Steeles Royal

Jian Ghomeshi trial to begin in Toronto Monday

Previous Thread Next Thread
A

AK-47

Armed to the tits
Mar 6, 2009
6,697
1
0
In the 6
Titalian said:
I have experienced jury duty, it was probably one of my most en lighting experiences. For the cause, yes I would
voice my opinion on this guy, all the rest in the jury, only have to listen to me. But I would listen to rebuttals as well. If their sound
I would then rethink my opinion. In this case, its pretty straight forward, this guy is a predator who has deep rooted issues
with women. If you can't see that. Well give me a reason to think otherwise
Click to expand...
While I fully agree with you, you didnt answer my question.

And FTR I would acquit. I'd have to take a shower afterwards to get rid of all the dirt on me, but yes I would acquit
 
T

Titalian

No Regrets
Nov 27, 2012
8,500
9
0
Everywhere
AK-47 said:
While I fully agree with you, you didnt answer my question.

And FTR I would acquit. I'd have to take a shower afterwards to get rid of all the dirt on me, but yes I would acquit
Click to expand...
It really doesn't matter AK If he's acquit'd or not. As this guy is branded. Good luck to him in his foreseeable future.
 
B

BaldEagke

Scent of a Woman = Life
May 20, 2004
149
2
0
NYC
Sorry, any guys that prey on woman and does not get their approval to any activity, should be branded as an asshole and have a price to be paid. Generalization, yep, but "generally" guys are larger built and stronger and should not unwillingly force their desires, it should be 100% understood that any joint act should be fully agreed by both. Blame the prosecutor for a weak effort, but the guy should pay for his transgressions. You can blame his company for allowing that environment and they should be at fault, but it starts with the guys actions.
 
SchlongConery

SchlongConery

License to Shill
Jan 28, 2013
12,961
6,440
113
Criminal Code of Canada

265. (1) A person commits an assault when


(a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;




There is evidence that he punched them prior to giving him their express or implied consent. Therefore, if that evidence is to be believed, he committed an assault according to the Criminal Code of Canada.

What happened afterwards, whether they called or texted him, offered him a blow job or whatever is only relevant to their credibility as a a witness. There can not be retroactive consent. There can be forgiveness, but not retroactive consent.

If the witnesses are to be believed that he slapped, punched or otherwise "intentionally applied force...directly" to them, then he committed assault. If it was for a sexual purpose it is a sexual assault.

The only defence I could imagine to these incidents was that for some reason he had good reason to believe that they wanted or liked being slapped around. Like if the text where she said she "loved his hands" in the context of being slapped prior to the slapping... then I can see he might have had a reasonable belief of vaguely implied consent.

Kind of the same as going out on a "date" with someone and leaning over and surprising her with a kiss without her express prior consent. If you reasonably thought maybe you were "more than friends", even if she rebuked you... that is not likely to lead to a conviction for sexual assault.

But he introduced no such evidence of a priori belief that he thought she was into it.

I'm going to predict that the Judge will convict him based on the evidence of the witnesses.
 
C

CapitalGuy

New member
Mar 28, 2004
5,769
1
0
^^^ But there is only their word against his, and their word has been quite well discredited. I would not convict, simply because the witnesses lied on the stand, so I don't believe their initial allegations.
 
I

icespot

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2005
1,692
84
48
kono said:
LMAO!! You have to give it to him, He's persistent to no end. All you can do is shake your head.
Enough about the enigma that is Fuji...


JG probably didn't even need to hire Marie Henein. Any lawyer could have taken on this case with all the evidence he had.
Click to expand...
A good quality to have when chasing your dreams, but not when you are so closed minded lol....

The truth always has a funny way to come up and I love what happen in this case, any lawyer was good as long as it was a female lawyer. I can't believe how much shit she has taken for bringing the truth to light.

I can't stand the argument that the allegation of sexual assault should be enough evidence to convict the poor fucker that was accused.
 
I

icespot

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2005
1,692
84
48
fuji said:
I have no idea whether Ghomeshi is innocent or guilty in the criminal trial but I trust the court to reach the right decision in that regard. I have no opinion on that.

What I stand by is the objective fact that:

1. Ghomeshi has publicly admitted that he enjoys violence against women, and

2. Most Canadians find violence against women repulsive, and

3. CBC isn't going to want to be associated with violence against women.

Those are facts. Objective facts.

Your post on the other hand was angry verbal diarrhea.
Click to expand...
Get this fact " ALL VIOLENCE IS WRONG, ALL VIOLENCE IS WRONG" not just violence against women.... Also violence against children, elderly people, and violence against men.....

The only way you stop the cycle of violence against women, is by declaring that all VIOLENCE IS WRONG.....

Also, I am going to state here that the reason you keep saying that Gomeshi is a scumbag, and that all violence against women even when consensual is wrong, is purely to assist you in some future legal issue that you will probably face. Be honest with us here Fuji, did you do something you shouldn't have done and are hoping that one day you will be able to use your posts as part of your defence.

Because you are really starting to remind me of Newt Gingrich:

 
L

LickingGravity

New member
Sep 9, 2010
962
0
0
CapitalGuy said:
^^^ But there is only their word against his, and their word has been quite well discredited. I would not convict, simply because the witnesses lied on the stand, so I don't believe their initial allegations.
Click to expand...
All three witnesses were not credible. Since is this the onlt evidence I would think that he has to be acquitted. The Crown may have actually done a disservice to women with this case if this was all they had.
 
O

omegaphallic

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2010
3,008
47
48
Titalian said:
I believe this to be a very sound statement. The fact is there were three women who had the courage enough to slam this degenerate
knowing full well what they were up against. Three not one, speaks volumes of this guy's true being. Not really sure what the motivation would
be other than they were subjected to violent acts from this character. Never let yourself be fooled by these predators, they walk amongst us.
His silence says it all.
Click to expand...
His silence says his lawyer told him to stay silent, nothing more.

And three accusers are NOTHING impressive. During the Satanic sex abuse trials, the false accusation were in the hundreds, not 3 people 2 of whom colludided, but hundreds of false accusations. History is replete with clusters of false accusations.

These women weren't couragous, they were dishonest, and most of these sexual assault DID NOT INVOVLE SEX. Think on that for a minute. Some consentual kissing,an accusation of some rough stuff, but no sex, inner or outer course within the accusations.
 
R

radagast

Member
Apr 8, 2014
607
4
18
Titalian said:
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.
Click to expand...
You and my buddy Sir William Blackstone should hang out some time. I think you'd have a lot to talk about...
 
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,866
22,260
113
LickingGravity said:
All three witnesses were not credible.
Click to expand...
And yet there is no challenge to the claim that Ghomeshi hit them.
I don't know if there was enough challenge to the witnesses credibility to make the judge doubt that Ghomeshi hit them without consent.
Sure, there are lots of questions, but was it enough to make you think that all three were lying about the assault?
 
G

GPIDEAL

Prolific User
Jun 27, 2010
23,358
12
38
SchlongConery said:
Criminal Code of Canada

265. (1) A person commits an assault when


(a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;




There is evidence that he punched them prior to giving him their express or implied consent. Therefore, if that evidence is to be believed, he committed an assault according to the Criminal Code of Canada.

What happened afterwards, whether they called or texted him, offered him a blow job or whatever is only relevant to their credibility as a a witness. There can not be retroactive consent. There can be forgiveness, but not retroactive consent.

If the witnesses are to be believed that he slapped, punched or otherwise "intentionally applied force...directly" to them, then he committed assault. If it was for a sexual purpose it is a sexual assault.

The only defence I could imagine to these incidents was that for some reason he had good reason to believe that they wanted or liked being slapped around. Like if the text where she said she "loved his hands" in the context of being slapped prior to the slapping... then I can see he might have had a reasonable belief of vaguely implied consent.

Kind of the same as going out on a "date" with someone and leaning over and surprising her with a kiss without her express prior consent. If you reasonably thought maybe you were "more than friends", even if she rebuked you... that is not likely to lead to a conviction for sexual assault.

But he introduced no such evidence of a priori belief that he thought she was into it.

I'm going to predict that the Judge will convict him based on the evidence of the witnesses.
Click to expand...


I'm not sure if he has admitted to it.

Their conciliatory conduct after the alleged incidents make their claims dubious, especially since they were under no compulsion to continue dating him (IOW, it's not like domestic abuse where a spouse cannot or won't leave right away).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Ashley Madison
Previous Thread Next Thread
Toronto Escorts
Top Bottom