Varlamov Arrested

[Pitts]

gotta love those Russian officials:
http://nhl.si.com/2013/10/31/russian-of ... -olympics/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If he is convicted, he can be deported. So it works out for Team Russia...

I think the point is that the Avs will likely suspend him and therefore he'll miss out on the necessary training and not be in game shape for the Olympics. any trial or conviction likely wouldn't happen for several months.

Or, as with most athletes, they will pay someone off and never miss a minute of the game.

[Daniel87]

As a Giguere owner, this works to my advantage.

My first thought as well.

[llipgh2]

The g/f's side of the story.

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ ... ghed-while

Even if a smidgen of this is true, he should be gone.

That said, if he has hit you before, why are you still with him? The whole "I love him and thought I could change him" crap is just that. Crap. Get out at the first incident.

[Crankshaft]

Goalies are a strange breed.

[Jim]

So... she goes to the cops only AFTER he kicked her out and she realized that her meal ticket was gone, er, I mean she realized that someone that beats you, but leaves no marks, er I mean, you don't bruise easily, should be in jail. It has nothing to do with him breaking up with you... And do 20 minutes tv interviews before the ink is even dry.

[shoeshine boy]

where did you see "no marks"? the arrest warrant states a friend who saw her both before and after the incident and claims the gf has the bruises to back up her story.
I suspect the truth is somewhere in the middle and I have no doubt that the Downie trade is part of this too.

[llipgh2]

where did you see "no marks"? the arrest warrant states a friend who saw her both before and after the incident and claims the gf has the bruises to back up her story.
I suspect the truth is somewhere in the middle and I have no doubt that the Downie trade is part of this too.

The reporter who wrote the story also tweeted police said they found "marks" consistent with abuse.

[llipgh2]

Varly is getting the start in goal tonight.

[Jim]

Is he going to beat the Stars?

[Gaucho]

So... she goes to the cops only AFTER he kicked her out and she realized that her meal ticket was gone, er, I mean she realized that someone that beats you, but leaves no marks, er I mean, you don't bruise easily, should be in jail. It has nothing to do with him breaking up with you... And do 20 minutes tv interviews before the ink is even dry.

[shoeshine boy]

Is he going to beat the Stars?

[Jim]

So... she goes to the cops only AFTER he kicked her out and she realized that her meal ticket was gone, er, I mean she realized that someone that beats you, but leaves no marks, er I mean, you don't bruise easily, should be in jail. It has nothing to do with him breaking up with you... And do 20 minutes tv interviews before the ink is even dry.

Yeah, well I prefer to consider the guy innocent until PROVEN guilty. While I have not had any charges against me directly, three friends have had court issues with women 5 times. All innocent, all treated like poo until the truth came out.

Friend #1: Paternity suit - Broke up with a girl, two weeks later she finds out she is pregnant. Says it is his, he says no. Goes to court, test... not his. Turns out she cheated on him with a married man and it was his. She hoped that my would just accept that it was his and not have a test done.

Friend #2: PFA - Breaks up with a woman, ugly breakup. She files for a PFA even though he never threatened her much less hit her. Gets the PFA. He appeals it and months later when they have the new hearing she doesn't show because she was just trying to get back at him for the breakup and ruin his life and she was now seeing someone else so couldn't be bothered... PFA rescinded (or whatever the term is for completely removed from the record).

Friend #1: Paternity suit - First guy gets another one but says he doesn't know the woman, no ne cares/listens, they even show up at his work to serve papers and make a scene. Goes to court. The woman says "That's not him, that's the wrong guy. I have never seen him before." Thrown out.

Friend #3: Paternity suit - Both my friend and her are party people, they both play the field. She was mad that they didn't stay together though. It could be his but there is obvious doubt. Test... not his.

Friend #3: Restraining order - Girl from above is mad that the he is not the father. Claims that he abused her and still does. Judge luckily sees that she is just bat-poo crazy and throws it out.


Five cases and five times that my friends were innocent. 5-0 with zero doubts. Sorry, but in cases like this my opinion is that there needs to be proof before condemning the guy. If he is guilty throw the book at him (I am actually even willing to extend this kind of thing into capital punishment area). But just because someone yells fire doesn't meant that there is.

[Gaucho]

So... she goes to the cops only AFTER he kicked her out and she realized that her meal ticket was gone, er, I mean she realized that someone that beats you, but leaves no marks, er I mean, you don't bruise easily, should be in jail. It has nothing to do with him breaking up with you... And do 20 minutes tv interviews before the ink is even dry.

Yeah, well I prefer to consider the guy innocent until PROVEN guilty.

No, you prefer, based on predictable mysogynistic preconceptions, to victimize the guy before nothing whatsoever is proven or disproven.

[canaan]

So he's guilty til proven innocent, but then he still might be guilty?

[columbia]

He sounds pretty white trash.

[Gaucho]

So he's guilty til proven innocent, but then he still might be guilty?

Uh, no?

[Idoit40fans]

Sounds pretty bad but im definitely on the innocen til proven guilty side

[Gaucho]

Sounds pretty bad but im definitely on the innocen til proven guilty side

So am I, just to be clear.

[ExPatriatePen]

Sounds pretty bad but im definitely on the innocen til proven guilty side

So am I, just to be clear.

Like most of these stories, there's probably a lot of blame to be had by both party's. He's no angel, but she obviously has an axe to grind at this point.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of scumbags out there who victimize their women.
By the same token, there are a lot of women who use the system for spite and to be vindictive. (I could tell story's that make Jim's story's pale in comparison.)

It's hard for any outsider to know the truth, even if they were close to the situation.

Edit to correct spelling errors.

[Tico Rick]

Given the backlash the Avs could receive, the fact that they played Varlamov last night indicates that, at a minimum, they are withholding judgment (which is a wise thing to do) and it could indicate that they know more of the story than we do and are on Varlamov's side.

[Jim]

So he's guilty til proven innocent, but then he still might be guilty?

Uh, no?

Actually that is where it seems like you are leaning. I showed a track record in my own life explaining why I wait for the guy to be proven guilty, and that the woman is not just crying wolf for her own reasons, and you counter saying that I have "predictable mysogynistic preconceptions" totally dismissing and ignoring the facts of what I said.

I guess it is okay to victimize the girl before nothing whatsoever is proven or disproven though huh? That's apparently fine to do.

[pittsports87]

The Avalanche twitter page was live tweeting the game last night, they probably sent out 50+ tweets and not one mention of Varlamov. Sounds like at least whoever runs their Twitter is to embarrassed to mention him.

I hope he is free until at least the end of the season, my fantasy hockey team needs him.

[Gaucho]

I wait for the guy to be proven guilty...

That's fine, so do I, but then you go on and question the woman's character. *shrug*

It's misogynistic, sorry for the typo.

[ExPatriatePen]

I wait for the guy to be proven guilty...

That's fine, so do I, but then you go on and question the woman's character. *shrug*

It's misogynistic, sorry for the typo.

And you're questioning Varlamov's character.

I think it's reasonable to suspect *both* at this point in time. Wondering if she may be embellishing her story is a far cry from misogyny.

No reason to impugn another posters character and accuse him of of hating women just because they suspect the story may have been embellished.

The last statement in that article is very interesting:

"When she sees fans shouting his name ... she wants to make sure they know his real face," Senova said.

[Gaucho]

I don't know, when a person is accused of violently beating up another person I don't normally suspect both. That would, in fact, be totally unreasonable.