Jian Ghomeshi trial to begin in Toronto Monday

[omegaphallic]

You people want Ghomeshi punished and it doesn't matter that he might be innocent, you've already pronounced him guilty as charged,and your just waiting to have your biases confirmed.

Me I'll let the trail unfold, but I guess I old fashioned, I believe in innocent till proven guilty.

I will say that the witnesses crediblity has been severally shaken and was caught lying about having contacted him later. That doesn't mean she lied about what occured, but it does help to put into question her crediblity.

People need to stop shitting on the his Lawyer, she doing her job and doing it well, if the people bashing her had their way, she'd have her hands tied behind her back. She responsiblity is to defend her client, not worry about PC sensiblities that suggest she cuddle witness and effectively hand the crown an easy victory irreguardless of the possiblity that Ghomeshi might be innocent, no social media mobs know better.

This isn't a game, if he gets convicted he goes to prision for YEARS, there can be no room for reasonable doubt and that is more important then a witness's confort zone.

A man's future and life and freedom are at stake, this isn't some game or fucking TV show, the truth is more important then any other concideration, because the witnesses discomfort is a tiny fraction of what Ghoneshi has already experienced and that in turn is nothing compared to prison.

 

[Cnd-Guy]

He should take the stand and be asked if he slapped, choked or punched these women.
He already admitted on his Facebook page that he liked rough sex.
His excuse was that it was consensual , they said it was not .
But because they continued to see the guy , kiss him or couldn't remember what car they were in , their credibility comes into question
He will walk and the return to the smug asshole he is

 

[GPIDEAL]

He should take the stand and be asked if he slapped, choked or punched these women.
He already admitted on his Facebook page that he liked rough sex.
His excuse was that it was consensual , they said it was not .
But because they continued to see the guy , kiss him or couldn't remember what car they were in , their credibility comes into question
He will walk and the return to the smug asshole he is

He won't take the stand, if he invokes his right to not self-incriminate. In Canada, you can't plead the 5th while on the stand. You can only do so, by not agreeing to testify or remaining silent. For if you go up on the stand, you swear an oath to tell the truth and the whole truth, thereby waiving your right to remain silent.

 

[AK-47]

Its starting to look like this case is dead in the water, folks:

http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news...ous-email-phone-relationship-court-hears.html

And Heinen is one hell of a trial lawyer. Worth every penny

 

[katsrin]

Its starting to look like this case is dead in the water, folks:

http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news...ous-email-phone-relationship-court-hears.html

Going in to the start of trial I thought Ghomeshi's goose was cooked, but these first two witnesses are sure not helping the prosecution thus far.

 

[AK-47]

Going in to the start of trial I thought Ghomeshi's goose was cooked, but these first two witnesses are sure not helping the prosecution thus far.

I thought the same. And if he really is innocent I feel like a horrible human being for jumping to conclusions.

Also if he is completely exonerated he should get his CBC job back. But we all know thats not gonna happen

 

[AK-47]

If he does win the trial I wonder if he'll have a valid case for a wrongful termination lawsuit against the CBC

 

[fuji]

Well, I don't think the audience is coming back.

Best case for him is he proves he enjoys beating up women but found a way to do it legally. That might keep him out of jail but it won't make him popular. Then there is the matter of him harassing women at his workplace, which may not be criminal, but sure is a firing offence.

So whether or not the court declares that he is a sex offender, he is a creep.

 

[fuji]

If he does win the trial I wonder if he'll have a valid case for a wrongful termination lawsuit against the CBC

Not a chance. The workplace harassment that the CBC execs got fired for covering up was enough to justify termination by itself and beyond that they can easily argue that a guy who likes beating up women harms their image, even if he beats them up legally.

 

[AK-47]

Well, I don't think the audience is coming back.

Best case for him is he proves he enjoys beating up women but found a way to do it legally. That might keep him out of jail but it won't make him popular. Then there is the matter of him harassing women at his workplace, which may not be criminal, but sure is a firing offence.

So whether or not the court declares that he is a sex offender, he is a creep

Where is the evidence he's harrassed women at work, fuji??

 

[fuji]

Where is the evidence he's harrassed women at work, fuji??

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/cbc-inquiry-concludes-management-mishandled-jian-ghomeshi-1.3035574

 

[AK-47]

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/cbc-inquiry-concludes-management-mishandled-jian-ghomeshi-1.3035574

Those are as of yet unproven accusations, fuji. I asked for evidence

 

[fuji]

Those are as of yet unproven accusations, fuji. I asked for evidence

CBC hired an independent investigator who interviewed nearly a hundred people and concluded the allegations of workplace harassment were true. You are confusing that with the criminal allegations of sexual assault which are being tested in court and are totally different.

There is a link to the investigators report in the article which you would have seen HAD YOU BOTHERED TO READ IT BEFORE REPLYING.

I note this is a pattern with you: you post based on YOUR BELIEFS and ignore facts and evidence even when it is provided to you.

 

[AK-47]

CBC hired an independent investigator who interviewed nearly a hundred people and concluded the allegations of harassment were true. You are confusing that with the criminal allegations which are being tested in court and are different.

There is a link to the investigators report in the article which you would have seen HAD YOU BOTHERED TO READ IT BEFORE REPLYING.

I note this is a pattern with you: you post based on YOUR BELIEFS and ignore facts and evidence even when it is provided to you.

Thats still not evidence, fuji. Just because some independent investigator says so doesnt make it evidence, it makes it an opinion.

Are you getting mad fuji?? You're using capital letters again, which usually means you're getting upset again

 

[fuji]

Thats still not evidence Just because some independent investigator says so doesnt make it evidence, it makes it an opinion.

Are you getting mad fuji?? You're using capital letters again, which usually means you're getting upset again

Yes it is evidence. And in terms of grounds for dismissal from a corporation it is bullet proof.

 

[AK-47]

Yes it is evidence. And in terms of grounds for dismissal from a corporation it is bullet proof.

No, its not evidence. Its accusations.

Evidence would be if one of the girls had recorded the sexual harrassment on audio or video. That would be considered evidence

 

[fuji]

No, its not evidence. Its accusations.

Evidence would be if one of the girls had recorded the sexual harrassment on audio or video. That would evidence

Ignorant nonsense. You are AGAIN confusing the proven allegation of workplace harassment with the unproven allegation of criminal sexual assault.

Interviewing a hundred people, collecting statements, and documenting that in a report is in fact evidence. When it comes to termination of employment that is a bullet proof paper trail.

You are once again being a moron and refusing to believe proven facts, like when you refused to accept that illegal immigrants subsidize social security even after you were shown a direct quote from the chief actuary at social security stating that they do

You are a waste of time. Facts don't matter to you, you don't have reasons for the things you think.

 

[MattRoxx]

No, its not evidence. Its accusations.

Evidence would be if one of the girls had recorded the sexual harrassment on audio or video. That would be considered evidence

This is a ridiculous standard. There's no video of it. There's no video of Bill Cosby drugging women. And even when there is video, eg Rob Ford smoking crack, the denials and "that's not evidence" claims continue. Ghomeshi has been known for perving on women all the way back to the Moxy Fruvous days.

AND he doesn't even deny any of it. JG's defense is that the women he suckerpunched in the head liked it and only complained about his abusive acts after he dropped them.

 

[AK-47]

Ignorant nonsense. You are AGAIN confusing the proven allegation of workplace harassment with the unproven allegation of criminal sexual assault.

Interviewing a hundred people, collecting statements, and documenting that in a report is in fact evidence. When it comes to termination of employment that is a bullet proof paper trail.

You are once again being a moron and refusing to believe proven facts, like when you refused to accept that illegal immigrants subsidize social security even after you were shown a direct quote from the chief actuary at social security stating that they do

You are a waste of time. Facts don't matter to you, you don't have reasons for the things you think.

You're still wrong fuji. Allegations are called allegations until they are backed up with actual evidence

 

[fuji]

You're still wrong fuji. Allegations are called allegations until they are backed up with actual evidence

The report is evidence. In fact, it is proof.

Next we will hear from you that the sun hasn't come up because a court hasn't ruled on it.

Stupid beyond belief.