Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 5678910 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 147
Like Tree276Likes

Thread: CBC cuts ties with Jian Ghomeshi after receiving 'information' about host

  1. #121
    Elite Member faithanne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    On the Hellmouth
    Posts
    14,050

    Default

    ^I heard that when he was arrested they had to put him in a choke hold. Luckily he was able to show them the best way to do it.
    "You're going to die tomorrow, Lord Bolton. Sleep well."



  2. #122
    Bronze Member anna112233's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    59

    Default

    ‘Women will be watching’: The wider relevance of Jian Ghomeshi’s sexual assault trial | National Post

    ‘Women will be watching’: The wider relevance of Jian Ghomeshi’s sexual assault trial

    Joseph Brean | January 29, 2016 1:44 PM ET


    When Jian Ghomeshi goes to trial for sexual assault next week, court watchers will be on the lookout for even more lurid details in a case that is already packed with them. They will sniff the air for that notorious cologne, listen out for the first mention of his creepy teddy bear, Big Ears, and critique the clothing of the man whose carefully considered fashion sense once embodied CBC’s aspirations to youth culture relevance, before it became a sinister liability.
    But Ghomeshi’s day of reckoning is not just personal.
    Like James Forcillo on police violence and Gregory Alan Elliott on Twitter harassment — recent trials that felt like social media sporting events, with opposing bleachers full of braying fans — Regina v. Ghomeshi has a wider relevance. Dangerously for criminal proceedings, it is symbolic. People will be looking for more than a verdict. They will want a message.
    “My anxiety is Canadian women will be watching this trial with acute attention and will learn lessons from it,” said Elizabeth Sheehy, vice-dean of research at the University of Ottawa and a leading expert on women and the law. “My hope is we will be watching it, and naming it for what it is.”


    The trial is before a judge alone, on four charges of sexual assault and one of choking to overcome resistance, between 2002 and 2003, involving three women, and it will be guided by three major legal themes: credibility, consent, and whether each charge can be used to support the others, a legal tactic known as similar fact evidence. Hanging over it all is a concern that women, when they learn or are reminded of how sexual assault is actually prosecuted and defended in Canada, will be more reluctant than ever to report their own victimizations to police.
    Canada is not alone in this national anxiety. The United Kingdom learned after his death that broadcaster Jimmy Savile was a sort of pedophile Willy Wonka figure at the BBC, doling out treats as he molested children, protected by what an official report described as a “deferential culture.” He never faced a court. The United States is similarly agog over a criminal charge against Bill Cosby, America’s TV dad, who allegedly drugged young adult women to force them into sexual compliance.
    As well-loved entertainers whose status helped conceal and prolong allegedly criminal sexual behaviour, all three of these cases have prompted much soul-searching about how reports of sexual assault are received and pursued.


    This has led, in some cases, to police action with the whiff of a hasty witch hunt, such as when British police appeared to tip off media to a home search of elderly pop star Cliff Richard, the subject of a historical complaint of sexual abuse against two boys, but as yet no charge after 18 months.
    In other cases, such as the rape allegation against hockey player Patrick Kane, public interest imbued the investigation with such panic that someone concocted an elaborate hoax about a stolen rape kit, leading to the resignation of the complainant’s lawyer, and the complainant’s own refusal to proceed, torpedoing any hope of legal resolution.
    But perhaps the deepest effect of this spate of celebrity sex assault claims, and the endless coverage of their lumbering process through courts, has been a growing disconnect between how the laws of sexual assault are written, how they actually work, and what the public expects of them.
    “I think we are seeing a new phenomenon,” said Elaine Craig, assistant professor of law at Dalhousie University and an expert on sex assault law. “My sense is that there is a heightened public scrutiny now.”


    In Canada, this disconnect is especially peculiar, as the notion of affirmative consent has been formalized in law and legislation since the 1990s — when “no means no” was replaced, roughly, with “only yes means yes.”
    “We have these really progressive laws, but the application of them continues to reflect some of the same kinds of sexist stereotypes that have been around all along,” said Craig. She noted, for example, the case of Robin Camp, an Alberta judge whose outrageous comments to a rape complainant — “why couldn’t you just keep your knees together?” — led to a formal complaint by Craig and others.
    Even lawyers who do not actually hold outdated sexist views can sometimes see benefit in playing to them, she said.
    “When they’re candid, in my research, I think it’s the case that defence lawyers often feel like they are obligated to trigger whatever assumptions they can to discredit the complainant. Credibility is going to be a big part of (Ghomeshi). It’s a big part of almost every sexual assault case.”
    That focus on credibility — with its implication of potential dishonesty, as if rape complainants are presumptive liars in need of debunking — can be frustrating to a culture that wishes to believe victims in their moment of need.


    The trouble is that courts have a duty to seek out reasonable doubt, but this presumption of innocence is an oft abused concept. As Craig sees it, people are so well versed in criminal law culture thanks to television that they use legal language in places where it does not fit. Presuming innocence is a duty of courts in the context of criminal prosecutions, but not of society at large, or individuals. And so when women start coming forward with similar allegations about a powerful man, “Why on Earth would we think there’s a right to presumption of innocence (outside the criminal law context) and we should always operate from the starting position that the complainant is lying?” Craig said.
    Complainants have been instinctively doubted for so long that now there is an impulse to flip that around, to instinctively believe them, to fight back against the peril to victims that is built into the presumption of innocence.
    This has shown itself in social media campaigns against the excessive or inaccurate use of the term “allegedly,” which is meant to reflect skepticism of the formal charge of the Crown, which rightly bears the burden of proof, but can also imply skepticism of the complainant, who does not.
    It also showed itself in outrage at the tactics on recent display in an Ottawa courtroom, where counsel for an alleged rapist took the teenaged complainant through her social media presence, narrating with loaded questions like “You’re showing everybody that you enjoy smoking marijuana?” and “Another example of your rare drinking?”


    And even though the “twin” rape myths are specifically outlined in the law — prior sexual history cannot be used to support an inference that a complainant is more likely to have consented, or is less worthy of belief — Sheehy said police still use them, prosecutors fail to object to them, and judges accept them, so defence lawyers have “free rein.”
    In fact, this has become par for the course, as Craig writes in a forthcoming research paper documenting the horrifyingly callous interrogation some rape victims endure under cross examination, sometimes despite begging to defence lawyers to stop. “Consider the sexual assault complainant,” she writes, “who is expected to take the stand and with civility and decorum answer questions about the vile acts to which she has been subjected, the contours of her humiliation, and the consequences for her of this kind of ‘world destroying’ domination. She is expected to do so using the correct language, the appropriate tone and level of emotion, and the required degree of deference to ‘the professionals’ and ‘the proceeding.’”
    This is what Canadians will watch for in the Ghomeshi trial. His lead lawyer Marie Henein is well trained in the evisceration of prosecution witnesses. She has won high profile cases for public figures, with the late Eddie Greenspan for former Nova Scotia premier Gerald Regan, accused of many sexual offences, and on her own for former Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant, charged with criminal negligence causing the death of a cyclist who jumped on his car.
    There has already been a third party records application, closed to the public, which can refer to medical, counselling, social service, police, and other official records that could inform the court’s view of a witness’s credibility.
    It is not yet clear what Ghomeshi’s defence is, but every expectation is that it will involve claims of consent, given Ghomeshi’s astonishing written account of his firing from the CBC, which described violent sexual practices as consensual and mutually exciting.
    The key here is that Ghomeshi does not have to prove consent. The Crown has to prove its absence, or that his actions were so harmful that the complainants were not capable of legally consenting to them.
    There is also a new ruling that could be relevant. Last week, the Supreme Court of Canada agreed an Alberta man should be retried for a gang sexual assault, after a jury acquittal, in a case that turned on his allegedly honest but mistaken belief in the woman’s consent – a legally valid defence to sexual assault, as long as the accused took reasonable steps to ascertain that the complainant was consenting.
    Sexual assault is what is known as a hybrid offence, meaning the Crown can decide whether to proceed summarily in provincial court, where the accused has fewer procedural rights and the possible sentence is capped at 18 months, or whether to proceed by indictment in superior court, where the sentence can be far higher, and witnesses can be forced to testify at a preliminary hearing.
    Sexual assault cases involving non-consensual intercourse, for example, are almost always done by indictment. Ghomeshi, however, is being tried summarily before a lower court judge.
    “It must speak to the Crown’s view of the seriousness of the conduct that is alleged,” said Robin McKechney, a criminal defence lawyer with Greenspan Humphrey Lavine in Toronto.
    He said this decision may offer a tactical advantage to the Crown, as it denies Ghomeshi’s lawyers a preliminary shot at cross examining witnesses, to catch them in inconsistencies that could undermine their credibility. Ghomeshi is likely to testify, he said, as the case will be a battle of credibilities.
    After the evidence is heard, the Crown is likely to outline similarities in the cases, and ask the judge to use each of them to buttress the credibility of the others, to discern a repeating pattern.
    McKechney said this “similar fact” application “can be devastating because of its cumulative effect.”
    Sheehy said she will be paying close attention to “how sex discrimination is encoded” in this trial, especially through cross examination of the complainants, and whether it focuses on what they were wearing, or drinking, or how long they waited to report, all of which is legally irrelevant except as part of an effort to undermine their credibility.
    “You’re inviting everyone in that room to sexualize them,” Sheehy said, and as a result, “women are damned if they do and damned if they don’t.”
    Sheehy said the latest statistics suggest the rate of rape reporting is falling, from which she concludes that women’s confidence in the system is “plummeting.”
    And therein lies one of the possible messages Canada will take from Ghomeshi’s prosecution, that after all the soul-searching, this blockbuster sex trial might not be a turning point at all, but rather, as Sheehy put it, “the same old same old, wrapped up in a new package.”

  3. #123
    Bronze Member anna112233's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Jian Ghomeshi was 'punching me in the head, multiple times,' witness says - Toronto - CBC News

    Jian Ghomeshi was 'punching me in the head, multiple times,' witness says


    Defence challenges credibility of complainant's testimony in cross-examination

    By Mark Gollom, CBC News Posted: Feb 01, 2016 5:00 AM ET Last Updated: Feb 01, 2016 8:40 PM ET





    Play Media


    As the high-profile trial of Jian Ghomeshi opened Monday, a woman who alleges she was sexually assaulted twice by the former CBC radio host testified that he twice pulled her hair and on one occasion punched her in the head multiple times after they started kissing at his home.
    "He pulls my head down, and at the same time, he's punching me in the head, multiple times," the woman, whose identity is protected by a publication ban, said in Ontario Court in Toronto.
    "I'm terrified. I don't know why he's doing this, I don't know if he's going to stop. Can I take this pain? And my ears are ringing, and I felt like I was going to faint. I'm going to end up passed out on his floor. And I start to cry."
    The credibility of the woman's testimony was later challenged aggressively by Ghomeshi's lawyer, Marie Henein, who called into question her recollection of key events.
    Ghomeshi, 48, who lives in Toronto, has pleaded not guilty in court to four counts of sexual assault and one count of overcoming resistance by choking, all related to assaults alleged to have taken place from 2002 to 2003. The trial is by judge only and is being heard by Judge William Horkins.
    Wearing a charcoal suit, Ghomeshi sat silent in the courtroom, occasionally scribbling down notes during the trial.
    'I'm terrified. I don't know why he's doing this, I don't know if he's going to stop.'- Witness at Ghomeshi trial
    The woman said the two had met at a Christmas party in 2002 and that they had been flirting with one another. She described Ghomeshi, the former host CBC Radio's Q, who at the time was hosting the CBC show Play, as "charming, fun, happy, charismatic."
    She said he later invited her to a taping of his show, which she said she attended two days later. After the taping, she said they went to a nearby pub, then he drove her to her car at a nearby parking lot.
    She said she felt safe with Ghomeshi, which was reinforced by the car he drove, a yellow Volkswagen Beetle, she told court.
    "He's driving a car that reminds me of a 1960s Disney movie," she said. "So, I'm feeling very safe at the moment, when I'm with him."

    Grabbed hair


    When they got to the parking lot, they began kissing in his car, she said. Suddenly and unexpectedly she said Ghomeshi grabbed her hair "very hard."
    She said that it was an instant switch and that Ghomeshi suddenly reverted "to the nice guy and I questioned whether he actually meant to hurt me."
    "I was thinking, 'Perhaps he doesn't know his own strength. Or ... in the future, this is something we'll have to sort out."
    'He went from being really nice, to this rage. Dark.'- Witness in Ghomeshi trial
    The woman said she went to three tapings of Play. At the third taping, the witness said she brought a friend with her. The two women and Ghomeshi later went to a pub, but only the complainant and Ghomeshi went back to his place.
    She said they were on his couch, kissing and then they stood up and continued kissing. She said that's when Ghomeshi went behind her, pulled her hair, pulled her to her knees, and then punched her in the right side of her head.
    "He went from being really nice, to this rage. Dark."
    She said she wasn't sure if he used a closed or open fist, but that it felt like a closed fist.

    'Threw me out like trash'


    "After I start crying, Jian says, 'You should go now' or 'You better go now, I'll call you a cab,'" the witness said."He didn't apologize, he didn't ask if I was OK. He threw me out like trash."
    She said she waited inside his home for about 10 minutes for the cab, and then went to her friend's house.
    Crown attorney Michael Callaghan asked the woman if there had been any prior discussion about Ghomeshi hitting her.
    "Absolutely no discussion," she said.

    Ghomeshi's trial will take place in this courtroom in front of a judge alone in the Ontario Court of Justice. (CBC)

    Witness cross-examined

    During cross-examination, Henein challenged key details of the woman's testimony.
    The defence lawyer said that Ghomeshi did not have a Volkswagen Beetle at the time of their meeting but did have a GTI (Volkswagen Golf) and that Ghomeshi purchased the Beetle "months and months" after their meeting.
    The witness said she had a recollection of a bright yellow car that looked like a Beetle.
    Henein also questioned the witness about two interviews she gave to the CBC where she failed to mention that she and Ghomeshi had been kissing before he allegedly pulled her hair the first time in his car.
    "That was a lie," Henein said.
    "That was not a lie," the witness said, adding that she was nervous during the interviews, that getting into all the details was embarrassing and she wasn't sure of the memory of kissing at that time.
    The witness first lodged a complaint with Toronto police on Nov. 1. The next day, she wrote an email to police saying that she believed she was wearing hair extensions. But she has since retracted that statement, saying that in fact she was not wearing hair extensions.
    "I take it you agree that if you had worn extensions ... that it would be odd that your hair was pulled so hard and the extensions didn't end up in Mr. Ghomeshi's hand? Right?" Henein asked.
    "I was not wearing extensions," the witness replied.
    Henein also quizzed the witness on another email she had sent police, in which she said Ghomeshi had smashed her head against the window of the car. The witness agreed with Henein that that had not occurred but that her head had been leaning up against the window.
    The witness said in that email to police she had been thinking out loud, trying to remember events and that she didn't choose her words carefully. She said she had told a friend that had she been closer to the window, her head would have smashed into the glass. But the information that was relayed to police was that Ghomeshi had smashed her head against the window.
    "When I wrote that to [police], it was incorrect," she said.
    ​Earlier, Henein asked the witness if she had told her friend after her first meeting with Ghomeshi that she was "smitten" with him, impressed that he was famous, and taken aback by him.
    "I don't recall saying anything of the sort," the woman said. "That is incorrect."

    I really liked him,' witness testifies


    Henein asked her if she had said she wanted to see him again, was very excited about seeing him again and that she couldn't stop talking about him.
    "I will accept that I really liked him. I thought he was a really nice person, intelligent and charming and a gentleman. It was that one incident that I had that I was unsure if it was just him not knowing his own strength," she said, adding that she did want to see him again.
    Ghomeshi faces a separate trial in June on another charge of sexual assault. He was originally charged with seven counts of sexual assault, but the Crown withdrew two of those charges in May, saying there was no reasonable prospect of conviction.
    The charges in today's trial stem from complaints made by three women. The woman testifying today alleges Ghomeshi sexually assaulted her on two occasions. Two of the women's identities are protected under a publication ban, but one of the complainants, actress Lucy Decoutere, went to court to waive that right.​

    Ghomeshi fired by CBC


    The CBC fired Ghomeshi in October 2014 after executives saw what they described as graphic evidence consisting of videos, photos and text messages that he had physically injured a woman.
    In a lengthy Facebook post following his dismissal, Ghomeshi admitted to engaging in rough sex with his partners, but said it was always consensual.
    But media reports quickly followed in which several women alleged Ghomeshi physically and sexually attacked them without their consent.


  4. #124
    Elite Member Novice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Beyond Caring, then hang a left.
    Posts
    47,617

    Default

    Joseph Been needs to check his facts
    "This has led, in some cases, to police action with the whiff of a hasty witch hunt, such as when British police appeared to tip off media to a home search of elderly pop star Cliff Richard, the subject of a historical complaint of sexual abuse against two boys, but as yet no charge after 18 months.".
    This was part of a massive " witch hunt" against systematic child abuse when any number of charges have been brought and "celebrities" have been found guilty (in a court of law, not just in theedia)
    Janus likes this.
    "I don't know what I am to them, maybe a penguin XD" - Tiny Pixie

  5. #125
    Bronze Member anna112233's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    59

    Default

    http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2016/02/02/next-steps-in-the-ghomeshi-trial-are-tricky-for-the-crown.html

    Next steps in the Ghomeshi trial are tricky for the Crown



    Damage to the credibility of the first complainant to testify could weaken a "similar fact" argument based on all three complainants’ stories



    Damage done on Tuesday to the credibility and reliability of its first witness could leave the Crown on shakier ground in what’s known as a “similar fact” application, observers of the Jian Ghomeshi trial say.

    After the Crown requested a delay after problems in scheduling witnesses, the trial is to resume Thursday. But the next witness remains a mystery.

    It could be a friend of the complainant, whose testimony about learning of the alleged sexual assault at the time might help to rebuild the woman’s credibility, in turn helping the Crown to argue that similarities in the allegations of the three women should be considered by the judge.

    Reliable corroborating evidence could help the Crown rebut an assertion by the defence that the allegations were fabricated after media reports came out about Ghomeshi’s actions, or that there was collusion among the complainants, said defence lawyer Daniel Brown, who is not involved in the case.

    But if the Crown is unable to include her in a similar-fact application, it could significantly weaken the prosecution’s position.

    “If the defence is destroying the credibility of one witness, they will have a harder time putting a similar fact application together,” said defence lawyer Cydney Israel, who is also not involved in the case and was speaking generally.

    “It certainly is the Crown’s duty during a trial to assess and reassess the reasonable prospect of conviction,” she said. It happens rarely, but Crowns do sometimes end up saying before closing submissions that it just doesn’t have enough to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

    “We often say the Crown takes their witnesses as they come. Sometimes the Crown has wonderfully consistent witnesses, credible witnesses who are able to communicate their evidence in court. Other times they have witnesses who leave out important details, or forget things or change important details out of their stories,” Brown said. “And there is not much a Crown attorney can do in any of those scenarios except to put them on the stand and ask them to tell the truth.”

    One suggestion from University of Windsor law professor David Tanovich is to call an expert witness to explain the effect that trauma can have on memory.

    “I think a lot of the inconsistencies can be explained by the neurobiology of trauma, which reveals that memories of traumatic events are often fragmented because of how our brains encode and consolidate such information,” he said.

    The court needs to be properly equipped with that knowledge to adjudicate fairly, he said.

    The Crown and defence lawyers also have different roles in preparing their witnesses to be cross-examined, Brown says. The Crown is not out to win the case; the prosecution represents the state. Crown attorneys also don’t have the benefit of disclosure and would not know, for example, that the defence had the emails sent from the complainant to Ghomeshi.

    The defence has the benefit of disclosure and the evidence to be used in the trial itself, which can be used to prepare the client.

    Legal counsel for sexual assault complainants has often been suggested as helpful in preparing them for cross-examination — though they won’t know what information about the complainant the defence has. The province has proposed a pilot project to offer free legal advice to sexual assault complainants.

    “My personal view is that every complainant in any case should have access to legal counsel if they choose,” the complainant’s lawyer, Jacob Jesin, said Tuesday. “The Crown and the police, while they are doing their jobs, cannot offer anyone confidentiality. … Anything that anyone says to a Crown or a police officer must be delivered to the defence.”




  6. #126
    Elite Member whitetigeress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    West coast of Canada, eh
    Posts
    2,951

    Default

    "After I start crying, Jian says, 'You should go now' or 'You better go now, I'll call you a cab,'" the witness said."He didn't apologize, he didn't ask if I was OK. He threw me out like trash."
    She said she waited inside his home for about 10 minutes for the cab, and then went to her friend's house.
    Crown attorney Michael Callaghan asked the woman if there had been any prior discussion about Ghomeshi hitting her.
    "Absolutely no discussion," she said.


    Canada's own Bill Cosby


    Asshole
    sluce likes this.

  7. #127
    Bronze Member anna112233's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    59

    Default

    The Ghomeshi trial turns into a fiasco
    The Ghomeshi trial turns into a fiasco - The Globe and Mail

    MARGARET WENTE
    The Globe and Mail
    Published Monday, Feb. 08, 2016 5:42PM EST
    Last updated Monday, Feb. 08, 2016 7:00PM EST


    When three women came forward in the fall of 2014 to press criminal charges against Jian Ghomeshi for sexual assault, many of us cheered them on. More than a dozen women, both on and off the record, had already described a pattern of odious behaviour over many years alleged incidents of punching, slapping, choking, and hair-pulling that came out of the blue and were not consensual. It was past time for a reckoning. It was past time to send a signal to all abusers: We wont take this any more.
    Everybody knew a guilty verdict was far from sure. The bar for a criminal conviction is, as it should be, high. But nobody, not even the most experienced court-watchers, could have predicted how this trial would go. It has turned into a fiasco. The most high-profile witness actress Lucy DeCoutere, who agreed to waive her anonymity suffered a devastating blow to her credibility because shed never told anyone involved in the case that she had pursued a relationship with Mr. Ghomeshi after he had allegedly assaulted her. Witness Number Three also left a few things out such as the fact that she, too, had had a date and sexual encounter after the alleged assault. The first time these witnesses mentioned these details to the Crown and the police (and perhaps their own lawyer) was just before they took the stand.
    Witness Number One didnt do too well either. She had a hard time explaining why shed sent e-mails and a bikini photo to a man whod allegedly just attacked her.

    Jian Ghomeshi trial: What you've missed so far
    Whatever happened to them, not one of Mr. Ghomeshis accusers behaved like people whod been attacked. Instead, they sent him sexy pictures and flowers and e-mails that ranged from coy flirtations to blunt sexual propositions. A few days after she says she was choked and slapped, Ms. DeCoutere sent him a six-page handwritten love letter that concluded, I love your hands.
    Why does this matter? After all, as Ms. DeCouteres lawyer, Gillian Hnatiw, was quick to remind us, Violence against women is not about the behaviour of the woman Its not about whether [victims of violence] see their abusers again or send flowers, any more than it is about what they wear or how much they had to drink.
    Shes right to a point. What happened after their encounter doesnt change what happened during it. And (to me, at least) the womens allegations have the ring of truth. But a criminal conviction needs more than that. It needs witnesses who are consistent, credible and open. And Ms. DeCoutere, for one, was not. She testified that her relationship with Mr. Ghomeshi after that night was distant and professional. Yet the evidence depicts a lovesick fan, pursuing a man who was no longer interested in her. When confronted with her e-mails and the letter, she said she couldnt remember writing them. She said that when she told Mr. Ghomeshi she wanted to fuck his brains out, she didnt mean it.
    Why didnt she and Witness Number Three disclose these awkward details beforehand? Maybe they were embarrassed. Or they forgot. Or they thought no one would find out. Whatever the case, they appear to have evaded the whole truth because the whole truth made them look bad. Or perhaps nobody involved in preparing them for trial had asked them to disclose all the awkward bits in which case they should be fired for negligence. In any event, by the end of Mondays proceedings, Marie Henein, Mr. Ghomeshis defence lawyer, had demolished the first two witnesses and had started in on Number Three. I felt sorry for them.
    I know the dynamics of abuse can be complex. I know that women can both love and fear their abusers. But these women were not battered wives. They were not in relationships with Mr. Ghomeshi. They barely knew him. They had no reason to fear him, and he had no power over them at all except the power of his charm and celebrity. They could have walked away. They didnt.
    And all thats left is their word about unpleasant encounters that may or may not rise to the standard of criminal assault.
    From the start, this case has evoked powerful emotions. Many of us hoped Mr. Ghomeshis accusers would prevail, and that they would help give voice to the many silent victims of sexual assault who have never been heard. If the case collapses as seems increasingly likely lots of people will be outraged, and will want to know why. And other people will wonder if there ever really was a case at all.
    ------
    *sigh* The legitimacy of their complaints is going to be overshadowed by doubts about their credibility typical the defense lawyer is laughing to herself. The Crown did not go into this prepared.

  8. #128
    Bronze Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    106

    Default

    He chose his lawyer well.

  9. #129
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    In My Own World
    Posts
    295

    Default

    U should summarize that shit.
    2 much 2 read


    Another lawyer not associated with this case was on tv said that because of the one ladies was talking about the case outside of court the case might be dismissed.
    msdeb likes this.

  10. #130
    Bronze Member anna112233's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Reading this just creeps me out...

    Why Did Jian Ghomeshi Keep Lucy DeCoutere's Letter? | CANADALAND


    Why Did Jian Ghomeshi Keep Lucy DeCoutere's Letter?








    Jesse Brown • February 7, 2016


    Trigger warning: Some parts of the article below describe instances of violence.

    Jian Ghomeshi kept Lucy DeCoutere’s handwritten letter to him for 13 years. She was never his girlfriend. They never had sex. Given what we heard at trial last week, it's hard to imagine he was carrying a flame for her. So, why did he hold on to it for over a decade?

    Ghomeshi kept files on women in case they would later accuse him of violence.

    Here is some of what Jian Ghomeshi wrote in 2013 to a young woman, almost 20 years his junior, after she confronted him to say she believed a recent encounter between them was not consensual sex, but an instance of manipulation which resulted, she told me, in brutal, non-consensual violence:

    "dear _______, ....it IS about sex. it WAS.....i have text messages from you saying you want this...the 'rough sex'...was something you were very interested in...you WANTED it to continue the next day and in subsequent messages and notes...reread our texts and re-examine our conversations if you wish... i wish for good karma into 2013. yours, jian"
    After she provided me with Ghomeshi's email to her, I asked this woman, who requested to remain anonymous, what he was referring to. Earlier, she told me that at the end of their first date, Ghomeshi slammed her against a cement wall, choked her from behind and punched her repeatedly on the head. Did she consent to all of that in a text message beforehand, as Ghomeshi's email suggested?

    No, she replied. Before they met, he introduced into their online flirtation talk of rough sex and submission, and told her she "needed to learn to agree to everything." She said she thought she could.
    "I thought there was going to be hair pulling," she explained.
    She told me that after choking her, he struck her "like I didn't even know men hit women."

    The pain was so bad, she recalled, that she considered going to the hospital the next day. Instead, she accepted Ghomeshi's pleas to give him one more chance and meet him again in a public place for a platonic outing. They ended up watching TV at his house and cuddling. He told her he was from an abusive family. They maintained a friendly correspondence for a while, but what happened didn't sit well with her. She ultimately confronted him to say she felt he manipulated her. That's when he reminded her in an aggressive tone that he had kept records: "i have text messages...you WANTED it..."

    Three other women told me similar stories, supported by evidence, of manipulation and entrapment. Ghomeshi would establish an electronic paper trail before the alleged violence took place and would make efforts to continue a correspondence afterwards. It followed a pattern.

    Ghomeshi encouraged women he was pursuing to engage in rough sex talk over text, Facebook message, or email. They told me that if they balked, he would assure them over the phone (verbally, no records) that it was just fantasy, and none of it would physically happen to them. He told them it was healthy to "experiment" and he taunted and challenged them, saying maybe they were "not ready" for a guy like him. He asked for nude photos and videos, demanding explicit, pornographic poses. None of the women, who were much younger than him and often his fans, reported having prior experience with BDSM. At no point did they discuss limits or establish a "safe word." One woman described this process to me as "grooming."
    They would then meet him, and what happened, happened.

    If women were upset with him or elusive afterwards, Ghomeshi would seem to become nervous and made efforts to normalize things. One woman said he showed up at her home in tears. He sent friendly, flattering emails, and sometimes they would respond in kind. Once this record of amicable contact was established, he would stop responding to their messages. Some chased after him with solicitous emails.

    If later they couldn't reconcile the incoherence of his behaviour and confronted him about it, he reminded his accusers that he had things on them: their texts, their nude pictures and videos, and the record of friendly contact after the fact, which he considered exculpatory.

    He seemed to think he had evidence of consent. They were certain he did not. “There’s a big part of blackmail that went into it,” one woman told me.
    The materials he had were threatening enough to keep most women from going to the police. That threat was realized last week in the cross-examination of Lucy DeCoutere. One of my initial sources wrote to me that what Lucy DeCoutere endured on the stand made her feel relieved that she spoke to the media and not to the police.

    She is not alone.
    There have been 23 separate allegations of assault or abuse by Jian Ghomeshi. The current trial involves three women.
    ***
    jesse@canadalandshow.com









  11. #131
    Elite Member sputnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    fellow traveller
    Posts
    58,445

    Default

    the bastard got acquitted.

    Jian Ghomeshi: Canadian not guilty of sex assault charges




    Image copyrightAPImage captionJian Ghomeshi has denied the chargesJian Ghomeshi, who was once one of Canada's top broadcasters, has been found not guilty of sexual assault and choking his victims.
    Three women had accused Mr Ghomeshi of attacking and sexually assaulting them.
    Mr Ghomeshi, 48, had denied the charges, describing the encounters as consensual "rough sex".
    The judge said that the three complainants' stories had been inconsistent and said reasonable doubt existed in this case.
    A group of protesters - holding slogans "We believe survivors" - later gathered outside the court building in Toronto.
    Ghomeshi trial rattles assault survivors
    The alleged assaults took place between 2002 and 2003.
    "Each complainant was less than full, frank and forthcoming in the information they provided to the media, to the police, to Crown counsel and to this Court," Justice William Horkins wrote in his judgement.
    "The evidence of each complainant suffered not just from inconsistencies and questionable behaviour, but was tainted by outright deception," he said.
    "At the end of this trial, a reasonable doubt exists because it is impossible to determine, with any acceptable degree of certainty or comfort, what is true and what is false."
    The trial, which attracted a flurry of media attention, has spurred debate about how victims of sexual assault are treated by the Canadian legal system.
    A demonstration in support of victims of sexual assault happened after the verdict was read, according to reports on Twitter.
    Mr Ghomeshi's three accusers came under intense scrutiny from the defence during the eight-day trial, with defence lawyer Marie Henein questioning why they remained in contact with or on good terms with Mr Ghomeshi after the alleged assaults.
    One sent Mr Ghomeshi a picture of herself in a bikini after she said he had punched her in the head. She told Ms Henein that she had wanted to bait Mr Ghomeshi into incriminating himself.
    But prosecutor Michael Callaghan said "post-assault contact was not relevant to the sexual assault that took place" and every victim coped with assault differently.
    Some advocates for sexual assault victims worried that the women were being put on trial rather than the alleged attacker.
    Image copyrightAPImage captionSeveral witnesses contradicted their earlier testimony during the trialOthers were concerned the scrutiny would discourage other victims from coming forward in future cases.
    Mr Ghomeshi, who hosted the radio show Q, was sacked by Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) in 2014 after the allegations became public.
    The CBC began an inquiry into Mr Ghomeshi's sexual activities after the Toronto Star newspaper began investigating allegations by an ex-girlfriend that he had engaged in non-consensual, violent sex with her.
    The report found that CBC management knew about Mr Ghomeshi's behaviour, or should have known. It said the members of management did not take steps to stop it.
    A number of women came forward after the Star's report, accusing him of punching, strangling and battering.


    --------------
    i blame the crown prosecution. they fucked up by not fact checking the victims' stories, not checking their text messages and emails and taking them at their word when they denied that they'd had further contact with ghomeshi after the rapes. not blaming the victims, just saying that it's the prosecution's job to pre-empt what the defence is going to argue and to prep the victims accordingly for testimony.


    I'm open to everything. When you start to criticise the times you live in, your time is over. - Karl Lagerfeld

  12. #132
    Elite Member SHELLEE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Florida Keys
    Posts
    24,310

    Default

    Ha! Canada is as bad as Florida!!!
    See, Whores, we are good for something. Love, Florida
    #fingersinthebootyassbitch

  13. #133
    Silver Member sparkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    668

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SHELLEE View Post
    Ha! Canada is as bad as Florida!!!
    Unfortunately, that is often very true.

  14. #134
    Super Moderator twitchy2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Milliways
    Posts
    59,972

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SHELLEE View Post
    Ha! Canada is as bad as Florida!!!
    but without the humidity and enormous bugs
    "But I am very poorly today & very stupid & I hate everybody & everything." -- Charles Darwin

  15. #135
    Elite Member msdeb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    in a van down by the river
    Posts
    39,422

    Default

    wall o'text. too small.
    Basic rule of Gossip Rocks: Don't be a dick.Tati
    Lighten Up Francis WCG

Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 5678910 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 4
    Last Post: August 18th, 2012, 04:55 AM
  2. Lily Allen receiving treatment for depression
    By mrs.v in forum Latest Gossip
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: March 6th, 2008, 09:12 AM
  3. MADD cuts ties with Miss Teen USA
    By Dean James in forum Gossip Archive
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 20th, 2006, 07:24 PM
  4. Paramount Cuts Ties, Tom Cruise Unemployed
    By UndercoverGator in forum Gossip Archive
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: August 23rd, 2006, 03:43 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •