What if, What if. This guy likes beating up women and that's a fact. What else do you need to know?
Jian Ghomeshi trial to begin in Toronto Monday
- Thread starter canada-man
- Start date
That's bullshit as far as I can tell.
If you went on a date with him Jain, and got beat up, then we can verify that claim. I would take your word for it under those circumstances.
The other way to verify this claim if he is arrested for assault and found guilty in a court of law. If he beat up woman, there should be a police report, or some record of a hospital visit by the victim of the beating, or photographs of injuries. I have read two articles on this court case, exhibit A is none of these things.
This case was his word against her(s). This case was a political correctness witch-hunt.
A very small percentage of sexual assaults are reported. Remember he was much older than the women he was "dating", and also in a position of power being a somewhat recognizable celebrity and highly connected in the entertainment world, plus he was wealthy.
That certainly could have been a factor in the assaults going unreported.
Your points are certainly logical and reasonable — but in these kinds of circumstances logic and reason is overwhelmed by emotions and also the psychological state of the victims. Like a predator he likely chose the girls carefully, retained all email correspondence, and tried not to go too far in his abuse, and then played Jekyll & Hyde by switching into his charming persona. A narcissistic psychopath, a complicated guy no doubt.
Clearly in this case the women all had issues like Stockholm syndrome and his alleged abuse made them only chase him more.
Last, you could be right and the set of complainants in this case could all be lying in collusion to destroy someone who rejected them and "tossed them out like trash" (Lucy DeCoutere.) But based on his own admission for having a proclivity for "rough sex" and unpalatable bedroom behaviour (in conservative society's eyes at least, I have no issue with BDSM and have enjoyed it from time to time), it seems probable to me that Ghomeshi choked/hit the women, but I will admit that based on the evidence presented in the case I don't think it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt — and therefore in the eyes of the law it didn't happen.
His Facebook post was incredibly insightful as it showed to me how he sees his behaviour and how he justifies it. I think breaking a girl's ribs, sending her to the hospital, and covering her body with deep bruises is well beyond what most consider "rough sex" or BDSM. Unfortunately for the Crown's case that particular woman did not testify.
Actually it's more complicated. Beyond a point it could be viewed as assault in the eyes of the law, and the Supreme Court has said you can't consent to assault. In other words, even if you say "Yes I want it", it's still illegal and punishable by law. I believe this is why M. Henein chose to discredit the victim's testimony and recollections, and downright honesty — because if she can suggest that they are lying, then then assaults never happened, and Ghomeshi is safe.
Bingo ! We are dealing with a psychopathic narcissist who has no empathy for human life, especially when it comes to the opposite sex. This is about control and his own inner insecurities.
Lets see what the presiding judge thinks. I my opinion, I believe this person is a sick individual, I mean think about it, what causes someone to enjoy this kind of practice. He is simply a
psychopathic predator. I can't be kind about this type of shit, it eats under my skin.
But after the fact it's possible that charges could be pressed. What if the person was drunk at the time or not of sound mind for example?
I think fashion boy made some good points. JG posted some facebook posts early on which suggested he was into rough sex.
I think we all know at least one woman who has been sexually assaulted. I know a few and none of them went to the police. Most of them were date rape or rape by a friend of the family and the girls at the time felt it was too difficult to prove let alone too difficult to even make it public.
If anything the existence of rough sex makes it even more difficult to prove date rape.
I'm not really sure what the meaning of rough sex is, but in this case its way out of line. Jmts
Exactly this guy has said and done stuff that an innocent person wouldn't do.
When your PR firm drops you that's a really bad sign.
The problem with this case is that they prosecution wasn't able to secure the best victims/witnesses. I think they are out there but don't want to be part of the media circus. It would be tough enough to press charges let along press charges against a celebrity and all that entails.
The other problem is that the defence might succeed in getting the jury to believe that how a person behaves after an assault can be predictable.
They try and make it sound like because Lucy continued to see JG afterwards that all is cool but surely there are enough battered wives who stay with husbands or people who continue to work for bad bosses to tell us that abuse victims will sometimes stay and continue to act "normal"
That's probably what JG would call it. But the definition was not my point. My point was that he came out on FB to warn his supporters that they were going to hear about what he is into. It just sounded like someone doing damage control and trying to make sure he can spin it his way.
He may very well be sick. Personally I think that he's a greasy slimeball.
But the question isn't if he's sick or if he's slimey. The question is if he's guilty in the eyes of the law.
Even if he is not guilty in the eyes of the law, it appears the CBC (and maybe society) holds him to a higher standard. Imagine if any of you guys ever got caught dallying with escorts, you would be fired on the spot and might even get a call from LE to come and visit them at your local station.
Isn't that a crock of shit. Its starring at us right in the face. And what is law going to do, I would summarise it as politics. Personally I would hang this scumbag
by the balls. Yes your right, I have absolutely no tolerance for this sort of shit. Just me.
That is one question, which the judge will answer. Another question is whether he should be allowed to resume what he was doing at CBC and the answer his no, he is scum, he should go seek rehabilitation in the care of psychiatric institutions
1. There is no jury in this trial. It's by judge alone and the judge in this case has a well respected trial record. He's not going to be swayed by emotion like any idiotic jury would be.
2. How do you know the prosecution was not able to secure "the best victims / witnesses"? Maybe these are the best (and they are all flakes as far as I'm concerned.)
3. Lucy was not married to Ghomeshi. In fact, they weren't really even dating on a serious basis. They saw each other casually a few times and she pursued him at length and he just wasn't interested. She teased him, she emailed him telling him she wanted to "fuck his brains out" (retch), she wrote him love letters. All after he allegedly assaulted her. Doesn't make sense. If she was so offended by his actions, she should have told him right then and there to fuck off and called the cops. She did neither. I personally think she figured he could help her with her career in the entertainment industry and when he wasn't interested in doing that, she decided that he needed to be "fucking decimated". Lucy is full of shit and frankly is the least sincere of the 3 witnesses brought up against him. She's milked this incident for all it's worth and frankly, it just back fired on her in spectacular fashion.
It totally makes sense that these women continued contacting him after he beat them up. He was a celebrity, he was their ticket, they thought their relationship with him was their shot. That means they were basically gold diggers who thought they could fuck their way to the top, and he knew it, he took advantage of that to abuse them, knowing that they would put up with anything in order to climb the ladder they thought he was providing. When he withdrew the ladder they were enraged, they suffered that abuse for nothing.
Is that criminal? Judge will decide. But it sure is repugnant.
One problem....
The alleged abuse occurred on the first date only.
So how could he know they were gold diggers on the first date?
He did not continue to abuse them after the first date, even they admit that. He saw Lucy on and off for a couple of years (albeit very casually). So again, how bad could it have been?
The third witness gave him a hand job on their second date and then told him to hit the road when he made disparaging remarks about one of her friends. The alleged abuse didn't motivate her to ditch his ass, but him dissing one of her friends sure did.
The only witness who even has a shred of credibility is the first witness, the other 2 are complete farces.
I wonder how many women over the years Ghomeshi had who were completely cool with the BDSM aspect of his personality?
Not like he only dated 3 women over the course of 15 years.
Not like he only dated 3 women over the course of 15 years.
