Quiz: What do you really know about the Patrick Kane case?

The Patrick Kane case has gone incredibly quiet since the circus week in late September when it seemed the lawyers in the case were holding a press conference every 20 minutes. But over the weekend reports out of Buffalo claim that the case will not be presented to a grand jury, and no charges will be brought.

This remains to be seen but the case certainly can’t stay quiet much longer. At some point soon, the District Attorney will either submit the case to a grand jury or will drop the investigation without pursuing charges. While the case is quiet on the legal front, some fans of other teams in the league have been vocal in jeering him about the case.

Even if no charges are brought against Kane, we could still know nothing more about the facts of what happened that night in August unless the DA provides details. And even if criminal charges are never filed, the accuser could still bring a civil lawsuit against Kane. No matter what happens next in the case, it is clear that many people have already made up their minds about his guilt or innocence But how much do you really know about the case?

Here’s a little quiz to test your knowledge. You’ll have to grade it yourself though because I don’t claim to have all the answers.

Qualification round:

First, let’s make sure you’re eligible to take this quiz by answering one qualification question:

I am (choose one):

a. Not a lawyer but I watch The Good Wife.
b. Not a doctor, but I watch Grey’s Anatomy.
c. A lawyer or a doctor, but not one who is involved in the case.
d. Someone other than Patrick Kane or the accuser.

If you were able to answer the question above, congratulations! You’ve qualified for the 2nd round!

1. On the night in question, Kane:

a. Did not have sexual contact with the accuser.
b. Had sex with the accuser, but it was consensual.
c. Raped the accuser.
d. I don’t know, I wasn’t there, and the confirmed facts don’t provide enough information to judge.

2. On the night in question, the accuser was:

a. Hanging all over Kane at the bar and pushing to go back to his place.
b. Not hanging all over Kane at the bar and did not want to go to his house.
c. Drunk.
d. High on ecstasy.
e. Um, I really don’t know, I was not in Buffalo that night, or at the bar, or at Kane’s house, and I have not seen any toxicology reports.

3. There were other people at Kane’s house that night and they claim:

a. Kane and the accuser were alone in a separate room for a time.
b. Kane and the accuser were never alone together at the house.
c. Wait, you mean there were potential witnesses who may have heard or seen something — or just as importantly not seen or heard something — but we have no idea who they are, what their statements are, and no one from the press has reported on anything these people might have to say about the events that day? Ok, I guess I have no idea what those people say they saw or heard that night, but it might be very important and relevant to the case.

4. Kane’s DNA was reportedly found on the accuser, but only on her shoulder and fingernails, which proves:

a. He is 100% innocent.
b. He is 100% guilty.
c. That reports claim that Kane’s DNA was found on the accuser, but only on her shoulder and fingernails.

5. In September, the accuser’s mother created a hoax involving a paper bag. This means:

a. The accuser must have known about this, and the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, thus the accuser is also a liar.
b. The accuser had no knowledge of this, the sins of the mother should not be visited upon the child, and thus the accuser is telling the truth.
c. Kane must be innocent because why else would the mother do such a thing?
d. We still have no idea why the mother did this, and if she acted alone then her actions in September have nothing to do with the facts of what may have happened in August.

6. Settlement talks between Kane and the accuser:

a. Are ongoing.
b. Never happened.
c. Happened but never resulted in an agreement.
d. One of the above but I have no idea which.

7. If Patrick Kane settles a civil case by paying the accuser:

a. It means he did it, because no innocent person would pay a dime to make a lawsuit go away when they could instead let the case linger for years while having a cloud hang over their head as they are billed large legal fees.
b. It means he’s innocent and she’s a gold digger, because no real victim would ever settle for money when they could instead let the case linger for years while fighting a difficult legal battle against a popular athlete with unlimited legal resources, and then go to court to be cross-examined in open court about being raped.
c. It means the parties settled the case for reasons most likely never to be made known to us, on terms most likely never to be made known to us, and almost certainly with no admission of wrongdoing by either party.

8. I know Kane is innocent because:

a. He is my favorite player and I really want to be able to keep wearing my #88 jersey.
b. He could get any woman he wants.
c. The accuser’s lawyer withdrew from the case.
d. She just wants his money.
e. I guess I really don’t know because I wasn’t there and there isn’t enough information to judge.

9. I know Kane is guilty because:

a. Victims rarely lie.
b. Kane is rich and has a powerful lawyer.
c. That time he punched a cab driver. Oh, and that time we was drunk in Madison.
d. They took his picture off the cover of a video game.
e. I guess I really don’t know because I wasn’t there and there isn’t enough information to judge.

Final Round.

This is the written fill-in-the-blank portion of the quiz and will count for 99% of your score. You can write as much as you wish to answer this question:

10. What I know for sure about what happened between Patrick Kane and the accuser is:____________________

Type your email address in the box and click the “create subscription” button. My list is completely spam free, and you can opt out at any time.

Filed under: Patrick Kane

Leave a comment