WestCoastRunner

Hal loves those gotcha moments.

I prefer the townhall meetings as the candidates have to address questions posed to them from the audience and they have no idea what questions will be asked. As well, the candidates appear one at a time so there is no opportunity for childish fighting. These meetings seem to be fairly new and so far they have received rave reviews.

A good analysis by three criminal defense lawyers in The Toronto Life. They all seem to be in agreement that Ghomeshi will be acquitted, however: http://torontolife.com/city/crime/criminal-defence-lawyer-jian-ghomeshi-roundtable-part-two/

Thank you. That was my point.

Not sure what this proves? Do you have cites? So does this mean that 50% of prostitutes should be approved for prostitution because they don't do drugs ? Does it mean that 50% of prostitutes are addicted to painkillers so therefore they aren't capable of earning a living as a sex worker? I'm not even sure what drug addiction has to do with prostitution?

It's American!!

Can you come up with more recent claims to support your argument than an article that is over 35 years old.

A judge has many more cases to focus on besides this one. Ghomeshi knew this when he elected for a judge only trial. Ghomeshi deserves no favours.

Why is so important to you that I cast a vote? I have said that I don't believe they were lying.

I'm not speaking for you. I'm holding you accountable.

Date published 1979.

He was very talented.

I love it!!

The sad thing is that he will walk to go ahead and do the same thing to young women.

Exactly my point. It's a great disservice to the whole process of handling sexual assault cases and hopefully this will further discussions going forward. I am delighted that this case has brought to the attention of the public the inefficiencies of prosecuting these cases.

I would think that a high profile case like this would have an abundance of resources and money accessible to the crown.

You are being the judge and jury by determining what is a luxury and what isn't. People who can afford therapy are lucky to have access to money for that but should they be heavily taxed? Seriously, the list goes on and on.

It's when I read posts like this that I get turned off by your comments. It's sounds sanctimonious and self righteous and does nothing to further discussion. I'm pretty sure that I may fall into this trap as well. The three you mentioned do have plenty of posts but I like to determine them on an individual basis whether they are constructive or not but you seem to slam them blindly for all their posts. Maybe you should step down from your pedestal.

He doesn't know.

Even if it's a local ymca and the member feels the importance of privacy is crucial to their getting fit? You are unfairly imposing higher taxes on individuals.Maybe change the wording from taking advantage to purchasing. It's a sensitive issue.

Take advantage of prostitutes? If a prostitute is charging a John upwards of 100 an hour who is taking advantage of whom? A luxury for some could also be a plus membership to a high end fitness club. Should that be taxed to the hilt as well? It doesn't even have to be a high end club. It could be the local ymca.

Look what's happened to the taxi business. They can't even compete against über because of all these regulations that work against them.

Double post

A drunk John wouldn't be able to get it up. I'm betting most johns are white, married with children and sober. If they showed up next door at that college students illegal suite, (or a single mom supporting her kids) he would look like some dude from the burbs.

It sure wasn't done. The Crown were incompetent in preparing this case. Everyone knows this. It's not rocket science.