Ghomeshi?

[Titalian]

I think there should be a statute of limitation on charging someone for sexual harassment. It's not really fair for a woman to wake up one day 10 years later and say I was sexually harassed in 2002.

It doesn't matter how far she woke up and realised it was harassment. She might have been 18teen at the time. I'm glad to see the consensus on this whole ordeal.
Even if you don't want to admit, this sounds like another O.J. case. This guy is dirt and no one will ever convince me otherwise.

 

[whitewaterguy]

I think there should be a statute of limitation on charging someone for sexual harassment. It's not really fair for a woman to wake up one day 10 years later and say I was sexually harassed in 2002.

I think a LOT of priests would be extremely supportive of your point of you...what a blessing you're proposing...

 

[SkyRider]

I think a LOT of priests would be extremely supportive of your point of you...what a blessing you're proposing...

Example: Let say you had consensual sex with an adult woman 15 years ago and now she claims you raped her.

Example: Let say "Jackie" claims you raped her 20 years ago and you met her only once in a bar and never saw her outside the bar or ever again.

 

[Titalian]

Example: Let say you had consensual sex with an adult woman 15 years ago and now she claims you raped her.

Example: Let say "Jackie" claims you raped her 20 years ago and you met her only once in a bar and never saw her outside the bar or ever again.

:rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl:

 

[rbadun]

Sad that it came to a trial. Sad that peoples lives were ruined. Sad if the woman were really assaulted.

However, made we watch trailer park boys again. Thought I would attach a pic of her today.

 

[SkyRider]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...omplainant-fails-to-appear-in-court-1.3015711

 

[Titalian]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...omplainant-fails-to-appear-in-court-1.3015711

http://www.torontosun.com/2016/03/26/53-give-thumbs-down-to-ghomeshi-verdict-poll

Do yourself a favour and read this. You are in the minority !

 

[tribunus]

Ghomeshi is a bonafide asshole. I was hoping he would spend the next decade in jail and get sodomized daily. But alas, these chicks were about as credible as a wet paper towel and thus the verdict was the right one.

 

[Butler1000]

http://www.torontosun.com/2016/03/26/53-give-thumbs-down-to-ghomeshi-verdict-poll

Do yourself a favour and read this. You are in the minority !

Thankfully this was decided by an informed and impartial judge as opposed to an uninformed and biased public.

Think about it this way. I slight majority disapproved. That still would be by far a hung jury.

Is he a scumbag, probably. But that's not against the law. The these women were arguably the worst witnesses. About the only worse thing would have been a sextape showing them demanding rough sex.

Perhaps the June trial will work out better. But in the meantime I've listened to my SO and her friends say the women were either stupid, crazy, vindictive and a number of adjectives. All thinking they aren't in anyway "heroes" for coming forward or victims. They are women who chose to place celebrity worship over common sense and their own self esteem.

Cripes the actress is also a captain in the military. Are you stating she couldn't handle herself against a little shit like Ghomeshi? Or wouldn't have the physical and mental training? And as an actress she can't be that naive to the scene either.

Justice was served here.

 

[fuji]

Clearly there wasn't enough evidence to convict him beyond a reasonable doubt so he is presumed innocent of CRIMINAL behavior.

But that doesn't make him a decent human being. He still enjoys beating up women, that's vile, and even if he found some social climber who actually consented to it, he's a terrible person.

Society is right to judge him. You don't need to be a criminal to be judged by others.

 

[Celticman]

I think these two posts sum up the entire issue perfectly

Thankfully this was decided by an informed and impartial judge as opposed to an uninformed and biased public.

Think about it this way. I slight majority disapproved. That still would be by far a hung jury.

Is he a scumbag, probably. But that's not against the law. The these women were arguably the worst witnesses. About the only worse thing would have been a sextape showing them demanding rough sex.

Perhaps the June trial will work out better. But in the meantime I've listened to my SO and her friends say the women were either stupid, crazy, vindictive and a number of adjectives. All thinking they aren't in anyway "heroes" for coming forward or victims. They are women who chose to place celebrity worship over common sense and their own self esteem.

Cripes the actress is also a captain in the military. Are you stating she couldn't handle herself against a little shit like Ghomeshi? Or wouldn't have the physical and mental training? And as an actress she can't be that naive to the scene either.

Justice was served here.

Clearly there wasn't enough evidence to convict him beyond a reasonable doubt so he is presumed innocent of CRIMINAL behavior.

But that doesn't make him a decent human being. He still enjoys beating up women, that's vile, and even if he found some social climber who actually consented to it, he's a terrible person.

Society is right to judge him. You don't need to be a criminal to be judged by others.

 

[Ridgeman08]

But that doesn't make him a decent human being. He still enjoys beating up women, that's vile, and even if he found some social climber who actually consented to it, he's a terrible person.

Society is right to judge him.

If he died today in a horrible car crash you'd be singing a totally different song tomorrow!

(As would many others...)

Hypocrite! :hand:

 

[SkyRider]

According to the polls of the unwashed masses, all you guys who think this was the right verdict are in the minority.

 

[ultistar]

Might as well add my 2 cents.
JG is a douchbage, the verdict doesn't change that.
M Heinen did her job very well, she's going to end up very rich.
The judge did his job considering the preponderance of the evidence put forth, came to the right judgement.

So I blame the prosecution lawyers; they didn't prepare their case or the witnesses very well. Heinen ripped them on the stand. How did H know there were 3000 emails/texts between 2 of the witnesses but the prosecution didn't bother finding out.
Of course the prosecution always just hide behind their weak claim "Well, we asked the victims if they were telling the truth, blah blah...".

There were 20+ women who came forward, 3 took the stand. Were these the 3 most credible witnesses? Clearly 2 had an agenda, via email messages to each other, so they were not trustworthy. Of course you cannot force any women to testify but you have to try a little harder than asking the 20+ ladies "anyone wanna take the stand?"

If you believe the sex assault stats that only 1/3 to 1/5 of rapes are reported, JG has probably assaulted 60 to 100 women. And not ONE of them came forward to defend JG, to say it as consensual and he's a wonderful guy.
JG is a predator who could probably see within the first 15 secs of meeting a girl that she is star struck by his B-C celebrity status and that he could have his way with her. And get away with it.

With the weak prosecution, and Heinen's great defence, JG got away with it.
And yes, women will be less likely to report assault cases because of this.

 

[d_jedi]

We have a legal system, not a justice system.
Legally, Justice Horkins decision was correct. The complainants' conduct made it difficult to accept their testimony as credible. Ms. Henein clearly raised reasonable doubt, and the judge was really left with no choice but to find Mr. Ghomeshi not guilty. Our legal system has the presumption of innocence, and that's a good thing. Better to let ten guilty men walk free than to convict one innocent man.

Is the decision just? That depends on what really happened. If he really did prey upon these women, choking them and hitting them without consent, explicit or presumed (ex. if they had discussed how he liked rough sex, and they weren't turned off by it..), then he should face punishment. He should go to jail. But we can take solace in the fact he's already paid a heavy price - he's lost his job and his credibility. Everyone knows about Jian (https://web.archive.org/web/2014110...inwinnipeg.com/2014/10/do-you-know-about-jian) and I don't think he'll be able to do this to anyone ever again.

OTOH, if these were consensual acts, and the stories of sexual assault were made up by jilted lovers, Mr. Ghomeshi has already suffered a huge amount of damage unjustly. The media and public attention this case has attracted is really a double-edged sword.

Overall, I urge caution in trying someone in the court of public opinion. The facts aren't always as they seem.

 

[Perry Mason]

I think the one thing many of you are missing is that this is the system that we have.

As much as you can malign JG, the Crown or anyone else under the sun, the system worked exactly the way it was designed, the way it is supposed to work.

We have a legal system that was designed before the invention of the steam engine... need I say more?

Perry

 

[Butler1000]

I think the one thing many of you are missing is that this is the system that we have.

As much as you can malign JG, the Crown or anyone else under the sun, the system worked exactly the way it was designed, the way it is supposed to work.

We have a legal system that was designed before the invention of the steam engine... need I say more?

Perry

I suppose the question is.......do you support it as is.

While it could be said it's outdated on the other hand it seems to have been a part of creating a stable society.

 

[fuji]

I think the one thing many of you are missing is that this is the system that we have.

As much as you can malign JG, the Crown or anyone else under the sun, the system worked exactly the way it was designed, the way it is supposed to work.

We have a legal system that was designed before the invention of the steam engine... need I say more?

Perry

I have no objection to the way the system worked. I object to the claim that only good people get acquitted or that I can't judge Ghomeshi to be vile trash based on the apparently non criminal things he does--specifically beating up women.

 

[jcpro]

Re. the people who disagree with the verdict. They either not followed the case or were not capable of following the events in the courtroom. Any system that would convict an accused on the basis of perjured testimony does not belong in a civilized society.

 

[Perry Mason]

I suppose the question is.......do you support it as is.

While it could be said it's outdated on the other hand it seems to have been a part of creating a stable society.

No... absolutely I do not support it as it is... but it is the law and what needs to change, therefore, is the law!

But look around... with your eyes wide open... do you really believe that we have a stable society today?

Perry