Jian Ghomeshi trial to begin in Toronto Monday
- Thread starter canada-man
- Start date
She does come off as a bit narcissistic.
And the way the trial is progressing, it reminds me of a quote from A Few Good Men, "Please tell me you have something more".
But I think we must not forget it's about the physical abuse. Are we to believe DeCoutere is making all of this up just for attention 20 years later?
I'm of the belief the incident did happen. And while she was surprised, she loved Ghomeshi's edge, and bad boy rockstar status. It was rough sex and she liked it...until he moved on and never gave her the attention she seeked (based on all the emails she sent).
It still doesn't make it right to strike a woman. I suppose it boils down to consent. Does it have to be verbal or can it be implied through actions?
He's a million miles from innocent.
Besides, a trial doesn't find you "innocent ", it finds you either guilty or not guilty. And not guilty does not equate to innocent.
And if he's found not guilty he would be VERY wise to shut his mouth and walk away. If he were to be an idiot and start suing people, it could end up a lot worse for him than it already is.
One of my golden rules in life is, "once you get what you want, stop talking"
Good question
I've been thinking about this, and although both crown witnesses have come across as a pair of flakes so far, especially Lucy Decoutere, it doesn't mean he has the right to choke and beat on them.
An analogy would be marital rape. Just because you're married doesn't mean you can force yourself sexually on a wife who doesn't consent to sex. Likewise, dating doesn't give Ghomeshi the right to choke and beat on a woman he was dating just because he thought it was ok.
The question does come down to consent and most difficult will be how must consent be given. If you're married and sleeping next to your wife and she's nude, does that green light you to climb on top of her and fuck her?
Most of us are asking these 2 witnesses, "if it was so devastating to you, how come you persued creep-boy after the fact? Why didn't you end all contact right there and then? And how come you you went to th cops 12 years later?"
These are valid questions and while consent and what exactly define consent is the crux of the issue, these questions certainly must be considered.
I don't know why you keep posting about this topic, you just show off your ignorance.
This isn't he said/she said. Stop saying that. And it won't be, unless Ghomeshi testifies.
There will be no wrongful termination suit, he already dropped that. It seems like you pretend to not know facts just so you can continue to argue about them.
And no matter what Henien argues or asks the complainants, nothing that happened after the assault is relevant to the question of whether or not it happened.
You're innocent until proven guilty. Therefore, you're still innocent when found not guilty.
Thats the law and thats the way its supposed to work. Reality is however many people will still think he's guilty after he's been completely exonerated
What I'd like to know is at what point did she go from "I want to fuck your brains out", sending him flowers and pictures of her deep thoating a bottle to “I want him fucking decimated” and “The guy’s a shit show; time to flush.”? Because something happened and it didn't have anything to do with him putting his hands on her throat and slapping her face.
With all the emails she and how we know girls talk to one another, is there not a shred of evidence, an email to a friend saying that she was assaulted and traumatized by JG? Nothing?
I think as JG became more famous, richer and refused to date her (have sex with her) even though she sent him all the signals, she went... Okay, two can play this game!
With all the emails she and how we know girls talk to one another, is there not a shred of evidence, an email to a friend saying that she was assaulted and traumatized by JG? Nothing?
I think as JG became more famous, richer and refused to date her (have sex with her) even though she sent him all the signals, she went... Okay, two can play this game!
Exactly, it's he said/ THEY said. If you take each accuser separately, there may be some holes in EACH of their story. But when there's 6 named (and many more unnamed accusers) all singing the same tune, then it's highly unlikely he is "innocent".
Legally: he has a good lawyer Henein publicly slut shaming his accusers, and may be found not guilty.
Morally: he's a douche and deserves all the public humiliation he's getting.
If you say you did not engage in slutty behaviour under oath in the legal realm, when in fact you did.....well Shame Shame on you.
+1 a pathetic hypocritical liberal douche
Ghomeshi was a voice of liberal reason, after all, an annoyingly affable metrosexual who has hosted radio segments about the meaning of rape culture. Not so long ago, he was on the air telling Anne Marie Owens, editor-in-chief of the National Post—formerly deputy editor of Maclean’s—how special it was that a woman had finally earned the top spot at a Canadian newspaper.
Lucy is just one, I'll wait for testimony from the woman he sent to the hospital with injuries. I doubt she was kind to him after that.
I suspect he'll still walk but he's already been convicted and given a life sentence as a piece of shit dirtbag by the public. This will be on his resume forever.
I suspect he'll still walk but he's already been convicted and given a life sentence as a piece of shit dirtbag by the public. This will be on his resume forever.
Ghomeshi, is a pure example of a Narcissist and never underestimate the intelligence of these characters. They prey upon people, in this case females.
The underlying defect with these people such as Ghomeshi is that they have no sense of empathy for any living entity. All that counts is their self gratification
at any cost.
The underlying defect with these people such as Ghomeshi is that they have no sense of empathy for any living entity. All that counts is their self gratification
at any cost.
So? They interviewed 100. How many had something that corroborates the allegations? You don't know. All that tells us is they did a fulsome investigation (maybe... depends on how hard they dug into what they learned).
Your spin is just as bad as the people trying to exonerate him.
The problem with the crown's case is that there is no track record of emails indicating that the women had changed their opinion of Ghomeshi if he "went too far" with rough sex. Everything indicates that they pursued him desperately. He tired of them and moved on and years later, they come forward with lurid allegations. It reeks of marginal people who pursued a celebrity with money and influence and them sought the limelight much later when he rejected them and there was the possibility of cashing in with a potential damages suit.
Fill in the blanks. The entertainment industry is a rough venue filled with frustrated and ambitious people who are more than prepared to sleep with a guy who can advance their careers. In my short time in the entertainment biz, I soon learned that women on the margins of the industry threw themselves at any guy with position. Probably what happened here. They may have liked the rough sex. Or they may have just thought it was a price to pay for time with a guy who could help them. In any event, they appear to have consented and CONSENT is the all important word here. If you have consent, it ain't assault.
Fill in the blanks. The entertainment industry is a rough venue filled with frustrated and ambitious people who are more than prepared to sleep with a guy who can advance their careers. In my short time in the entertainment biz, I soon learned that women on the margins of the industry threw themselves at any guy with position. Probably what happened here. They may have liked the rough sex. Or they may have just thought it was a price to pay for time with a guy who could help them. In any event, they appear to have consented and CONSENT is the all important word here. If you have consent, it ain't assault.
