Ghomeshi?
- Thread starter notthemama
- Start date
While the statement is somewhat accurate in the sense that enables the abusers to some extent who know how to work the system, the lens that abuse is being viewed through is generally one sided. Abuse of ALL forms needs to stop, including those individuals who unintentionally supporting and enable the mental kind from the least expected.
http://www.helpguide.org/articles/abuse/help-for-abused-men.htm
Schlong my friend, I now how you feel, But I have to side with Perry on this one, God knows my Younger brother being a Lawyer has pounded this into my head.
How you prepare for a case is the key. And believe the prosecution fuked up ! Whether I believe if he did it, is immaterial at this point. If he is truly the person
you think he is, he'll be back in court one day. The interesting thing about these characters is, they never change. ie who would have ever thought this about Bill Cosby.
No it doesn't, where do you come up with this shit, In this case there wasn't enough proof. Gezz.
I certainly never heard of him either
I think it takes a special kind of person to die hard support Canadian talents lol
Likely the identical advice ghomeshi's lawyer has given him in terms of how he publicly conducts himself from here on in
Its no wonder she got involved in his case. She saw flaws in the prosecution. Perfect opportunity to be in the limelite
This why the hobby rules. None of this flaky vengeance shit. I do think he is probably guilty, but was smart enough to choose unstable insecure victims who were suffering severe mood swings at the time. They were expertly demolished by Jian's lawyer. It is very strange to me that Canadian law allows these cases to proceed without the prosecution being allowed to cross examine the accused. Bad day for women, who now re-enforce their fear of reporting sexual abuse.
It was a radio show and Ghomeshi was very good at it. His successor is competent but comparatively bland and humourless. I can' t see him working on air in Canada again though. Maybe the States , if he wants.
The CBC has sburra on it's logo right about now, Ghomeshi has a strong case for unjust dismissal. But he would have nothing to gain by going after the women. There's no way he can prove consent beyond a shadow of doubt and the public will see him as the masher he probably is.
He was a good interviewer but he should have learned something from a real man. His outstanding interview with Liev Schreiber on Q is no longer online.
He was a good interviewer but he should have learned something from a real man. His outstanding interview with Liev Schreiber on Q is no longer online.
Any false accusation of any crime is a crime in and of itself. Sexual assault is no different from any other crime in that regard. That said, the accusations in the Ghomeshi case aren't deemed false, the witnesses are just being deemed unreliable, since they essentially perjured themselves.
The fact is, the prosecutors did a shit job prepping witnesses that, had they been handled differently, would've made this an open and shut case. Instead, they were evidently prepped by a team that did not make them feel comfortable in fully disclosing their stories. I know a lot of people who had run-ins with Ghomeshi over the years. No one was surprised when allegations of abuse came to the fore.
With luck and proper outrage from the public aimed where it should be, the next trial in June will be better served by more competent prep work and support for the victim. The dude's a fucking abuser and well-acknowledged creep in numerous circles, and will hopefully get what he deserves in Round 2.
I disagree wholeheartedly.
There is a BIG difference between rape and what has transpired in this case.
Consensual sex, is consensual and therefore NOT rape. Consensual sex with regrets after the fact (for whatever reason) is not rape.
Rape is sex without consent. Period.
HUGE difference.
I'm not saying what Gomeshi did is right- far from it, I think he's a first class scumbag, who feels he is entitled to do what he pleases, but it appears that with the witnesses in this case, consent was given (and from what I've read, repeatedly), and therefore not rape.
I agree. Based on my intuition, tells me he is a loser scumbag who gets off dominating and having power over women within the system. It appears these women were attracted to him for the wrong reasons, maybe money fame who knows, however they do not demonstrate sound mental stability. The facts demonstrate that there was consent as is evident from the no guilty verdict.
However, it is important to support the principles of equality and not allow after the fact these ladies to go after him because they had regret for whatever reason be it that they decided to collude, bring him down for whatever reason, even it it was revenge because he did not want to be with them. These women are just this, which is adult women and should be held responsible for their actions during and after which includes collusion and conspiracy. They participated in these activities and should take full responsibility provided at the time of the activities both parties followed each others safe words and/or rules.
Why should we treat them unequally and give them the power to have regret after the fact. This has the potential to open a huge can of worms if paratice enabled through the legal system.
Fine if there is CLEAR evidence he raped them lock him up and punish the guy as hard as possible. Based on evidence and sequence of events it this does not appear to be the case and any decent defence lawyer could have done just of a good job defending the guy
Solely from the newspaper account when the trial was ongoing the verdict is no surprise and on balance entirely just. Doesn't mean that he isn't a lout. It just means that he isn't guilty and even in a place where we tend to err on the PC side the Justice system did it's job.
This ^^
The Feminazi's, White Knights and SJW's will fume for a little while after this verdict. But in a few weeks when their emotions have calmed somewhat, most of them will probably realize this is the right verdict
I think the bar for what is considered sexual assault and/or sexual harassment is set way too low nowadays.
Back when I was a young man just staring my university life and later work life, what is considered sexual assault and harassment to-day was considered flirting.
Back when I was a young man just staring my university life and later work life, what is considered sexual assault and harassment to-day was considered flirting.
I believe he selected his victims or dates, very carefully. What I mean to say is not every woman would have consented to this type of treatment, at least not
the women I know. Were these women he selected asking for it? Maybe. Does it make it right or consensual. I believe its taking advantage of the star struck and weak. Jmts
