Jian Ghomeshi Fired from Q

WestCoastRunner · February 9, 2016

To be honest WCR, even the the most staunch feminist should turn their back on this case and these women, they are doing more harm than good. I'm surprised you're trying to defend them.

I am defending the right for victims to have their day in court without being called embarrassing or whether they gave the accused a handjob.

Boges · February 9, 2016

I am defending the right for victims to have their day in court without being called embarrassing or whether they gave the accused a handjob.

But that information was withheld and now makes justice impossible to achieve even if the assault happens.

I think everyone agrees OJ Simpson probably killed those people. But he was acquitted mostly people a racist cop planted evidence.

Credibility matters in a courtroom.

These women may have been abused, but because they were dishonest, their abuser will likely go free.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Boges

WestCoastRunner · February 9, 2016

But that information was withheld and now makes justice impossible to achieve even if the assault happens.

I think everyone agrees OJ Simpson probably killed those people. But he was acquitted mostly people a racist cop planted evidence.

These women may have been abused, but because they were dishonest, their abuser will likely go free.

So you think they are embarrassing and feel the need to point out a handjob after the fact when you think they could possibly be telling the truth? Wonderful.

Hal 9000 · February 9, 2016

What they are doing is losing credibility for real victims.

At this point there is more evidence that he's the victims than they are, If one was to read the transcripts, they'd think it was a case of Ghomeshi filing restraining orders for stalking.

I told you Lucy Decoutere was a nutcase the minute she entered the scene and now i'm even more convinced.

And, where is the testimony from CBC employees telling us how creepy and abusive Ghomeshi is?

Boges · February 9, 2016

So you think they are embarrassing and feel the need to point out a handjob after the fact when you think they could possibly be telling the truth? Wonderful.

This 3rd woman perjured herself. She was asked if she saw Ghomeshi again by police and said no. Then Friday she says she had another sexual encounter with him.

Perhaps that didn't matter to the Crowns case at the time. But now it does because it shows a witness that has already lied about her relationship with the accused.

http://m.thespec.com/news-story/6269415-third-ghomeshi-witness-gets-ahead-of-another-courtroom-rewrite-dimanno

Perhaps embarrassing is a strong word for you but if justice is what this woman wanted, she effed that up.

Edited February 9, 2016 by Boges

WestCoastRunner · February 9, 2016

I'm quite frankly surprised at the prosecution for not calling more witnesses regarding mental health, former colleagues etc. Perhaps because they didn't have full knowledge of the emails. But again, it doesn't excuse the assaults. The judge will determine if those assaults actually took place with no reasonable doubt.

Edited February 9, 2016 by WestCoastRunner

Hal 9000 · February 9, 2016

So you think they are embarrassing and feel the need to point out a handjob after the fact when you think they could possibly be telling the truth? Wonderful.

It's more than a hand job, it's everything they did and every lie they told and every conversation they hid - there hasn't been once ounce of honesty from any of these women and you want to convict the guy.

Weren't you talking about "the making of a murderer" recently?

Hal 9000 · February 9, 2016

I'm quite frankly surprised at the prosecution for not calling more witnesses regarding mental health, former colleagues etc. Perhaps because they didn't have full knowledge of the emails. But again, it doesn't excuse the assaults. The judge will determine if those assaults actually took place with no reasonable doubt.

Would you convict Ghomeshi based on the evidence given?

WestCoastRunner · February 9, 2016

It's more than a hand job, it's everything they did and every lie they told and every conversation they hid - there hasn't been once ounce of honesty from any of these women and you want to convict the guy.

Weren't you talking about "the making of a murderer" recently?

Their honesty is the fact they even pursued this in the first place.

WestCoastRunner · February 9, 2016

Would you convict Ghomeshi based on the evidence given?

I'm not the judge. Geez.

Boges · February 9, 2016

Their honesty is the fact they even pursued this in the first place.

Then the should have disclosed all pertinent information.

Hal 9000 · February 9, 2016

I'm not the judge. Geez.

That's not the question. The question was "Would you convict Ghomeshi based on the evidence given?"

WestCoastRunner · February 9, 2016

That's not the question. The question was "Would you convict Ghomeshi based on the evidence given?"

I haven't been present in court. Let's be realistic.

Hal 9000 · February 10, 2016

I haven't been present in court. Let's be realistic.

Have you read the play-by-play tweets? I can send them to you, then you can answer.

Edited February 10, 2016 by Hal 9000

WestCoastRunner · February 10, 2016

Then the should have disclosed all pertinent information.

Shoulda, woulda, coulda. This all comes out in court. The judge will determine the relevance.

WestCoastRunner · February 10, 2016

Have you read the play-by-play tweets? I can send them to you, then you can answer.

I have read the live blog. I still won't answer. There is a huge difference in being there in person and reading live blogs.

WestCoastRunner · February 10, 2016

This 3rd woman perjured herself. She was asked if she saw Ghomeshi again by police and said no. Then Friday she says she had another sexual encounter with him.

Perhaps that didn't matter to the Crowns case at the time. But now it does because it shows a witness that has already lied about her relationship with the accused.

http://m.thespec.com/news-story/6269415-third-ghomeshi-witness-gets-ahead-of-another-courtroom-rewrite-dimanno

Perhaps embarrassing is a strong word for you but if justice is what this woman wanted, she effed that up.

But, but, earlier you stated they could be telling the truth.

Hal 9000 · February 10, 2016

I have read the live blog. I still won't answer. There is a huge difference in being there in person and reading live blogs.

No, you won't answer...and here's why;

If you say that "yes, you would convict", then you lose all credibility and become just an angry radical feminist who will lock a man up with no evidence to support the accusations.

If you say "no, you would not convict", you would be admitting that these women are not victims, but instead liars. And, if they have lied, then maybe not every woman who claims victim, is in fact a victim. You have to believe that each and every woman is a victim.

Neither scenario is gonna work for you - is it?

WestCoastRunner · February 10, 2016

My point is that this is what typically happens in assault causes reported by women. These posts confirm that victims are attacked over and over again.

WestCoastRunner · February 10, 2016

No, you won't answer...and here's why;

If you say that "yes, you would convict", then you lose all credibility and become just an angry radical feminist who will lock a man up with no evidence to support the accusations.

If you say "no, you would not convict", you would be admitting that these women are not victims, but instead liars. And, if they have lied, then maybe not every woman who claims victim, is in fact a victim. You have to believe that each and every woman is a victim.

Neither scenario is gonna work for you - is it?

Edited February 10, 2016 by WestCoastRunner

Boges · February 10, 2016

My point is that this is what typically happens in assault causes reported by women. These posts confirm that victims are attacked over and over again.

So would you Deny the accused a vigorous defence?

WestCoastRunner · February 10, 2016

So would you Deny the accused a vigorous defence?

Of course not. But as I have suggested earlier, there is no fair justice. It's all about the money. I question the ability of the prosecution team.

Edited February 10, 2016 by WestCoastRunner

Hal 9000 · February 10, 2016

.............

No txt.

Edited February 10, 2016 by Hal 9000

Hal 9000 · February 10, 2016

Of course not. But as I have suggested earlier, there is no fair justice. It's all about the money. I question the ability of the prosecution team.

Something else we agree on.

WestCoastRunner · February 10, 2016

I'll quote you! But, I won't report you.

Sorry, but in your heart of hearts, you know there is nothing there, you know these women have lied every chance they had, you know they colluded. and you know that at least 2 of them were fixated on the guy.

I wonder if these women were lying to each other.

I certainly don't believe they were lying or colluded.