Jian Ghomeshi trial to begin in Toronto Monday

[mandrill]

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.

It's not slut shaming if it's logically and legally relevant. Henein is establishing the likelihood of consent to JG's rough sex practices and the possibility of recent fabrication by the complainants. She's doing a good job in a perfectly ethical way. And if there's 6 accusers, that just means there's 6 potentially false accusers attempting to ride the gravy train and get some media attention. No doubt the guy is a creep and a bully. But the women may have got off on it or thought it was worthwhile pretending that they did to hold his attention.

 

[Titalian]

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.

BS some of these women had no idea what they were walking into. Only after the fact did they realise OMG what do I do. How embarrassing !

 

[mandrill]

BS some of these women had no idea what they were walking into. Only after the fact did they realise OMG what do I do. How embarrassing !

No. They make it known to JG at the time that they are not consenting, or it ain't assault. The trial isn't about embarrassment. It's about whether JG could reasonably rely at the very time and place on the impression that the women were consenting to being punched, slapped and being verbally abused etc. That's the law.

If he reasonably believes they are consenting, it is not an assault. So he gets to walk.

 

[Titalian]

No. They make it known to JG at the time that they are not consenting, or it ain't assault. The trial isn't about embarrassment. It's about whether JG could reasonably rely at the very time and place on the impression that the women were consenting to being punched, slapped and being verbally abused etc. That's the law.

If he reasonably believes they are consenting, it is not an assault. So he gets to walk.

Do you realise what your speaking of here ? And do you agree with it? And Does it still make it right?

 

[fuji]

You're innocent until proven guilty. Therefore, you're still innocent when found not guilty.

Presumed innocent. Not proven innocent. The difference is important if you proceed to a civil trial where there will be no presumption of innocence and the matter week be decided on a balance of probabilities basis.

 

[art van dele]

+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.

You sound like a bitter Ex too!!

 

[fuji]

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.

Yes that tells us they did a full investigation and found corroborating reports of harassment, for which three people were terminated, ghomer and two execs.

Note the topic is is CBC was justified in terminating him for his workplace behavior and for the disrepute he brought on them. This is not a comment on the separate question of whether the women he enjoys beating up consented.

 

[AK-47]

Yes that tells us they did a full investigation and found corroborating reports of harassment, for which three people were terminated, ghomer and two execs

But if the corroborating reports were bullshit allegations, like the 2 girls in court have been so far, Ghomeshi has a good case against the CBC for wrongful termination.

And before you say 100 people couldnt be lying, the article doesnt say 100 people accused JG, it just says 100 people were interviewed

 

[fuji]

But if the corroborating reports were bullshit allegations, like the 2 girls in court have been so far, Ghomeshi has a good case against the CBC for wrongful termination.

And before you say 100 people couldnt be lying, the article doesnt say 100 people accused JG, it just says 100 people were interviewed

The report concluded that the allegations were true. Go read it. Your outright refusal to believe anything makes it pointless to debate with you, like when you refused to believe SSA is subsidized by illegal immigrants even after you were shown a direct quote from the SSA's top actuary saying it is. You are just a troll.

 

[Titalian]

But if the corroborating reports were bullshit allegations, like the 2 girls in court have been so far, Ghomeshi has a good case against the CBC for wrongful termination.

And before you say 100 people couldnt be lying, the article doesnt say 100 people accused JG, it just says 100 people were interviewed

If I found out that an employee was abusive to women or animals, I would terminate them immediately. If only for my sanity!

 

[fuji]

If I found out that an employee was abusive to women or animals, I would terminate them immediately. If only for my sanity!

And more to the point, to protect the reputation of your company. The fact that this individual was extensively documented to be harassing other employees only strengthens the case for termination.

 

[james t kirk]

You're innocent until proven guilty. Therefore, you're still innocent when found not guilty.

No, it's not a mathematical correlation.

He will be found guilty or not guilty.

Not guilty is not the same as innocent.

 

[james t kirk]

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!

I agree.

As Bill Shakespeare so aptly put it, "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned"

This has been Ghomeshi's argument all along - these are simply jilted women who are pissed off at him and out to get him. It would seem that there is some truth to that.

The one thing I'm wondering about, and Henein does not appear to have asked either woman this, is, "Did either of these women say "stop it", or "no, don't do that" when he went into his sexual fog and started choking them, thinking in his own mind that this was sex, or this was OK because this is what women really want?"

Did they tell him in no uncertain terms - NO.

I'm guessing that Henein does not want to ask that question because the two women on the witness stands would sieze on it and claim that they did tell him directly and to the point - NO.

 

[james t kirk]

But there's still cross examination of Ghomeshi.

Only if he choses to testify.

So far, I don't know that his lawyer has decided to put him on the stand. (If I were her, the way things stand right now, I certainly would not put him on the stand. I'd roll the bones on the merit of the witness testimony against him (which SO FAR has been weak at best and fraught with contradictions.))

If his lawyer doesn't put him on the stand, the crown does not get to ask him a single question.

 

[AK-47]

The report concluded that the allegations were true. Go read it. Your outright refusal to believe anything makes it pointless to debate with you, like when you refused to believe SSA is subsidized by illegal immigrants even after you were shown a direct quote from the SSA's top actuary saying it is. You are just a troll.

Fuji, it was one report by one lawyer named Janice Rubin. And that was it. Thats not strong enough evidence, you fucking retard. Why do you think we have courts of law??

 

[james t kirk]

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.

Bingo.

Lucy Decoutere is now working for the Canadian Forces as an airforce trainer. Since she has a degree, she has the rank of Captain. Fair enough. But it shows that her career as an actress never went further than playing "Lucy" in "Trailer Park Boys". So I think it's safe to say that her acting days are behind her and there are no offers coming her way any time soon. She's not about to be the next Canadian Meryl Streep if you know what I mean.

 

[fuji]

Fuji, it was one report by one lawyer named Janice Rubin. And that was it. Thats not strong enough evidence, you fucking retard. Why do you think we have courts of law??

You don't need to go to court to fire somebody, twit. You asked for evidence. There is evidence. A lawyer interviewing 100 people and documenting harassment is waaaaaaay beyond the evidence I collect when I fire people. There will be no wrongful dismissal case.

Note that as a civil trial if he challenged it in court he gets no presumption of innocence. He would have to prove the report is wrong, not just plant a few doubts.

 

[james t kirk]

It's not slut shaming if it's logically and legally relevant. Henein is establishing the likelihood of consent to JG's rough sex practices and the possibility of recent fabrication by the complainants. She's doing a good job in a perfectly ethical way. And if there's 6 accusers, that just means there's 6 potentially false accusers attempting to ride the gravy train and get some media attention. No doubt the guy is a creep and a bully. But the women may have got off on it or thought it was worthwhile pretending that they did to hold his attention.

Correct.

Henein has not stood up there and asked any of these women about when they lost their virginity, or if they like it up the ass, or anything to do with sex. She's tearing apart their stories with respect to their relationship with Ghomeshi period.

 

[Titalian]

He's fucked, one way or another. What he was exercising is not right period ....

 

[james t kirk]

He's fucked, one way or another. What he was exercising is not right period ....

I'm not into beating a woman up, not ever. But I will be the first to admit, I've had some pretty freaky sex over the years with some petty freaky women and I LOVED IT and THEY LOVED IT. (The best is the outwardly conservative bookish types who just love the wild perverted sex and are completely wild and uninhibited in the bedroom. Never ceases to amaze me.)

So who's to say what is right and what is wrong when it comes to sex.

This all comes down to consent and what constitutes consent. That, I don't know to be honest. Just the optics so far of the first two witnesses is not clear to me. Very grey at best.