On Guard for Thee Posted February 11, 2016 Report Posted February 11, 2016 You are assuming the crown knew about the after the fact actions of the accusers. The defense is not obligated to disclose evidence it intends to use to discredit witnesses and if the accusers did not think to inform the crown that such evidence might exist the crown could not have known. This was certainly not the first case of this type. An experienced council should easily have anticipated the type of questions defense would ask, and have prepared the complainants for them. Quote
Hal 9000 Posted February 11, 2016 Report Posted February 11, 2016 If the women fessed up from the beginning, the Crown could've brought in other witnesses to testify as to their actions...then they might have stood a chance, instead they all - to a person, lied and were caught lying. Quote The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so. - Ronald Reagan I have said that the Western world is just as violent as the Islamic world - Dialamah Europe seems to excel at fooling people to immigrate there from the ME only to chew them up and spit them back. - Eyeball Unfortunately our policies have contributed to retarding and limiting their (Muslim's) society's natural progression towards the same enlightened state we take for granted. - Eyeball
On Guard for Thee Posted February 11, 2016 Report Posted February 11, 2016 What if the guy "slipped"? Tell us, what do you think would happen if the guy "slipped"? Quote
TimG Posted February 11, 2016 Report Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) This was certainly not the first case of this type. An experienced council should easily have anticipated the type of questions defense would ask, and have prepared the complainants for them.How can any lawyer prepare a witness to deal with evidence that they lied? The crown can warn accusers of the risks of lying but if they insist on lying or omitting important information then there is nothing a lawyer can do to help them prepare because they are obviously lying because they believe it won't be found out. Edited February 11, 2016 by TimG Quote
Hal 9000 Posted February 11, 2016 Report Posted February 11, 2016 On at least 2 occasions in closing, the Crown tried putting the onus on the defence to prove innocence. And, insults the judge a time or two. I like the term "delayed disclosure" and the word "animus". Quote The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so. - Ronald Reagan I have said that the Western world is just as violent as the Islamic world - Dialamah Europe seems to excel at fooling people to immigrate there from the ME only to chew them up and spit them back. - Eyeball Unfortunately our policies have contributed to retarding and limiting their (Muslim's) society's natural progression towards the same enlightened state we take for granted. - Eyeball
Hal 9000 Posted February 11, 2016 Report Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) How can any lawyer prepare a witness to deal with evidence that they lied? The crown can warn accusers of the risks of lying but if they insist on lying or omitting important information then there is nothing a lawyer can do to help them prepare because they are obviously lying because they believe it won't be found out. I know what you're saying, but what we don't know is whether Crown might have been complicit or willfully unaware that this info was out there. Or, they may have just been unable to convince these people just how important the truth is. I agree that these women (who seem none to bright) probably went rogue and sent the Crown into salvage mode, Or maybe the Crown rolled the dice in the hopes that these emails and letters were long gone. Edited February 11, 2016 by Hal 9000 Quote The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so. - Ronald Reagan I have said that the Western world is just as violent as the Islamic world - Dialamah Europe seems to excel at fooling people to immigrate there from the ME only to chew them up and spit them back. - Eyeball Unfortunately our policies have contributed to retarding and limiting their (Muslim's) society's natural progression towards the same enlightened state we take for granted. - Eyeball
overthere Posted February 11, 2016 Report Posted February 11, 2016 How can any lawyer prepare a witness to deal with evidence that they lied? The crown can warn accusers of the risks of lying but if they insist on lying or omitting important information then there is nothing a lawyer can do to help them prepare because they are obviously lying because they believe it won't be found out. The police are rarely shy about asking 'victims' exactly what happened and are not shy about exploring their relationships with the accused. The interviews prior to laying charges were wholly inadequate. Nothing stopped them from asking the complainants the same questions that the defence ultimately did ask. And the Crtown read thse brief and incompete interviews, and went to trial with that info. Fail and fail. The accusers answered what they were asked, but they were not asked nearly enough prior to trial. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
On Guard for Thee Posted February 11, 2016 Report Posted February 11, 2016 How can any lawyer prepare a witness to deal with evidence that they lied? The crown can warn accusers of the risks of lying but if they insist on lying or omitting important information then there is nothing a lawyer can do to help them prepare because they are obviously lying because they believe it won't be found out. There is a lengthy interview period before a trial hits a court room. That is where a lawyer finds out the truth, and also should discover how clear the memories are of what did/didn't occur and prepare them for cross. That clearly wasn't done properly here. Quote
WestCoastRunner Posted February 11, 2016 Report Posted February 11, 2016 There is a lengthy interview period before a trial hits a court room. That is where a lawyer finds out the truth, and also should discover how clear the memories are of what did/didn't occur and prepare them for cross. That clearly wasn't done properly here. It sure wasn't done. The Crown were incompetent in preparing this case. Everyone knows this. It's not rocket science. Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
cybercoma Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 Good Grief, This woman is actually teaching people. "That woman" has studied law for many years longer than you. Quote
Big Guy Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 The amount of money and resources that the Crown is able to spend on any particular case depends on a decision of how much of the budget allocated to the crown by the government that the Crown is prepared to spend. The amount of money and resources that a defendant is able to spend on a particular case is the amount the defendant is prepared to spend. This will depend on his/her material wealth and resources. This is why, generally, the chances of acquittal in serious cases is directly proportional to the wealth of the defendant. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
WestCoastRunner Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 (edited) The amount of money and resources that the Crown is able to spend on any particular case depends on a decision of how much of the budget allocated to the crown by the government that the Crown is prepared to spend. The amount of money and resources that a defendant is able to spend on a particular case is the amount the defendant is prepared to spend. This will depend on his/her material wealth and resources. This is why, generally, the chances of acquittal in serious cases is directly proportional to the wealth of the defendant. I would think that a high profile case like this would have an abundance of resources and money accessible to the crown. Edited February 12, 2016 by WestCoastRunner Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 It sure wasn't done. The Crown were incompetent in preparing this case. Everyone knows this. It's not rocket science. Sure seems that way, but why didn't the discovery process prepare the Crown much better as a matter of pre-trial protocol. There shouldn't have been many courtroom surprises. What a circus.... Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
WestCoastRunner Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 Sure seems that way, but why didn't the discovery process prepare the Crown much better as a matter of pre-trial protocol. There shouldn't have been many courtroom surprises. What a circus.... 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. Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
On Guard for Thee Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 Sure seems that way, but why didn't the discovery process prepare the Crown much better as a matter of pre-trial protocol. There shouldn't have been many courtroom surprises. What a circus.... It was actually the crown who failed to prepare the complainants. But what's the surprise here is that I don't see one hint of a Canada reference in a post by you. Must be a time for celebration eh. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 It sure wasn't done. The Crown were incompetent in preparing this case. Everyone knows this. It's not rocket science. Apparently there are some around here who don't know this. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 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. Agreed...it's not like on TV when detective Paul Drake (Perry Mason) rushes into the court room at the last minute with new evidence. No judge worth his/her salt would permit it. So we go from one circus at the CBC to another one in an Ontario courtroom. Ghomeshi walks.... Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
WestCoastRunner Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 Agreed...it's not like on TV when detective Paul Drake (Perry Mason) rushes into the court room at the last minute with new evidence. No judge worth his/her salt would permit it. So we go from one circus at the CBC to another one in an Ontario courtroom. Ghomeshi walks.... The sad thing is that he will walk to go ahead and do the same thing to young women. Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
Smallc Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 The sad thing is that he will walk to go ahead and do the same thing to young women. As he should. The case has not been proven in any way, and there's enough doubt as to the validity of the 'assaults' and the 'witnesses' that a conviction would completely surprise me at this point. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 As he should. The case has not been proven in any way, and there's enough doubt as to the validity of the 'assaults' and the 'witnesses' that a conviction would completely surprise me at this point. In all likelihood he will walk, but his reputation is gonzo. If he ever gets into broadcasting again it will be with some scuzzy US outfit in a similar vein as Rush Limbaugh etal. Quote
Smallc Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 In all likelihood he will walk, but his reputation is gonzo. If he ever gets into broadcasting again it will be with some scuzzy US outfit in a similar vein as Rush Limbaugh etal. It's too bad - he was an amazing interviewer. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 It's too bad - he was an amazing interviewer. Yes I admit I enjoyed a number of his segments over his time there. Quote
msj Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 It's too bad - he was an amazing interviewer. No he wasn't. He had a smarmy pandering style. He must have saved the hard hitting for later. Quote If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist) My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx
Smallc Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 No he wasn't. He had a smarmy pandering style. I guess he wasn't for everyone. Barbara Walters agreed with me though...maybe they...nevermind. Quote
WestCoastRunner Posted February 12, 2016 Report Posted February 12, 2016 No he wasn't. He had a smarmy pandering style. He must have saved the hard hitting for later. He was very talented. Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.