Jian Ghomeshi scandal

[lilmira]

This is not a case of blaming the victims. This is a case of whether they are victims. Of may be they are but they did a piss poor job showing it. Next!

[SmAcKpOo]

Had an argument with some women at the office today about this.

They claimed he was still guilty even though the judge ruled otherwise. I stated that this case was never about whether or not he actually choked/punched/BSDM'd/etc these women, it was about whether or not it was consensual.

I would probably bet he did do those acts but revoking consent after the fact is fucking ludicrous and it sets an awful precedent. On the way to work this morning I heard a snipit on 660 about some SJW feminists who are protesting against sexual abuse on women and there was a comment from one of them surrounding how all claims of sexual abuse should be believed until otherwise.

Where is the burden of proof being on the accuser? I swear, this Blue Pill mentality about emasculating men is getting so fucking out of hand.

Jian should sue the fucking shit out of the CBC for firing him before the court judgement.

[lasimmon]

He already did and lost and had to pay CBC's legal fees.

[dandia89]

Originally posted by SmAcKpOo
Had an argument with some women at the office today about this.

They claimed he was still guilty even though the judge ruled otherwise. I stated that this case was never about whether or not he actually choked/punched/BSDM'd/etc these women, it was about whether or not it was consensual.

I would probably bet he did do those acts but revoking consent after the fact is fucking ludicrous and it sets an awful precedent. On the way to work this morning I heard a snipit on 660 about some SJW feminists who are protesting against sexual abuse on women and there was a comment from one of them surrounding how all claims of sexual abuse should be believed until otherwise.

Where is the burden of proof being on the accuser? I swear, this Blue Pill mentality about emasculating men is getting so fucking out of hand.

Jian should sue the fucking shit out of the CBC for firing him before the court judgement.

dude this is an uphill battle i stay out of. the legal system properly evaluated this case with the given evidence and it was the crown's lack of ability to provide a convincing case. a man goes free of charge, and there's an upheaval because people think sexual assault charges should go above the law? give me a break.

you disagree with this verdict you look like a rape sympathizer. i just let these people ride out their emotional responses

[403Gemini]

Originally posted by SmAcKpOo


Where is the burden of proof being on the accuser? I swear, this Blue Pill mentality about emasculating men is getting so fucking out of hand.

Likewise with this story;

http://globalnews.ca/news/2595781/ca.../?sf23023111=1

I mean, the guy is deemed innocent through our legal system.

Social media is a plague that perpetuates the court of public opinion

Don't get me wrong , child molesters are the vile filth of humans - but maybe he's just innocent and it's as simple as that.

It's crap like this that makes parents hesitant to volunteer teaching sports or other activities - one kids false accusation can literally ruin your life , even if found innocent. My father in law (retired CPS) said this is exactly why he never got involved with a "leadership" role with his kids lives (supported them, just never coached or anything) because some kid get pissed at you and lies, your world can get torn apart.

[SmAcKpOo]

Funny you mention it. By asserting my position they "jokingly" made a statement that I somehow support sexual abuse and physical abuse on women.

I literally had to stand up and say that in no way do I support sexual abuse or abuse towards women. I said it twice in fact.

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by SmAcKpOo
Jian should sue the fucking shit out of the CBC for firing him before the court judgement.

He's going to unleash a shit load of law suits.

[lilmira]

Originally posted by SmAcKpOo
Had an argument with some women at the office today about this.

Hmm, let's see what can we learn here.

[RickDaTuner]

He really can't sue the CBC, because he was fired after an internal review, where he showed the directors photos of bruised and battered women. He was fired on those grounds, not on the allegations of the 3 claimants.
Further to this, there is also another trail waiting for him in June, concerning sexual assault of a co-worker while at work.

The CBC fired him with just cause.

As for suing the 3 complainants, There isn't really much that he can do there either. Defamation suits need to prove that you were 100% looking to destroy the other person with false witness testimony. The courts just ruled that the case was dismissed based on reasonable doubt and not on false witness.

Really he should just thank his lucky starts that he is did not get a life sentence for the acts we all know he did commit.

[SmAcKpOo]

Originally posted by lilmira


Hmm, let's see what can we learn here.

I knew better. They were just spouting some riidculous bullshit and I had to set them straight.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by D'z Nutz


Yeah, because of that I think he's gonna get off.

Pretty much exactly what happened.

From the judge:

[138] The success of this prosecution depended entirely on the Court being able to accept each complainant as a sincere, honest and accurate witness. Each complainant was revealed at trial to be lacking in these important attributes. The evidence of each complainant suffered not just from inconsistencies and questionable behaviour, but was tainted by outright deception.

[139] The harsh reality is that once a witness has been shown to be deceptive and manipulative in giving their evidence, that witness can no longer expect the Court to consider them to be a trusted source of the truth. I am forced to conclude that it is impossible for the Court to have sufficient faith in the reliability or sincerity of these complainants. Put simply, the volume of serious deficiencies in the evidence leaves the Court with a reasonable doubt.

Also from the judge:

"The twists and turns of the complainants' evidence in this trial illustrates the need to be vigilant" in order not fall into the assumption "that sexual assault complainants are always truthful"

Ooh, that's gonna ruffle some feathers.

[msommers]

Originally posted by SmAcKpOo
On the way to work this morning I heard a snipit on 660 about some SJW feminists who are protesting against sexual abuse on women and there was a comment from one of them surrounding how all claims of sexual abuse should be believed until otherwise.

Wow, could you imagine lol. I think some feminists are so out-to-lunch that they forget what they're (rather should be) fighting for: equality, not superiority.

BCS, where did you find those court exerts? Would like to read more on that.

[finboy]

Originally posted by msommers


Wow, could you imagine lol. I think some feminists are so out-to-lunch that they forget what they're (rather should be) fighting for: equality, not superiority.

BCS, where did you find those court exerts? Would like to read more on that.

CBC released a pdf of the decission, it's making a lot of Twitter mad, but the reasoning is clearly articulated and sound

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by msommers

BCS, where did you find those court exerts? Would like to read more on that.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...eshi-1.3505808

It's a well-written decision, very clear and understandable.

[dandia89]

why wasn't this tried infront of a jury?

[RickDaTuner]

Originally posted by dandia89
why wasn't this tried in front of a jury?

That would have certainly have gone against Jian.

The defense has the option to go before a judge or jury. They chose a Judge.

[g-m]

Hah, wow, what even happened here?? Man those are some jealous, vengeful exes. Wow

[khanan]

Excellent verdict by the judge, remind me of 12 angry men for some reason.

[sexualbanana]

Originally posted by SmAcKpOo

I would probably bet he did do those acts but revoking consent after the fact is fucking ludicrous and it sets an awful precedent. On the way to work this morning I heard a snipit on 660 about some SJW feminists who are protesting against sexual abuse on women and there was a comment from one of them surrounding how all claims of sexual abuse should be believed until otherwise.

That's difficult part about all sex-related crimes. They're difficult to prove, and it's unfortunate for the cases that are legitimate. It's even worse for the victim when they have to re-live the (traumatic) incident when they allege the crime, then will probably have to testify to it in court. On top of that, they'll be grilled by the defense attorney and do everything they can to sully your character and/or your case.

I sympathize with how difficult cases like that are difficult to handle, but it doesn't mean that the presumption of guilt should be thrown out because of it.

Originally posted by 403Gemini

It's crap like this that makes parents hesitant to volunteer teaching sports or other activities - one kids false accusation can literally ruin your life , even if found innocent. My father in law (retired CPS) said this is exactly why he never got involved with a "leadership" role with his kids lives (supported them, just never coached or anything) because some kid get pissed at you and lies, your world can get torn apart.

I've been coaching for years and that's one of the things you have to watch out for, so you always have to take precautions because, even if it's not true, the allegation itself is enough to ruin a life.

[FraserB]

Originally posted by dandia89
why wasn't this tried infront of a jury?

Because most people had decided he was guilty already. Only a moron would choose a jury trial in a sex assault case.