diego]

Guys, the presumption of innocence is a legal right in the context of a criminal trial where the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt, which the prosecution bears. I highly doubt anyone on this forum is against that right or that standard of proof.

Public opinion, the Voyageurs forum, and civil trials do not share this concept, though of course in a civil trial the claimant bears the onus to prove their claim on a balance of probabilities (i.e. that their claim happened more likely than not).

If anyone says that they believe the woman in this case and that Harry is shitty, that does not mean they are necessarily against the presumption of innocence. They are making a judgment based on the facts as they know them. Maybe their judgment is wrong, but it doesn't mean they don't believe in fundamental rights.

[Obinna]

7 minutes ago, El Diego said:

Guys, the presumption of innocence is a legal right in the context of a criminal trial where the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt, which the prosecution bears. I highly doubt anyone on this forum is against that right or that standard of proof.

Public opinion, the Voyageurs forum, and civil trials do not share this concept, though of course in a civil trial the claimant bears the onus to prove their claim on a balance of probabilities (i.e. that their claim happened more likely than not).

If anyone says that they believe the woman in this case and that Harry is shitty, that does not mean they are necessarily against the presumption of innocence. They are making a judgment based on the facts as they know them. Maybe their judgment is wrong, but it doesn't mean they don't believe in fundamental rights.

That's perfectly fair. I don't expect public opinion, or certainly Voyageurs opinion, to unanimously mirror that legal standard. 

[El Diego]

4 minutes ago, Obinna said:

That's perfectly fair. I don't expect public opinion, or certainly Voyageurs opinion, to unanimously mirror that legal standard. 

Then I think everyone in this thread is actually closer in opinion than they think

[Unnamed Trialist]

Thank the lord (or Jordan Peterson) that Paton isn't good enough for the National Team as it stands. 

I blame that on his inability to disconnect when he's at home.

[Obinna]

Any update on this guy? The only thing I can find is that he "chose" not to renew with Ross County in June of 2022. His twitter account seems to have gone silent around then. Don't know if he has any other social media and I haven't checked.

I am left with the impression the rumored legal issues are still preventing him from re-joining the football world. Otherwise, it would be odd not to renew with Ross County and then go this long without finding another club situation. It's going on 7 months now...

He's still 24 years old with nearly 90 SPL matches under his belt - and over 150 professional appearances in total. |That's roughly Liam Fraser level experience in the club game, despite the time missed. Making that comparison because both play the same position, and both are the same age. 

Obviously, he would need to be cleared of his legal issues (if they are still pending) AND he'd have to find a new club before he gets back in the national team picture, but if he could there's a nice little foundation there for a player who may potentially give us some much-needed midfield depth.

[narduch]

Been wondering this too.

He was on the edge of the national team in summer of 2021.

[InglewoodJack]

With his legal issues, especially if he has to remain in Scotland, I feel like he might’ve had to get a real job to pay those legal bills. 

[Obinna]

6 minutes ago, InglewoodJack said:

With his legal issues, especially if he has to remain in Scotland, I feel like he might’ve had to get a real job to pay those legal bills. 

That's a good theory and may explain why he's gone completely dark in terms of football.

Is it possible that playing for Ross County he was on little more than CPL-level wages? The SPL doesn't pay that well outside of Celtic and Rangers, and his club would be near the bottom as far as wages go, I imagine. He was one of their better players though, which may have been relatively decent money.

A quick look here suggests his salary was roughly 60k American, which is a pretty decent wage for a young man, especially in a small Scottish town where the cost of living (I assume) is inexpensive. Is that enough to pay for expensive legal bills, however?

The other thing is, assuming he was on 60k what kind of "real job" would be available to him that pays greater? Does he have some unknown technical skill set? Seems unlikely as he's not a graduate from any post-secondary institution as far as I can tell. 

[InglewoodJack]

29 minutes ago, Obinna said:

That's a good theory and may explain why he's gone completely dark in terms of football.

Is it possible that playing for Ross County he was on little more than CPL-level wages? The SPL doesn't pay that well outside of Celtic and Rangers, and his club would be near the bottom as far as wages go, I imagine. He was one of their better players though, which may have been relatively decent money.

A quick look here suggests his salary was roughly 60k American, which is a pretty decent wage for a young man, especially in a small Scottish town where the cost of living (I assume) is inexpensive. Is that enough to pay for expensive legal bills, however?

The other thing is, assuming he was on 60k what kind of "real job" would be available to him that pays greater? Does he have some unknown technical skill set? Seems unlikely as he's not a graduate from any post-secondary institution as far as I can tell. 

I think it would be very difficult for him to get a contract while he has open charges, and I don't think that you can save enough off a $60k salary to be out of work for months, let alone an entire year.

His twitter location says Kitchener too, so it's possible he's laying low at his parents' house too. I don't think he's good enough for any team in the UK or Canada to give him a try unless he gets cleared of his charges.

[Obinna]

8 minutes ago, InglewoodJack said:

I think it would be very difficult for him to get a contract while he has open charges, and I don't think that you can save enough off a $60k salary to be out of work for months, let alone an entire year.

His twitter location says Kitchener too, so it's possible he's laying low at his parents' house too. I don't think he's good enough for any team in the UK or Canada to give him a try unless he gets cleared of his charges.

I was wondering - if the charges prevent him from being a footballer, would they prevent him from other work as well? I am guessing not, but I don't know. 

Another question - if he is on this side of the Atlantic could he still play despite any outstanding charges? He seems to have been able to freely leave the country of Scotland, after all.

I don't want to steer this thread in a legal or moral direction, but I am curious about what his prospects are (or could be). CPL perhaps? I bet numerous teams could use his services. Would they possibly shy away given his "situation", or would it be a case of legally being not allowed to sign him? It's a different country - but it's a commonwealth country, so not sure if that counts for anything. 

Edited January 4, 2023 by Obinna

[InglewoodJack]

Just now, Obinna said:

I was wondering - if the charges prevent him from being a footballer, would they prevent him from other work as well? I am guessing not, but I don't know. 

Another question - if he is on this side of the Atlantic could he still play despite any outstanding charges? I don't want to steer this thread in a legal or moral direction, but I am curious about what his prospects are (or could be). CPL perhaps? I bet numerous teams could use his services. Would they possibly shy away given his "situation", or would it be a case of legally being not allowed to sign him? It's a different country - but it's a commonwealth country, so not sure if that counts for anything. 

They would make it pretty hard, but worse people have kept better jobs, so I guess it's up to the employer.

I don't think the CPL would sign him for those reasons though. With how precarious the financial situation of some of those teams are, I don't know if you want to risk fan outrage over that. For how misogynist hockey culture is, Habs fans were largely pissed when we drafted Logan Mailleux, and the fan outrage about Logan Miller caused the Bruins to tear up Mitchell Miller's contract. Patton's situation is a lot lower key, and not to make a moral judgement (he sucks hard), but his charges are far less grave than these other situations, so maybe. I'm also not sure if he could secure a visa for another country with an open court case. I wouldn't be surprised once his case is wrapped up and he pays whichever price he ends up having to pay that he ends up going the Marcus Haber route and landing in southeast asia. If you have no marketable skills and you're washed out of europe, I'm sure teams there will pay you a living wage.

[Obinna]

1 minute ago, InglewoodJack said:

They would make it pretty hard, but worse people have kept better jobs, so I guess it's up to the employer.

I don't think the CPL would sign him for those reasons though. With how precarious the financial situation of some of those teams are, I don't know if you want to risk fan outrage over that. For how misogynist hockey culture is, Habs fans were largely pissed when we drafted Logan Mailleux, and the fan outrage about Logan Miller caused the Bruins to tear up Mitchell Miller's contract. Patton's situation is a lot lower key, and not to make a moral judgement (he sucks hard), but his charges are far less grave than these other situations, so maybe. I'm also not sure if he could secure a visa for another country with an open court case. I wouldn't be surprised once his case is wrapped up and he pays whichever price he ends up having to pay that he ends up going the Marcus Haber route and landing in southeast asia. If you have no marketable skills and you're washed out of europe, I'm sure teams there will pay you a living wage.

Seems like a sad ending to a once-promising career, but what you are saying makes a lot of sense. 

[InglewoodJack]

5 minutes ago, Obinna said:

Seems like a sad ending to a once-promising career, but what you are saying makes a lot of sense. 

At the end of the day, it's all speculation- I saw his brother posted a picture of them in uniform about 4 days ago, and I haven't heard anything about his case since last spring, so it could be all sorted out by now, and the issue could be that at his age, taking 10 or so months off of soccer could spell the end of your prospects. There are a thousand Harry Pattons in the UK who have his talent and are younger.

[SoCalTransport]

4 hours ago, InglewoodJack said:

They would make it pretty hard, but worse people have kept better jobs, so I guess it's up to the employer.

I don't think the CPL would sign him for those reasons though. With how precarious the financial situation of some of those teams are, I don't know if you want to risk fan outrage over that. For how misogynist hockey culture is, Habs fans were largely pissed when we drafted Logan Mailleux, and the fan outrage about Logan Miller caused the Bruins to tear up Mitchell Miller's contract. Patton's situation is a lot lower key, and not to make a moral judgement (he sucks hard), but his charges are far less grave than these other situations, so maybe. I'm also not sure if he could secure a visa for another country with an open court case. I wouldn't be surprised once his case is wrapped up and he pays whichever price he ends up having to pay that he ends up going the Marcus Haber route and landing in southeast asia. If you have no marketable skills and you're washed out of europe, I'm sure teams there will pay you a living wage.

That's the problem with society right now, we want to be judge, jury, and executioner all at once.

The kid made some mistakes, but that doesn't mean he can't come out of this a better person. We shouldn't take his livelihood and passion over one incident.

Edited January 5, 2023 by SoCalTransport

[InglewoodJack]

11 hours ago, SoCalTransport said:

That's the problem with society right now, we want to be judge, jury, and executioner all at once.

The kid made some mistakes, but that doesn't mean he can't come out of this a better person. We shouldn't take his livelihood and passion over one incident.

clubs are businesses and it’s bad business to associate yourself with a player who has open charges of domestic abuse. He’s also nowhere near good enough to have people sweep his charges under the rug, so he truly isn’t worth the risk. This isn’t even coming from a moral POV- it isn’t like CPL teams are these century old institutions who can afford to rustle supporters feathers-  half the teams in the league could fold after one or two really poor seasons revenue wise.

also, that “one mistake” was a two year pattern of psychological and physical abuse, so bad that it led to his partner to file charges. I’m not sure how we can look at a player who did that, got dropped from his team and then disappeared off the face of the earth, and say like “maybe he came out of this a better person! It was a single oopsie!” unless we’re injecting a generous dose of wishcasting.

[The Real Marc]

Society has always been judge, jury, and executioner all at once. It's just that now certain actions, outcomes, and groups of people that previously ducked that are subject to it too.

[SoCalTransport]

2 hours ago, InglewoodJack said:

clubs are businesses and it’s bad business to associate yourself with a player who has open charges of domestic abuse. He’s also nowhere near good enough to have people sweep his charges under the rug, so he truly isn’t worth the risk. This isn’t even coming from a moral POV- it isn’t like CPL teams are these century old institutions who can afford to rustle supporters feathers-  half the teams in the league could fold after one or two really poor seasons revenue wise.

also, that “one mistake” was a two year pattern of psychological and physical abuse, so bad that it led to his partner to file charges. I’m not sure how we can look at a player who did that, got dropped from his team and then disappeared off the face of the earth, and say like “maybe he came out of this a better person! It was a single oopsie!” unless we’re injecting a generous dose of wishcasting.

What I meant by better person, is that he could of learned from this situation.

The problem I have with this is that his career is destroyed, and he doesn't have the opportunity to defend himself. 

You are assuming that the accuser is telling the truth, none of us on here really know the full story.

[InglewoodJack]

32 minutes ago, SoCalTransport said:

What I meant by better person, is that he could of learned from this situation.

The problem I have with this is that his career is destroyed, and he doesn't have the opportunity to defend himself. 

You are assuming that the accuser is telling the truth, none of us on here really know the full story.

Based on what though? He could've also grown 7 inches and decided to go play basketball during his yearlong absence, we have as much evidence of that as we do your claim. Who says he doesn't have the opportunity to defend himself? He quite literally had a court date set in June of last year to do exactly that. He also, as far as I am aware, has an active twitter account he can post to.

Cases also don't typically go to court if the woman is lying- law enforcement generally don't take these cases seriously, so for them to pursue this to this extent heavily implies there's real weight behind this. But that isn't even what I'm arguing- teams won't sign a guy with an open or unresolved case, nor would they sign a guy who got convicted (if he did), like 6 months after his case. It's bad business. Doesn't matter if he did anything, teams don't want baggage. There's a real discussion about kicking Reyna off the USMNT because him and his parents are annoying and you don't want that shit in your dressing room. Players have been dropped for less.

[GasPed]

9 hours ago, InglewoodJack said:

But that isn't even what I'm arguing- teams won't sign a guy with an open or unresolved case, nor would they sign a guy who got convicted (if he did), like 6 months after his case. It's bad business. Doesn't matter if he did anything, teams don't want baggage. There's a real discussion about kicking Reyna off the USMNT because him and his parents are annoying and you don't want that shit in your dressing room. Players have been dropped for less.

It seems to depend on circumstances though.  For instance, Bayern Munich have had three high profile domestic abuse cases (Coman, Hernandez, Boateng) in recent years - none of those players were dropped.  That said, there's a difference between dropping a player who has charges against them and signing a player who has charges against them, especially a not-so famous player like Paton.

[jordan]

Case dropped

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/spfl-star-walks-free-court-29022997

[Jack1997]

1 hour ago, jordan said:

Case dropped

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/spfl-star-walks-free-court-29022997

Wow, feel bad for the guy hopefully he can get a contract somewhere.