Jian Ghomeshi Fired from Q

[WestCoastRunner]

The Crown has a specific duty assigned to it in the adminstartion of justice. One of those things is to bring charges against those they think are guilty of crimes, so yes they do care about guilt and innocence.

.

And if you believe that, I have some land for sale. You interested?

[Hal 9000]

The Crown has a specific duty assigned to it in the adminstartion of justice. One of those things is to bring charges against those they think are guilty of crimes, so yes they do care about guilt and innocence.

The burden of proof is no less or greater in sexual assault cases than in any others.

The Crown has to present evidence that proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

With the first witness, it sounds lie the police failed to interview the accuser in any depth, and the Crown went to trial ill prepared on that weak interview..

So yes, we the people have been poorly represented.

The Crown certainly looks unprepared, but I don't know how you can explain away the actions of these women post "assault".

So far it looks like 2 for 2, that seemed not that bothered by his actions.

[BubberMiley]

So far it looks like 2 for 2, that seemed not that bothered by his actions.

When making a decision, does the court look at how pissed off the victim was for being punched in the face, or does it just concern itself with whether or not the face was punched?

[Hal 9000]

When making a decision, does the court look at how pissed off the victim was for being punched in the face, or does it just concern itself with whether or not the face was punched?

Both, I would hope...and assume! However, there doesn't seem to evidence of either.

[Hal 9000]

Wow, this case is going downhill fast. I'm starting to think Ghomeshi should bring civil charges.

Edit: Can you say "stalker"? WoW!

Edited February 5, 2016 by Hal 9000

[Boges]

When making a decision, does the court look at how pissed off the victim was for being punched in the face, or does it just concern itself with whether or not the face was punched?

Ghomesi never denied that he was into the kind of stuff he's being accused of, but he says it was consensual. The evidence seems to back up his case.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2016/02/05/cross-examination-of-lucy-decoutere-continues-at-jian-ghomeshi-trial.html

Henein produced an email in court Friday that DeCoutere sent Ghomeshi on July 5, 2003, a day after the alleged assault. It read: “You kicked my ass last night and that makes me want to f--- your brain out. Tonight.”

Edited February 5, 2016 by Boges

[Hal 9000]

Ghomesi never denied that he was into the kind of stuff he's being accused of, but he says it was consensual. The evidence seems to back up his case.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2016/02/05/cross-examination-of-lucy-decoutere-continues-at-jian-ghomeshi-trial.html

I'll still call Ghomeshi a douche. But wow, is this prosecution team ever bad. Lucy Decoutere is killing them, stalking, secret meetings, sexy pics, love letters? This case should be thrown out and the Crown reprimanded.

[Big Guy]

Ghomesi is a sleaze who gets off on hitting women. Unfortunately, the way this case is progressing he is going to be found not guilty and end up with lots of $'s from the CBC for wrongful dismissal.

This is a "He said - she said, she said, she said" case but the evidence is undermining a conviction. I hope the crown has a few more believable witnesses because these first two are really throwing a wrench into the works. Why would they place them on the stand - assuming that they knew the subsequent contacts initiated by the witnesses - maybe the prosecution did not know?

[Hal 9000]

I half expect the next witness to show up in a wedding dress and propose to the guy or have Ghomeshi produce restraining orders against these women.

Edited February 5, 2016 by Hal 9000

[On Guard for Thee]

I'll still call Ghomeshi a douche. But wow, is this prosecution team ever bad. Lucy Decoutere is killing them, stalking, secret meetings, sexy pics, love letters? This case should be thrown out and the Crown reprimanded.

Don't think it's the crowns fault. Rather it's that their witnesses, so far, weren't candid at the outset. The case still has a ways to go.

[On Guard for Thee]

Ghomesi is a sleaze who gets off on hitting women. Unfortunately, the way this case is progressing he is going to be found not guilty and end up with lots of $'s from the CBC for wrongful dismissal.

This is a "He said - she said, she said, she said" case but the evidence is undermining a conviction. I hope the crown has a few more believable witnesses because these first two are really throwing a wrench into the works. Why would they place them on the stand - assuming that they knew the subsequent contacts initiated by the witnesses - maybe the prosecution did not know?

He tried a wrongful dismissal suit initially, and quickly withdrew it, probably on the advice of a knowledgeable lawyer. Regardless of the outcome of the trial, he is wasting his time with a civil suit.

[Boges]

Don't think it's the crowns fault. Rather it's that their witnesses, so far, weren't candid at the outset. The case still has a ways to go.

I think there's only one more accuser to come. And I just heard on the radio that there have been some more disclosure from that person in the wake of today.

[On Guard for Thee]

I think there's only one more accuser to come. And I just heard on the radio that there have been some more disclosure from that person in the wake of today.

So far it looks like he walks.

[capricorn]

So far it looks like he walks.

I too think he will walk. But IMO we haven't heard the last of Ghomeshi's "antics". I predict it won't be long before he's inclined to test his new found sense of invincibility whereby he thinks he can rough up women and get away with it.

[On Guard for Thee]

I too think he will walk. But IMO we haven't heard the last of Ghomeshi's "antics". I predict it won't be long before he's inclined to test his new found sense of invincibility whereby he thinks he can rough up women and get away with it.

As we know, being grilled on the stand as a sexual assault complainant is tough, and so far these witnesses haven't fared well. However, I don't think they are making all this up.

[capricorn]

However, I don't think they are making all this up.

Agreed. Of note, when DeCoutere was asked why she did not break off all contact with Ghomeshi after the alleged assault, DeCoutere responded it's akin to a battered woman remaining in a bad relationship. I think that was a good reply.

[On Guard for Thee]

Agreed. Of note, when DeCoutere was asked why she did not break off all contact with Ghomeshi after the alleged assault, DeCoutere responded it's akin to a battered woman remaining in a bad relationship. I think that was a good reply.

I think the complainants may have a slight benefit by dent of being heard by a judge only. The effectiveness of bludgeoning cross examination by the defense may not have the same impact on a judge who is likely more aware of the tactic and will be more able to separate the chaff from the wheat.

[Hal 9000]

So far it looks like he walks.

You mean "it looks like he's not guilty, right"?

[Big Guy]

Unfortunately, it appears that this case is establishing a template for interaction between the sexes. The proper and legal method (from the male point of view) is saying, I like you, may I kiss you - giving the recipient the choice of SAYING yes or no. Then I guess you ask - "may I fondle your breasts" and if the reply is "yes|" then you continue. If "no" then you say goodnight and go home.

If the fondling question is replied in the affirmative then the next question must be clearly voiced that "can I ........." If that answer is affirmative then you progress (depending on your favorite sexual fantasies) and asking, in a clear voice, if you can do that.

BTW - These are the rules for both males and females depending on who is initiating the encounter.

Finally, you have to ask "can I penetrate you in the following manner" or "I would like to be penetrated by you in the following manner" being careful that you adhere to the details of the agreed to verbal contract.

From the male point of view, I guess another approach would be to print out the steps that you intend to use which you assume will end up in having a sexual encounter with your partner. So after a couple of drinks in your place and if you feel as if you want an encounter then you would give the potential partner a copy of your plans, have her/him check off all of the things that they agree to and then fulfill the "contract".

The female, on the other hand, may also print out what she is prepared to do depending on what her partner either initiates or agrees to do physically. Once the consultation takes place then both participants sign the final agreement and that becomes the acceptable behavior for that night and encounter. There is no need for a third party to sign as a witness to the contract (unless of course a third party is a participating part of the sexual agreement).

I guarantee that this process would lead to many fewer complaints of sexual misconduct and lead to many, many, many fewer sexual encounters.

For men, it will follow the golden rule as I saw in scratched into a brass plate above an airlock submarine door on a Canadian submarine: "If your wife is not at your right hand then let your right hand be your wife!"

Edited February 6, 2016 by Big Guy

[ReeferMadness]

Unfortunately, it appears that this case is establishing a template for interaction between the sexes.

That template has been in place for years. If it were possible to suddenly apply sexual assault laws to the letter, I suspect most couples would be in prison.

Human interactions are complicated and none more complicated than those that involve sexual intimacy and attraction. Our criminal legal system has to have a villain and a victim - real world relationships don't often work that way.

The issue of consent is one where the standard of the law and the actual reality often don't meet. The decision to have sex (particularly early in a relationship) is often (usually?) clouded by hormones, emotions and/or drugs.

I've often wondered whether there should be an option to go with some sort of restorative justice model for crimes where the accused and the accuser know each other well or intimately. The problem with our binary justice system is that there is no incentive for either party to critically examine their own actions or accept any responsibility. One puts on the mantle of victimhood and the other wears the mantle of innocence.

[kimmy]

Ghomesi is a sleaze who gets off on hitting women. Unfortunately, the way this case is progressing he is going to be found not guilty and end up with lots of $'s from the CBC for wrongful dismissal.

He might get acquitted of the criminal charges against him, but CBC was absolutely within their rights to terminate him for the stuff he did as an employee. He treated the women in the office like crap, and while that's not a criminal offense, it's certainly reasonable grounds for termination.

-k

[cybercoma]

This is a lengthy article, but worth reading if you want to better understand how our "sexual assault" laws fail victims. I don't have anything else to add to it and it explains the situation in far more detail than I'm willing to put into a post here these days. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/how-canadas-sex-assault-laws-violate-rape-victims/article14705289/?page=all

[Guest]

From the male point of view, I guess another approach would be to print out the steps that you intend to use which you assume will end up in having a sexual encounter with your partner. So after a couple of drinks in your place and if you feel as if you want an encounter then you would give the potential partner a copy of your plans, have her/him check off all of the things that they agree to and then fulfill the "contract".

I understand consent is not possible if drink is involved.

[ReeferMadness]

I understand consent is not possible if drink is involved.

Not true. Consent is not possible only if the victim is impaired.

idk how it works if both parties are impaired.

[Bonam]

idk how it works if both parties are impaired.

The male gets blamed.