Ahahaha....fuji now claims to work in management where he can fire people. This is comedy gold
Jian Ghomeshi trial to begin in Toronto Monday
- Thread starter canada-man
- Start date
I can and have. I have also been sued by a disgruntled former employee, who is still disgruntled and still former. Anyone who has managed people long enough has a) received extensive HR training on how to manage out bad people, and b) very likely had direct experience with former employees going legal.Ahahaha....fuji now claims to work in management where he can fire people. This is comedy gold
Also note that "she consented to me grabbing her ass in order to work on my show" isn't a job saver.
Maybe James, its all up to the individuals involved, If ever I was to meet this type of female, I'd graciously opt out. Just not my style. Again this is a personal choice.
But I'm sure this guy exuded his preferences on women who had no idea, remember he was a celebrity and used it.
Really?
You're judging Fuji based on the fact that he posts on terb, or his frequency of posting.
You're here, he's here, I'm here.
You are the proverbial black pot mon ami.
Not really. I'm separated and semi-retired, I can go get drunk or do whatever I want.
Fuji is the one claiming to be a jetsetting CEO and a whole host of other things. Its hilarious :biggrin1:
I never claimed to be a CEO. I spend about nine hours a day at work out of which I do about six or seven hours of actual work on a typical day. That leaves me with two or three hours a day some days to fuck around reading news and posting on forums. At my job so long as I deliver on all my goals actual hours don't matter. Some days I am there sixteen hours and still haven't got time to breathe, other days I have a lot of free time.
I also check terb when I'm lying around at home. I use my mobile phone exclusively with images suppressed so its pretty discreet, I can lie on the couch posting on terb while talking to my wife and she would never know. Flip to Google news if she comes within twenty feet. Right now she is in the next room binge watching TV. I never watch TV.
Some people watch TV a couple hours a day, some play video games, I surf online, read things and post on forums.
criminal conviction is not always about right or wrong. The standards are high for a reason. If the sex got too weird for her, that is not assault unless she said stop and it continues. If it were otherwise, every move you make on a woman that was rejected would be assault.
I'm talking about violence here not standards. This shit is totally wrong. I mean really, there's gotta be something wrong with someone who abuses women physically.
Yeah. His defense is that he likes beating up women and he found women who for whatever reason consented to being beaten up.
It will be interesting to see whether that defence works. It might work.
But either way he is scum, and the idea that he has a wrongful dismissal case is ludicrous. Beating up women is not compatible with the corporate image CBC wishes to project.
NO, NO, NO... you have it ass backwards...
Guilt or innocence are questions that arise ONLY by reason of the operation of the laws of our legal system... if there are no such laws, then no issues of guilt or innocence can possibly arise.
Under this system, you are presumed to be factually and legally innocent unless and until the processes of the system determine guilt reasonable doubt. And under this system the "quality" of your "innocence" is the same before and after a trial that finds you not guilty... because until you are found guilty by that process, nothing has changed in your status from what it was before the accusation was made.
If you don't like the system, change it... but you cannot, willy-nilly, pick which laws you accept and apply and which you reject and do not apply... that does violence not only to the system but to reason itself.
What you are saying is the same thing as saying all that you need is an allegation and you are deemed or held to be blameworthy, liable or responsible... by that standard, how could anyone ever establish that the accusation is false or without foundation?
If you wish to live in a system where once accused of something you have no way of escaping blame, then go ahead and create it... but leave me out of it! The system that we already have is stupid enough without it!
There is a "legal" expression that expresses this very succinctly: "You can't suck and blow at the same time"... Try working that out with your favorite sex partner!
Perry
You fixated on the word innocent there and limited your understanding to its strict meeting in criminal law. What people meant is that a finding of not guilty isn't proof that he didn't do it.
Sometimes lawyers have trouble remembering that reality exists outside the law. Society, people in general, are able to come to a different conclusion than the court, and what actually happened may be different than both of those.
Bottom line Perry, this guy is a scumbag one way or another. You can preach any law you want.
I have no tolerance for people like this. I'm only going by my gut feeling.
Maybe I missed it but where in the various emails, letters, photos, etc. that say anything about hair pulling and/or a punch in the face? The string bikini photo is not evidence of a punch in the face. The sucking the coke bottle photo is not evidence of hair pulling/choking.
If the third witness doesn't offer any tangible proof, then the crown should drop the case and stop embarrassing themselves.
No... I am not fixated. Words like "innocent" and "guilty" have very specific meaning and are terms of art, concepts created by the law.
If you want to talk about gut feelings, hunches, beliefs, opinions or whatever else under the sun, then don't use legal terms, use other words...
Perry
