Be 🫰🏻

This is my favorite tweet from Luke

kind reminder that his family is trying to keep his legacy alive with the cameron boyce foundation and raising awareness about the cure to epilepsy….which killed him. remembering him is very important but i feel like people need to remember his legacy (not targeted at user)

@Jbri3rl3y You are uninformed. She went for charges right away, but the London Police, statistically the worst in the country at SA investigations botched the investigation. The London Police made a public apology for mishandling the investigation. Mix in some research next time

Estou sempre a dizer que a área que mais precisa de uma lavagem a fundo é a área da Justiça… Um dos setores mais antiquados e pouco eficazes do nosso país! 💔

Do you hear this? This is the sound of privilege. The “current situation” is Russian genocidal war against Ukraine. If you are privileged enough to not know about it first hand and don’t read the news, shut the fuck up!

@Benben10001 Disgusting

tw // sa The Myth: “The judge saw all the evidence and acquitted Carter Hart and his teammates” The Reality: Statements made to Hockey Canada in 2022 by players involved contained critical information that would have lent credibility to EM, and ultimately proved she was sexually assaulted. - It proves Cal Foote was naked when he performed his “party trick”. - It proves she was crying in the hotel room. - It proves the men had golf clubs, and that Dube swung one at her. - It proves she tried to leave. - It proves she slipped and fell at the bar. All of these points were contested by the defence and used to discredit her. McLeod’s own lawyer David Humphrey went as far as to call the report a “virtual treasure trove” of evidence. However, this 2022 report was ruled during the pre-trial process to be coerced on the threat of barring the players from representing Canada again, and thus ruled inadmissible. The judge who acquitted the players NEVER saw the evidence. But it is naive to believe that the “threat” would make the men tell a MORE damning account of the night. Common sense suggests that even those confessions were a sugar-coated version of their conduct. There is no logical explanation for them to exaggerate their impropriety. Hockey Canada’s investigator Danielle Robitaille agrees; she referred to the statements as the most “truthful versions from the players”. But regardless of common sense, the way the information was obtained spoiled the “legality” of the evidence; but it does not change the “reality” of it. To illustrate this distinction, look no further than R. v. Collins; a landmark 1987 Supreme Court of Canada decision that shaped how Canadian courts handle unlawfully obtained evidence. In Vancouver, Ruby Collins was under surveillance as part of an investigation into a "heroin problem". An officer approached her in a local pub, told her that he was a police officer, and then grabbed her by the throat and in the process dragged her down to the floor in what is known as a "throat hold" used to prevent suspects from swallowing drug filled balloons. The officer then told her to let go of a heroin filled balloon she had in her hand, and she did so. The officer then arrested Collins for drug possession. The reality? Collins was in possession of an illegal drug. Plain as day. The legality? Grounds for the officer's belief that Collins possessed heroin was never established, and the trial judge concluded that the search was illegal. Because of the method the evidence was gathered, Collin’s walked free. Legally she was “innocent”. But the reality isn’t as black and white, it exists in a grey area. Legal scholars can debate the outcome, but regardless, it is clear that crucial evidence CAN be omitted from a trial regardless of how “real” it is. In the case of Carter Hart and his fellow accused, anyone who claims the “judge saw all the evidence” is telling a half-truth. The reality is the judge saw only the admissible evidence. Because no matter how obviously crucial to a case evidence can be, nothing is immune to the web of legal loopholes that complicate courtrooms. Unfortunately for EM, so many people will only see the headlines: “Players acquitted” or “Justice rules complainant unreliable”. But it is irresponsible to pretend that a “treasure trove” of evidence doesn’t exist because of a technicality. It will never have the impact it deserved in court, but it deserves to have its impact felt in the court of public opinion. And on the point of Foote’s party trick, the evidence proves that EM was sexually assaulted (the judge, in her own ruling, acquitted Foote solely on Carter Hart’s false testimony that he was clothed). Hart testimony was the epitome of his entitled privilege; lying under oath because he knew legally he could not be held accountable for those lies.

Carter Hart is about to play in the Stanley Cup Final. He was acquitted of sexual assault charges this past summer, but there is a lot more to the story. With the brightest lights now shining on him, it is important to understand the nuance of the controversial case. “We Believe E.M” does not mean we believe every detail of her testimony. It does not mean we believe she did not make any mistakes that night. It simply means we believe she was sexually assaulted. And the evidence supports that belief. I will leave you with some facts. This is all available if you research (tw // sa): - There is ZERO evidence or testimony that EM ever asked Michael McLeod to invite additional men to that hotel room. McLeod never testified, and all we have is a video interview with police where he never made that claim, meanwhile LYING when he denied sending a text invite to ALL his teammates. On the otherhand, there is text evidence the following day of EM telling McLeod she did not expect more partners, and it was not disputed by McLeod. - There is ZERO evidence or testimony that EM ever asked (or was asked) for Cal Foote to do the splits over her. Even if you believe the men’s story that she was saying “have sex with me”, she never said “teabag me”. The judge actually agreed in her report there was no consent, instead she dismissed it saying it was non-sexual based on Carter Hart’s testimony that Foote was not naked. - In 2022, Alex Formenton & Dillon Dube BOTH CONFESSED to Hockey Canada that Cal Foote was naked during the splits. This was ruled inadmissible on a technicality. Other than Hart, no other witness dared to say Foote was clothed; they all pretended to not remember. With this information, at the very least, McLeod and Foote are guilty: - Foote performed a sexual act without consent. It does not make him a rapist, but it is a crime - McLeod is an accessory to that sexual assault If these two men were given the guilty verdict I strongly believe they deserved (even if it was a proverbial slap on the wrist; i.e. a 6-month house arrest), it would have been an amazing teaching moment for our nation while setting a modern standard for consent. The conduct of the others, including Hart, may not have been illegal. There was certainly not enough evidence to prove it was. But that does not mean what they did wasn’t morally reprehensible. The NHL and Hockey Canada both agreed. The NHL kept the players out of the league for months PAST the ruling, citing their own private investigation. Hockey Canada stood in the House of Commons and said “harm was caused” after paying out a civil settlement. But what Hart did was more than morally wrong. He lied under oath to protect his teammates. This is actually perjury. The judge by law is not privy to those 2022 confessions, but we as a public are. We are allowed to pass judgement in the court of public opinion. Hart is not a conquering hero who overcame adversity. He is a liar who abused his privilege and legal protection to obstruct justice. He is allowed to continue his career, and we are allowed to remind him of his abhorrent behaviour.

this narrative annoying as hell bc if all artists were said to be plagiarists for inspiration literally no one would survive

this is why everytime some swiftie moans about how olivia doesn’t “clear things up” (as if it’s her responsibility to even begin with) it makes me laugh cause it’s so obvious she is doing taylor a grace by not speaking about it and there is a reason BOTH parties ignore it

This situation has always been so perplexing cause it seems entirely antithetical to everything Taylor stands for? Like I understand hypocrisy but I genuinely don’t see what the gain is to take publishing from a teenager who was straight up your biggest fan. that’s just cruel

why hasn’t her team blacklisted these questions yet?;$3&3& she sounds like she’s about to cry omds

not exaggerating when I say this is the greatest opening to a musical of all time

Mesmo se não fosse rico vcs acham mesmo que Garrett Graham dividiria conta nos encontros com a Hannah

imagine this year’s roland garros being your first time watching tennis like actually it usually is not THIS dramatic 😭😭

seth jarvis go k*ll the vgk and i will buy you a lifetime of nerds gummy clusters

Olivia Rodrigo explains her reason for speaking up for Palestine: “I am an artist, and what I do for my job is like, ‘this is how i feel’ and I present it to people, and I think it would be disingenuous to say that I don’t feel heartbroken about what’s going on in Gaza.”

Estão a gozar?! Vamos ter Kardashians à portuguesa e não me avisaram? 😭😂

É inadmissível não haver a transmissão da final @ChampionsLeague em canal aberto no nosso país! O futebol está cada vez mais a afastar-se da sua essência. O futebol já não é do Povo!

A final da Champions não dá em canal aberto??