Based on years of representing sex workers, there is a price to be paid for earning a living that way, even if what they’re doing is legal. It warps them emotionally and robs them of their ability to engage in true loving human relationships. They develop a deep and permanent contempt for people. And they have emotional problems long after they’re able to make a living that way.
Maybe this girl can handle it; but I haven’t seen good outcomes.
I once represented a prostitute/bank robber named Amy. I really liked her and felt sorry for her. I got her off the bank robbery charge and I still worry about what happened to her. The above summary I believe to be accurate.
So what 10:51 is saying is that she will have the same attitude as most male attorneys. Honestly people. Uritta just got “Attaboy”s on this blog for siphoning off $1.3 million from the mother of a dead prisoner but this woman gets infantilized for syphoning off money from hormonal men? This is so dumb.
@11:30– no way the state paid $1.3 million in atty fees unless they are handing money out for political favors. So there had to be an agreement between the P and P’s atty.
Being annoyed by the stupidity is not the same as hate. There’s a big difference between likely tricked street prostitutes and a law student who dabbles in Only Fans. She’s making far more money than many of you, which leads me to think you are simply jealous.
In actuality, she doesn’t even make nude content, just shakes her ass in tight dresses. Simp men line up with their wallets out. Can’t really blame her when she’s makes tens of thousands of dollars to do dumb tiktok dances.
The goofballs attending these “protests” are the same people that shamed others.people for not wearing masks, not social distancing and not getting vaccinated. No kings my ass.
I’m anti-king in the US and I love to protest so I think the protest will foster a community of like-minded individuals and the press is already covering it so it will let like-minded people in other places know we agree and support this issue. Kings just let the power go to their head and end up suing people who disagree with they say and kicking people out of the country they don’t like and other bad stuff. Surprised this is controversial.
12:41 here. I was hoping to hear from 10:03 because maybe there is something we can agree on.
Guest
Anonymous
October 16, 2025 11:09 am
The Golden Knights put out a statement that goalie Carter Hart will be joining their organization. https://www.nhl.com/goldenknights/news/statement-from-the-vegas-golden-knights. Hart is controversial because of an incident of alleged sexual assault that involved several Hockey Canada players (including Brett Howden who was also on that team). Charges only went forward against 5 players–including Hart. Hart testified at the trial and admitted being in the room and getting a “blowie” from the woman. He also could not remember a lot of the other details. Ultimately, the trial determined that none of the players were guilty of sexual assault. Naturally, there are arguments that the police botched the investigation and that limited the Crown’s case against the players.
Anyway, now VGK are letting him join the organization. I’m torn about it because people deserve second chances in life, but I also don’t condone sexual assault. Lots of people probably have stories from their past that might be offensive to someone else, so where do we draw the line. This woman alleges she was assaulted and did not consent to what happened in the room full of hockey players. For me it’s a tough call on how to respond to this. What do you all think?
I think we need to know a lot more about what actually occurred. I have not read the articles on this, but saw a news report that they were acquitted more than once and re-tried. Is that true? Also, wasn’t there a video that showed consent or cleared some of them?
my takeaway from this is that the girl was ashamed/regretted doing a group thing with the hockey players, and instead of owning up to it, she claims SA.
I only say this because there is zero evidence that she said any version of “no” at any point with any of the men in the room. The other claim was she was too inebriated to consent, which may be plausible, but her actions demonstrate she was conscious enough to make multiple actions with multiple persons over a period of hours. it wasnt as if she was passed out drunk and they did whatever they wanted. she was an active participant.
cases like this are not good for actual victims of SA, who endure physical aggression and abuse from the perpetrator, and also for those who get drugged and/or unconscious and are not active/willing participants
There was also video of her from the bar which showed she was not that drunk. In addition to the videos in the room where she said she was fine with it. Acquittal means not guilty. So what’s the issue? Not guilty means he doesn’t need a second chance. Everybody is all up in arms about giving bail to violent offenders, sealing past crimes of convicted felons, and seeking to overturn convictions for people who are more likely than not guilty like Margaret Rudin, but you want to continue to penalize people who’ve actually been found not guilty? Make it make sense.
I think people are being a little too categorical here.
1) Something can be bad without being criminal. If a hockey player hung out outside a high school every day hoping to pick up 18-year-old girls, that would not be criminal, but it should certainly be a consideration when deciding whether to sign him.
2) “Not guilty” does not equal “innocent.” Kobe’s charges were dismissed because the victim couldn’t handle the media attention, but he later admitted that he had nonconsensual sex. Especially when it comes to sex crimes, there are many reasons, like mishandled investigations or reluctant prosecutors, that have nothing to do with guilt/innocent but can lead to an acquittal or dismissal of charges.
3) Forgiving someone does not require allowing him to paid millions of dollars to play professional sports and be a role model to our children. No one is entitled to be on the VGK and I don’t have any issue saying some kind of bad behavior is disqualifying, even if I think the person should generally be allowed to move on with their life in other ways.
I don’t have any opinion on Hart specifically – I don’t know nearly enough about his case. But I don’t agree that that the acquittal by itself is dispositive, or that we must automatically allow sex criminals onto our sports teams in the name of forgiveness.
The crown’s key witness also butchered the alleged victim’s case. He basically testified that she was literally asking for it and she was calling the guys pussies for not having sex with her.
https://people.com/law-student-makes-1-million-a-year-posting-adult-content-exclusive-11827374
Thoughts?
My snarky thoughts:
– would.
– BK hottie is going to have some competition
My real thoughts:
– Good for her. Do what you want.
Certainly agree with the “do what you want” part.
Based on years of representing sex workers, there is a price to be paid for earning a living that way, even if what they’re doing is legal. It warps them emotionally and robs them of their ability to engage in true loving human relationships. They develop a deep and permanent contempt for people. And they have emotional problems long after they’re able to make a living that way.
Maybe this girl can handle it; but I haven’t seen good outcomes.
I once represented a prostitute/bank robber named Amy. I really liked her and felt sorry for her. I got her off the bank robbery charge and I still worry about what happened to her. The above summary I believe to be accurate.
So what 10:51 is saying is that she will have the same attitude as most male attorneys. Honestly people. Uritta just got “Attaboy”s on this blog for siphoning off $1.3 million from the mother of a dead prisoner but this woman gets infantilized for syphoning off money from hormonal men? This is so dumb.
Those fees likely didn’t come out of the award. Rather, from the Defendant.
@11:30– no way the state paid $1.3 million in atty fees unless they are handing money out for political favors. So there had to be an agreement between the P and P’s atty.
11:25 hates male attorneys
Being annoyed by the stupidity is not the same as hate. There’s a big difference between likely tricked street prostitutes and a law student who dabbles in Only Fans. She’s making far more money than many of you, which leads me to think you are simply jealous.
Just read more of the article. She is in Twitch, not Only Fans and she doesn’t even get nude. She’s brilliant.
Dad died at 15. Needed a way to pay for college and law school. It’s just like many other lawyers’ stories, just with extra toe pics.
Gotta pay for those UMich bills somehow.
In actuality, she doesn’t even make nude content, just shakes her ass in tight dresses. Simp men line up with their wallets out. Can’t really blame her when she’s makes tens of thousands of dollars to do dumb tiktok dances.
“she doesn’t even make nude content”
Well, we now know what you have been doing.
I suspect the amount is greatly exaggerated.
The No Kings protests are idiotic. They accomplish absolutely nothing. We don’t have a king now and won’t have a king the day after.
If they accomplish absolutely nothing, they are not worth the energy and attention you put into your comment.
Oh, it is always worth the energy to make fun of stupid people like the No Kings protestors.
The goofballs attending these “protests” are the same people that shamed others.people for not wearing masks, not social distancing and not getting vaccinated. No kings my ass.
I’m anti-king in the US and I love to protest so I think the protest will foster a community of like-minded individuals and the press is already covering it so it will let like-minded people in other places know we agree and support this issue. Kings just let the power go to their head and end up suing people who disagree with they say and kicking people out of the country they don’t like and other bad stuff. Surprised this is controversial.
Just curious, are there any protests you find not idiotic? If so, could you name a few?
The protestors he agrees with, of course. Like the patriots on January 6.
The patriots who were also antifa and were also all secret FBI agents who were all pardoned.
12:41 here. I was hoping to hear from 10:03 because maybe there is something we can agree on.
The Golden Knights put out a statement that goalie Carter Hart will be joining their organization. https://www.nhl.com/goldenknights/news/statement-from-the-vegas-golden-knights. Hart is controversial because of an incident of alleged sexual assault that involved several Hockey Canada players (including Brett Howden who was also on that team). Charges only went forward against 5 players–including Hart. Hart testified at the trial and admitted being in the room and getting a “blowie” from the woman. He also could not remember a lot of the other details. Ultimately, the trial determined that none of the players were guilty of sexual assault. Naturally, there are arguments that the police botched the investigation and that limited the Crown’s case against the players.
Anyway, now VGK are letting him join the organization. I’m torn about it because people deserve second chances in life, but I also don’t condone sexual assault. Lots of people probably have stories from their past that might be offensive to someone else, so where do we draw the line. This woman alleges she was assaulted and did not consent to what happened in the room full of hockey players. For me it’s a tough call on how to respond to this. What do you all think?
Not guilty
Me too . . . .
I think this public warning for women and girls not to be in confined spaces with his is helpful.
I think we need to know a lot more about what actually occurred. I have not read the articles on this, but saw a news report that they were acquitted more than once and re-tried. Is that true? Also, wasn’t there a video that showed consent or cleared some of them?
They were acquitted once. There were two consent videos taken AFTER the incident. In one, she was asked if she was “okay with this.”
Hart’s role in the incident was asking for a “blowie.” He then went up to the victim, pulled his pants down and got a “blowie.”
There but for the grace of God go thee?
my takeaway from this is that the girl was ashamed/regretted doing a group thing with the hockey players, and instead of owning up to it, she claims SA.
I only say this because there is zero evidence that she said any version of “no” at any point with any of the men in the room. The other claim was she was too inebriated to consent, which may be plausible, but her actions demonstrate she was conscious enough to make multiple actions with multiple persons over a period of hours. it wasnt as if she was passed out drunk and they did whatever they wanted. she was an active participant.
cases like this are not good for actual victims of SA, who endure physical aggression and abuse from the perpetrator, and also for those who get drugged and/or unconscious and are not active/willing participants
There was also video of her from the bar which showed she was not that drunk. In addition to the videos in the room where she said she was fine with it. Acquittal means not guilty. So what’s the issue? Not guilty means he doesn’t need a second chance. Everybody is all up in arms about giving bail to violent offenders, sealing past crimes of convicted felons, and seeking to overturn convictions for people who are more likely than not guilty like Margaret Rudin, but you want to continue to penalize people who’ve actually been found not guilty? Make it make sense.
I think people are being a little too categorical here.
1) Something can be bad without being criminal. If a hockey player hung out outside a high school every day hoping to pick up 18-year-old girls, that would not be criminal, but it should certainly be a consideration when deciding whether to sign him.
2) “Not guilty” does not equal “innocent.” Kobe’s charges were dismissed because the victim couldn’t handle the media attention, but he later admitted that he had nonconsensual sex. Especially when it comes to sex crimes, there are many reasons, like mishandled investigations or reluctant prosecutors, that have nothing to do with guilt/innocent but can lead to an acquittal or dismissal of charges.
3) Forgiving someone does not require allowing him to paid millions of dollars to play professional sports and be a role model to our children. No one is entitled to be on the VGK and I don’t have any issue saying some kind of bad behavior is disqualifying, even if I think the person should generally be allowed to move on with their life in other ways.
I don’t have any opinion on Hart specifically – I don’t know nearly enough about his case. But I don’t agree that that the acquittal by itself is dispositive, or that we must automatically allow sex criminals onto our sports teams in the name of forgiveness.
The crown’s key witness also butchered the alleged victim’s case. He basically testified that she was literally asking for it and she was calling the guys pussies for not having sex with her.