From: (Gerry Gryschuk)
Subject: Re: Additional comments (was Re: Pens-0 Red Wings-8/Random thoughts)
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 10:24:01 GMT

From article <Bxv9pz.Dun.1@cs.cmu.edu>, by lli+@cs.cmu.edu (Lori Iannamico):
> In article <1992Nov17.060933.10864@access.usask.ca> (Gerry Gryschuk) writes:
> 
>>It's no wonder people have marital problems if every time your with a group
>>of people with equal number of men and women it's automatically assumed you
>>have to be pairing up.
>>
>>*If* Quinn actually raped this woman and *if* Lemieux,Tocchet or Errey had
>> been able to stop it the only thing they have to be held accountable for is
>> their innaction, their own fidelity(or lack there of) shouldn't be in
>> question here.
>>
> 
> Ok, so I forgot the smiley at the end of that phrase about the pants.  But
> as for the "pairing up", in one of my earlier posts I reported on an interview
> with one of the women with the Pens that night.  She said that the group split
> into 2 groups of 4.  She and her friend with Tocchet and Errey, the alleged victim
> and her friend with Lemieux and Quinn.

Smiley or not, that one phrase was the simplest to start a disagreement with.
Your whole first paragraph sounded like you have already decided the players
were going to "cheat" on their SO irregardless of their actual motive for
being there(which of course we don't/can't know).

Didn't the woman above also claim they didn't feel obliged to provide sexual
favors? Or did I misread something again? Well it is certainly true they
shouldn't feel obliged to do anything they don't want to, is it not possible
that the "feeling" amongst the group was, in the main, nonsexual in nature?
Is it not possible that Quinn did something that most(or all) of the others
didn't want to be a party to(legal or otherwise)? Is it not possible that
there is more than one person having been taken advantage of?

Granted Lemieux and the others put themselves in a situation that could be
considered compromising, but maybe they never expected Quinn to do what
he did(assuming he did something wrong) or at least to have the common decency
to be a gentleman about it. Basically what I'm saying is that you appear to
have condemned all of them for the actions of one with little evidence as to
their actual actions,motivations or feelings. Your entirely entitled to your
opinion it's just not one I agree with nor can understand given the little
we know about the situation.

> 
>>
>>Alleged gang rapes? From some reports there was no one else in the room. Who
>>else has been charged? Some reports imply the police may not have enough
>>evidence to even charge Quinn. How can we be assuming there was anyone else
>>involved when we don't know if Quinn even did anything wrong.
> 
> Reread what I wrote. I said the Ciccerelli and Bengals inicidents were alleged
> gang rapes.  Not the Quinn incident.

Right sorry about that. I flunked reding and comprension in grade scool.

Your not going to buy that are you? Again sorry.

> 
>>Well that's all I have a problem with, the rest of your article makes sense.
> 
> Gee, thanks.  Now my life can go on...

Lucky I added that then. 
--
Gerald Gryschuk            Saskatoon,Saskatchewan = a place with 9 months
gerry@sask.usask.ca           of hockey and 3 months of poor skating.
Go Habs!!!		              (The Bum rules!!!)