# Jian Ghomeshi alleges firing due to Fifty Shades of CBC



## dapaterson (26 Oct 2014)

Noted CBC radio personality Jian Ghomeshi has been fired; he's hired high-priced PR firm Navigator to help make his case that it's because of a jilted BDSM lover spreading lies about him. (Oh, and he's suing for $50M for being fired)

His version of the story: https://www.facebook.com/jianghomeshi/posts/10152357063881750



As one person observed, finally there's a decent CBC drama...


----------



## jollyjacktar (26 Oct 2014)

That sucks for the show, Q, as he was a major factor of what made it enjoyable.  It will be interesting to see how this plays out.  Get your whips and chains ready.


----------



## RedcapCrusader (26 Oct 2014)

Didn't really like his show too much, liked the bit where he had bands and artists perform, didn't care for the rest of it.


----------



## cupper (26 Oct 2014)

I heard a few shows down here in NPR, what I did hear was interesting.

I have to agree, what one does in the bedroom is no one's business but your own.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Oct 2014)

First their TV programming sucked. Now their radio is useless. Time to pull the plug on that useless, tax sucking, elitist, inbred corporation.

I'd rather set fire to the portion of my taxes that supports them, rather than watch that self licking ice cream cone continue to point and laugh, with impunity, at the people they are supposed to serve.

If Harper gets back in, the first thing on his agenda should be to burn the place to the ground, scatter the ashes and salt the ground.


----------



## MJP (26 Oct 2014)

recceguy said:
			
		

> First their TV programming sucked. Now their radio is useless. Time to pull the plug on that useless, tax sucking, elitist, inbred corporation.
> 
> I'd rather set fire to the portion of my taxes that supports them, rather than watch that self licking ice cream cone continue to point and laugh, with impunity, at the people they are supposed to serve.
> 
> If Harper gets back in, the first thing on his agenda should be to burn the place to the ground, scatter the ashes and salt the ground.



Don't hold back, tell us how you really feel!


----------



## dapaterson (26 Oct 2014)

recceguy said:
			
		

> First their TV programming sucked. Now their radio is useless. Time to pull the plug on that useless, tax sucking, elitist, inbred corporation.
> 
> I'd rather set fire to the portion of my taxes that supports them, rather than watch that self licking ice cream cone continue to point and laugh, with impunity, at the people they are supposed to serve.
> 
> If Harper gets back in, the first thing on his agenda should be to burn the place to the ground, scatter the ashes and salt the ground.



If not for the first paragraph, it sounds like your solution for NDHQ.


----------



## daftandbarmy (26 Oct 2014)

recceguy said:
			
		

> First their TV programming sucked. Now their radio is useless. Time to pull the plug on that useless, tax sucking, elitist, inbred corporation.
> 
> I'd rather set fire to the portion of my taxes that supports them, rather than watch that self licking ice cream cone continue to point and laugh, with impunity, at the people they are supposed to serve.
> 
> If Harper gets back in, the first thing on his agenda should be to burn the place to the ground, scatter the ashes and salt the ground.



But if we get rid of the CBC, from where will we get our future Governors General?  ;D


----------



## dapaterson (26 Oct 2014)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> But if we get rid of the CBC, from where will we get our future Governors General?  ;D



You're right!


----------



## dapaterson (27 Oct 2014)

More from the Star: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/26/cbc_fires_jian_ghomeshi_over_sex_allegations.html



> The three women interviewed by the Star allege that Ghomeshi physically attacked them on dates without consent. They allege he struck them with a closed fist or open hand; bit them; choked them until they almost passed out; covered their nose and mouth so that they had difficulty breathing; and that they were verbally abused during and after sex.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (28 Oct 2014)

recceguy said:
			
		

> First their TV programming sucked. Now their radio is useless. Time to pull the plug on that useless, tax sucking, elitist, inbred corporation.
> 
> I'd rather set fire to the portion of my taxes that supports them, rather than watch that self licking ice cream cone continue to point and laugh, with impunity, at the people they are supposed to serve.
> 
> If Harper gets back in, the first thing on his agenda should be to burn the place to the ground, scatter the ashes and salt the ground.



to be fair CBC North still plays a important role and their archive is worth keeping.


----------



## Gunner98 (28 Oct 2014)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> More from the Star: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/10/26/cbc_fires_jian_ghomeshi_over_sex_allegations.html



And these are referred to as 'dates' with consensual sex? and did not result in rape charges- sound like an episode of Law and Order Special Victims Unit which is broadcast on CTV.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (28 Oct 2014)

If the allegations are true I don't think he has a leg to stand on


----------



## jollyjacktar (28 Oct 2014)

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> If the allegations are true I don't think he has a leg to stand on


And if they're not.  He'll be beating those ladies who like to play off with a stick(no pun intended, but I'll take it).  Free advertising if I ever saw.  Not to mention those lawsuit winnings he'll maybe enjoy.


----------



## The_Falcon (28 Oct 2014)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> And if they're not.  He'll be beating those ladies who like to play off with a stick(no pun intended, but I'll take it).  Free advertising if I ever saw.  Not to mention those lawsuit winnings he'll maybe enjoy.



Actually there was a long and detailed post in the National Post, outlining that this lawsuit is going to go nowhere fast given that he was in a union, and therefore the proper forum to remedy a (perceived) wrongful termination is through the grievance/arbitration process.


----------



## Loachman (28 Oct 2014)

And I believe that there have been no complaints to the police, based upon my quick skim of what's been in the press.


----------



## jollyjacktar (28 Oct 2014)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> Actually there was a long and detailed post in the National Post, outlining that this lawsuit is going to go nowhere fast given that he was in a union, and therefore the proper forum to remedy a (perceived) wrongful termination is through the grievance/arbitration process.


l didn't know BDSM folks had a union.   Meetings must be interesting.


----------



## dapaterson (29 Oct 2014)

The Star is now up to eight women; one has agreed to be named, a Captain in the CAF.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/10/29/jian_ghomeshi_8_women_accuse_former_cbc_host_of_violence_sexual_abuse_or_harassment.html



> Two of the women who allege they were physically assaulted also say that before the alleged assaults in his home he introduced them to Big Ears Teddy, a stuffed bear, and he turned the bear around just before he slapped or choked them, saying that “Big Ears Teddy shouldn’t see this.”


----------



## The Bread Guy (29 Oct 2014)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> The Star is now up to eight women; one has agreed to be named, a Captain in the CAF.
> 
> http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/10/29/jian_ghomeshi_8_women_accuse_former_cbc_host_of_violence_sexual_abuse_or_harassment.html
> 
> ...


Well done for stepping forward on the record.  Also, check out this interesting Twitter feed that appears to have begun mid-April, @bigearsteddy

As they say in Italian, the spinach cooks in its own grease ....


----------



## Scott (30 Oct 2014)

Sweet chocolate Christ.

The thing that is blowing me away is how many women are lining up to defend him. Vehemently. A few I know, who will not pause to inform someone about the plight of women, are on his side. Irony much? Personally, I don't know what he did or didn't do. I thought his massive missive looked like shit and I knew that more would come out in time. I hope loads of folks can extract their feet from their mouths at the end of this, because it does not look good at all.

And Elizabeth May? "I defended him because I was so tired from the Hill shootings" or something like that. Yeah. Nice one Liz. Back to doltdom. That's just one example of the idiocy surrounding this because people like a fucking radio show.


----------



## Halifax Tar (30 Oct 2014)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> The Star is now up to eight women; one has agreed to be named, a Captain in the CAF.
> 
> http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/10/29/jian_ghomeshi_8_women_accuse_former_cbc_host_of_violence_sexual_abuse_or_harassment.html



Its Lucy from the Trailer Park Boys....


----------



## Scott (30 Oct 2014)

DO NOT read the Facebook post from the Herald linked to that article, the comments will make you want to dropkick your computer.


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Oct 2014)

Scott said:
			
		

> Sweet chocolate Christ.
> 
> The thing that is blowing me away is how many women are lining up to defend him. Vehemently. A few I know, who will not pause to inform someone about the plight of women, are on his side. Irony much? Personally, I don't know what he did or didn't do. I thought his massive missive looked like shit and I knew that more would come out in time. I hope loads of folks can extract their feet from their mouths at the end of this, because it does not look good at all.
> 
> And Elizabeth May? "I defended him because I was so tired from the Hill shootings" or something like that. Yeah. Nice one Liz. Back to doltdom. That's just one example of the idiocy surrounding this because people like a fucking radio show.


The "(Alleged) National Treasure Get Out of Jail Free" Card effect, I think.


----------



## vonGarvin (30 Oct 2014)

Scott said:
			
		

> Sweet chocolate Christ.


It exists...


----------



## Staff Weenie (30 Oct 2014)

So, if he likes to choke and hit women, without their consent, until they were almost unconscious.......how many steps is he away from killing? This guy is sounding more like a serial sexual predator on his way to becoming a serial killer than somebody with a BDSM fetish.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (30 Oct 2014)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> l didn't know BDSM folks had a union.   Meetings must be interesting.



I had a girlfriend with let's say "exotic tastes" and she took me to the "leather appreciation show" put on by a society of similar name in Vancouver. While observe the large cast of characters I got to listen in to a conversation between a dominatrix and a transvestite arguing about the Robert Rules of Order for a meeting and the need to meet the requirements of the Societies Act as this was a non-profit group. Never in my wildest imagination had I expected that subject of conversation.


----------



## Scott (30 Oct 2014)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I had a girlfriend with let's say "exotic tastes" and she took me to the "leather appreciation show" put on by a society of similar name in Vancouver. While observe the large cast of characters I got to listen in to a conversation between a dominatrix and a transvestite arguing about the Robert Rules of Order for a meeting and the need to meet the requirements of the Societies Act as this was a non-profit group. Never in my wildest imagination had I expected that subject of conversation.



But you couldn't interject with that gag ball in, right?


----------



## Kilo_302 (30 Oct 2014)

Once upon a time I was in the "biz" as a member of a somewhat successful band (I receive cheques for dozens of dollars for radio play from years ago). The Canadian scene is tiny, everyone knows each other, and there were plenty of Jian stories going around. This was 5 years ago. I actually ran into him a couple times at various schmooze fests, and he definitely had a "vibe" about him when interacting with women. When people say "none of this surprises me" they mean it. It's tragic that his position of power is probably what allowed him to get away with this behaviour for so long. But also, we as a society have to change the prevailing narrative around rape and similar allegations. Lots of people are still defending him, and by extension painting the victims as opportunistic. No wonder no one came foward until the story was broken. I can only imagine how ashamed and embarrassed they must feel.

As far as the CBC goes, I'm with Recceguy. Privatize it. It's become a mouthpiece for the government, the news and political analysis is as shallow as what you would see on CNN, and the original programming tries so hard to be "Canadian" it's impossible for it to be relevant or edgy.


----------



## OldTanker (30 Oct 2014)

Interesting to read that Lucy Decoutere is now a TDO in New Brunswick (Gagetown?). I always enjoyed her in Trailer Park Boys.


----------



## vonGarvin (30 Oct 2014)

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> But also, we as a society have to change the prevailing narrative around rape and similar allegations. Lots of people are still defending him, and by extension painting the victims as opportunistic.



This is why people often times refuse to come forward. They would rather suffer in silence than relive the horrid experience, this time in the court of public opinion.  I believe it to be a shame.


----------



## dimsum (30 Oct 2014)

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> As far as the CBC goes, I'm with Recceguy. Privatize it. It's become a mouthpiece for the government, the news and political analysis is as shallow as what you would see on CNN, and the original programming tries so hard to be "Canadian" it's impossible for it to be relevant or edgy.



Before I moved to Australia and started watching the ABC, I would have agreed.  However, the ABC here doesn't have that same vibe (it's still left-wing, but not as left as CBC) and it has great Aussie content.  

The best parts, in my opinion, are on ABC Radio.  They have two stations (Triple J and Double J) which are national and geared towards the 20-35 crowd - lots of great (mostly Aussie) music of all genres, age-group relevant talk programs (e.g. Hack, dealing with trending issues), great original programming (Like a Version is amazing, where guest acts come in to play one of their songs and a cover of another one) and best of all, no commercials.  Both are very popular all around the country, even with the same commercial radio saturation as in Canada - I don't listen to commercial radio anymore.  That being said, satellite radio is all but non-existent here.

I have always thought that Triple J would work well in Canada.


----------



## ModlrMike (30 Oct 2014)

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> It's become a mouthpiece for the government...



I would hardly classify the CBC as a mouthpiece for the government. At least not the current government.


----------



## armybuck041 (30 Oct 2014)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> I would hardly classify the CBC as a mouthpiece for the government. At least not the current government.



As an avid CBC Radio 2 listener, I completely agree with you. 

Like it or not, it's going to be a sad day when all I can get on the dial are Astral Media owned stations shoving commercials down my throat.


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Oct 2014)

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> It's become a mouthpiece for the government ....


Have you & I been listening to different CBC's?



			
				Dimsum said:
			
		

> Before I moved to Australia and started watching the ABC, I would have agreed.  However, the ABC here doesn't have that same vibe (it's still left-wing, but not as left as CBC) and it has great Aussie content.


Australia and the UK have very good publicly-funded broadcasting systems that lessons could be learned from.


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Oct 2014)

Bumped with more than just a bit of Schadenfreude ....

<cue agent-like character>




"Jian, baby, of COURSE we luv ya - yer da best - but you're just too .... _hot_ for us right now ....."


> High profile PR firm Navigator is no longer representing Jian Ghomeshi. In a terse statement issued earlier today, the firm stated:
> 
> In response to numerous media requests, Navigator confirms it does not advise Jian Ghomeshi. Regrettably, the circumstances of our engagement have changed and we are no longer able to continue. No further comment will be issued.
> 
> Ghomeshi's long-standing PR firm, Toronto-based rockit-promotions has also just dropped Ghomeshi, tweeting: Going forward, rock-it promotions will no longer be representing Jian Ghomeshi. We won't be responding to or receiving media requests ....


----------



## Rocky Mountains (30 Oct 2014)

Kilo_302 said:
			
		

> As far as the CBC goes, I'm with Recceguy. Privatize it. It's become a mouthpiece for the government, the news and political analysis is as shallow as what you would see on CNN, and the original programming tries so hard to be "Canadian" it's impossible for it to be relevant or edgy.



CBC cannot be privatized and be successful.  Labour legislation does not allow disposal of the union and the CBC union is the main reason it loses $ 1 billion annually.  That is the union AND inertia not unlike the military where the simplest of tasks are over-managed.

I don't know that the Marxists at CBC are rooting for the Conservatives all that much.


----------



## cupper (30 Oct 2014)

Caught this on NPR on the way home tonight. Interesting comment by the Toronto Star's Editor on their decision to run the story when they did.

http://www.npr.org/2014/10/30/360179435/allegations-emerge-against-fired-cbc-host-jian-ghomeshi


----------



## The Bread Guy (3 Nov 2014)

And the CBC president chimes in ....


> I’m not sure where to begin. Like you, the unfolding allegations of the past week have left me in shock, sadness, and some anger.
> 
> As you have no doubt heard, since CBC fired radio host Jian Ghomeshi on Sunday, his lawyers have commenced legal proceedings against us. That limits what we have been able to say about the circumstances of his firing, but we will defend our action. In the meantime, there are a few things that are important for me to address.
> 
> ...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (3 Nov 2014)

Whether he gets cleared or not, his career is done.


----------



## ModlrMike (3 Nov 2014)

So much for the presumption of innocence.


----------



## MJP (4 Nov 2014)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> So much for the presumption of innocence.



Presumption of innocence is for the courts.  Public opinion and the ability for an employer to release you have have little bearing.   In this case CBC releasing a statement could be expected especially considering the allegations and the ramification to the CBC itself.


----------



## The_Falcon (4 Nov 2014)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> And the CBC president chimes in ....
> 
> 
> > I’m not sure where to begin. Like you, the unfolding allegations of the past week have left me in shock, sadness, and some anger.
> ...



I don't buy his BS for second in light of this from Sun News a day or two ago...http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/straighttalk/archives/2014/11/20141102-073501.html



> EZRA LEVANT | QMI AGENCY
> 
> The CBC has now joined other media in reporting about Jian Ghomeshi’s violent sexual misconduct. They’re interviewing women who accuse the former CBC star of beating them and forcing himself on them. (Ghomeshi claims the women consented to be beaten; so far, nine women have come forward saying they did not.)
> 
> ...



I think Hubert Lacroix needs to be hauled before Parliament and explain what he new and when he knew it.  He should also be the next one in line to get fired.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (4 Nov 2014)

Just to make it clear the Lawsuit is a mute point. He's part of a union and therefore is required to go through the proper protocols.


----------



## The Bread Guy (5 Nov 2014)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> I don't buy his BS for second in light of this from Sun News a day or two ago...http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/straighttalk/archives/2014/11/20141102-073501.html
> I think Hubert Lacroix needs to be hauled before Parliament and explain what he new and when he knew it.  He should also be the next one in line to get fired.


If you want to see what else Jian's claiming about the CBC, here's a copy of the Statement of Claim he filed in a Toronto court (via Google Drive).  Remember, none of this has been proven in court at this point.


----------



## a_majoor (5 Nov 2014)

I think this story will enver reach a satisfactory ending. Since the CBC essentially fired their employee based on unproven allegations (remember, nothing has been proven at this point in time), we are now in a "he said/she said" sort of slanging match.

This is the worst sort of thing to get dipped in, since the standards of evidence and burden of proof are totally lacking, and any attempt of investigation in the future will be tainted. As well, there will be a huge push to reach some sort of predetermined outcome (especially if a non judicial star chamber becomes involved), and public pressure has been deployed as a weapon as well.

Whatever Jian Ghomeshi did or did not do, he has been effectively stripped of his rights to truely defend himself by facing his accusers in a court of law in front of an unbiased jury of his peers. His accusers have also been effectively stripped of their rights as well, to the detriment of all. People's reputations have been ruined based on what in effect are rumours and speculation.


----------



## Good2Golf (5 Nov 2014)

If charges against him resulting from the police investigations are laid, he will indeed have his day in court, as will the accusers.  I'm not certain I see how he has been "stripped" of his legal rights?  If so, then by whom?

Regards 
G2G


----------



## mariomike (5 Nov 2014)

MJP said:
			
		

> Presumption of innocence is for the courts.  Public opinion and the ability for an employer to release you have have little bearing.



This case reminds me somewhat of a co-worker who was fired not so long ago. 

He was caught, off-duty, sitting in his car with two 16 year old girls who were drinking beer and smoking cigarettes he had provided. He admitted to purchasing the beer and cigarettes but denied giving them to the girls, saying they just took them despite his disapproval.

There was no allegation of attempted physical contact.

The union took it to arbitration. The arbitrator upheld the dismissal, finding the misconduct to be “unpardonable” for a paramedic.

He had been on the department for 10 years and was considered to be a good employee with a discipline free record. There were never any charges, and it never went to court.
http://www.hrreporter.com/blog/employment-law/archive/2013/04/22/professional-conduct-outside-of-profession


----------



## Kilo_302 (5 Nov 2014)

Rocky Mountains said:
			
		

> CBC cannot be privatized and be successful.  Labour legislation does not allow disposal of the union and the CBC union is the main reason it loses $ 1 billion annually.  That is the union AND inertia not unlike the military where the simplest of tasks are over-managed.
> 
> I don't know that the Marxists at CBC are rooting for the Conservatives all that much.



I think my post was misunderstood. The government is currently stacking the CBC board with their supporters. The CBC is rarely critical of Canada, our role in the world, and largely repeats the government line on things like our mission in Iraq. I believe the CBC in it's current form is focused on perpetuating Canadian mythology and nationalism to the point where self-examination as a nation has become virtually impossible.

As for the CBC being Marxists, I strongly disagree. The CBC is not REALLY part of this "liberal media" that is so often referenced. The only mainstream publication that might occasionally mount a criticism of capitalism or globalization is the Toronto Star, who just ended up endorsing Tory for Mayor anyways. Where the CBC may appear to be liberal is on the radio. And this brand of liberal thinking is mostly social window dressing and drivel about identity politics and the like. When it comes down to what I would consider the main indicators of one's political bent, namely views on our political and economic structures, the CBC is as liberal as the Globe and Mail or the National Post. Looking at the CBC news website today I see an "analysis" piece that largely defends Scotiabank's layoffs, a bit on the remains of a Canadian soldier in WW1 and the usual breaking news stories (today Trudeau suspending two MPs). A casual survey no doubt, but as someone who consumes 4 papers, a myriad of "leftist" and critical websites, FP magazine etc, I can assure you the CBC is not the Marxist threat it's often portrayed as.


----------



## Jarnhamar (5 Nov 2014)

mariomike said:
			
		

> This case reminds me somewhat of a co-worker who was fired not so long ago.
> 
> He was caught, off-duty, sitting in his car with two 16 year old girls who were drinking beer and smoking cigarettes he had provided. He admitted to purchasing the beer and cigarettes but denied giving them to the girls, saying they just took them despite his disapproval.
> 
> ...



Surprised he didn't get open alcohol container in a motorized vehicle or something.


All around creepy story with Ghomeshi.   I'm surprised this didn't come to light sooner.


----------



## The Bread Guy (5 Nov 2014)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> I think this story will enver reach a satisfactory ending. Since *the CBC essentially fired their employee based on unproven allegations* (remember, nothing has been proven at this point in time), we are now in a "he said/she said" sort of slanging match.


IF (and it's a big "if") the Statement of Claim is to be believed, he claims he was dismissed because of worries that the CBC's brand would be tainted if word of his allegedly less-than-wholesome personal life became public.   OOkie-Jian = Ookie-CBC

This is not much different from other on-air talent in broadcast operations being removed because of what they were doing to "the brand" - part of the glory of being a "star" (while it lasts, anyway).



			
				ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> All around creepy story with Ghomeshi.   I'm surprised this didn't come to light sooner.


 :nod:


----------



## mariomike (5 Nov 2014)

ObedientiaZelum said:
			
		

> Surprised he didn't get open alcohol container in a motorized vehicle or something.



Not even that. The girls smoked cigarettes and drank beer in the park, while the grievor remained inside the car. There was no open alcohol in the car.

The entire arbitration is on the Canadian Legal Information Institute website. HR specialists seem to consider it a textbook case. The union and lawyers representing Jian and his employer may be familiar with the summary of it in Canadian HR Reporter.

"Jian Ghomeshi Hires Criminal Defence Lawyer, Male Victim Comes Forward"
http://www.etcanada.com/blogs/etc_118403/jian-ghomeshi-hires-criminal-defence-lawyer-male-victim-comes-forward/tv/


----------



## The_Falcon (6 Nov 2014)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Whatever Jian Ghomeshi did or did not do, he has been effectively stripped of his rights to truely defend himself by facing his accusers in a court of law in front of an unbiased jury of his peers. His accusers have also been effectively stripped of their rights as well, to the detriment of all. People's reputations have been ruined based on what in effect are rumours and speculation.



Don't forget though HE is the one that went on the offensive with his 1500 word facebook post.  HE is the one that at the outset that tried to curry the court of public opinion in his own favour.  He severely miscalculated (in that his "alleged" victims would never come forward), and his strategy backfired.  So lamenting the whole "innocent until proven guilty" "being tried in public" etc, rings hollow.  This circus is squarely on him, and his own attempts to manipulate public opinion.


----------



## PMedMoe (6 Nov 2014)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Not even that. The girls smoked cigarettes and drank beer in the park, while the grievor remained inside the car. There was no open alcohol in the car.



Not to stray too far off topic, but I think in the case you quoted, the _real_ issue was this:



> What made the circumstances even worse is the girls were from a treatment centre and the paramedic had first met them while on calls to the centre. So not only did his actions while off duty call into question his judgment and honesty, there was some tie to his job, since as the girls were former patients and he met them while on duty.
> 
> .....
> 
> In this case, while the paramedic’s misconduct took place when he wasn’t working, it could be linked to his job because he met the girls through performing his paramedic duties.





			
				Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> Don't forget though HE is the one that went on the offensive with his 1500 word facebook post.  HE is the one that at the outset that tried to curry the court of public opinion in his own favour.  He severely miscalculated (in that his "alleged" victims would never come forward), and his strategy backfired.  So lamenting the whole "innocent until proven guilty" "being tried in public" etc, rings hollow.  This circus is squarely on him, and his own attempts to manipulate public opinion.



I agree.  And I am also surprised that this hasn't come out sooner.  Seems there's way too many people who covered for him.


----------



## mariomike (6 Nov 2014)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Not to stray too far off topic, but I think in the case you quoted, the _real_ issue was this:



"What made the circumstances even worse is the girls were from a treatment centre and the paramedic had first met them while on calls to the centre. So not only did his actions while off duty call into question his judgment and honesty, there was some tie to his job, since as the girls were former patients and he met them while on duty.

.....

In this case, while the paramedic’s misconduct took place when he wasn’t working, it could be linked to his job because he met the girls through performing his paramedic duties."

http://www.hrreporter.com/blog/employment-law/archive/2013/04/22/professional-conduct-outside-of-profession

It goes on to say:

"This made it more egregious, but he may have been terminated even if he had met the girls another way."


"Jian Ghomeshi, Rob Ford and the cost of Canadian politeness

As the stories about Jian Ghomeshi grow in number and deepen in depravity, Canadians have asked themselves painful questions about how and why his alleged behaviour went ignored for so long. But if the history of Rob Ford is any indication, Torontonians are experts at not asking questions about a charismatic man’s treatment of women. And while the allegations against both Ford and Ghomeshi have not been proven in court, this reluctance to even talk about it suggests the famous Canadian politeness might give men cover for how they treat women.

It may seem strange to compare Ghomeshi with Ford. On the surface, they appear to be polar opposites. While Ghomeshi gleefully exploited his hipster cred among left-voting CBC listeners, Ford gorged himself on their frustration. But beneath their brands, the stories about them are disturbingly similar."
http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/madeline-ashby-jian-ghomeshi-rob-ford-and-the-cost-of-canadian-politeness


----------



## a_majoor (6 Nov 2014)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> Don't forget though HE is the one that went on the offensive with his 1500 word facebook post.  HE is the one that at the outset that tried to curry the court of public opinion in his own favour.  He severely miscalculated (in that his "alleged" victims would never come forward), and his strategy backfired.  So lamenting the whole "innocent until proven guilty" "being tried in public" etc, rings hollow.  This circus is squarely on him, and his own attempts to manipulate public opinion.



While I really have no opinion about Ghomeshi personally (I saw a couple of "Q" segments on YouTube looking up various bands), we need to remember that he was being fired for unspoken allegations, and once they surfaced, unproven ones. Ghomeshi's carreer is effectively ended because of this without any form of recourse. While going on the offensive via social media was probably not the best strategy, I'm not sure what other COA is open to anyone in that situation? How would you respond (or indeed be able to respond) if this was to happen to you?


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (6 Nov 2014)

Thuc., I usually enjoy your posts even when I differ in view, however, your post below is one of your least thoughtful one I've ever seen. What bug got you? (Are you are rabid fan of Gomeshi???  )

Let me see here (my comments in yellow):



			
				Thucydides said:
			
		

> I think this story will enver reach a satisfactory ending. Satisfactory for whom? This is a Labour matter between Gomeshi and the CBC: They are the only ones that have to be satisfied by whatever resolution they reach - or deal with any court's decision.
> 
> Since the CBC essentially fired their employee based on unproven allegations (remember, nothing has been proven at this point in time) And nothing has to be proven - at least not to you and me - in a labour matter between employer and employee, at least not before the penultimate moment that the matter comes to a hearing. However, the CBC has tons of labour lawyers both in house and external, and I can guarantee you that like any other employer, they would not fire someone merely on a say so but only after they have sufficient evidence to make a reasonable case in court.
> 
> ...


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (6 Nov 2014)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> While I really have no opinion about Ghomeshi personally (I saw a couple of "Q" segments on YouTube looking up various bands), we need to remember that he was being fired for unspoken allegations, and once they surfaced, unproven ones. Ghomeshi's carreer is effectively ended because of this without any form of recourse. While going on the offensive via social media was probably not the best strategy, I'm not sure what other COA is open to anyone in that situation? How would you respond (or indeed be able to respond) if this was to happen to you?



Thuc.: This is EXACTLY how it happens in every single case of firing for cause in Canada. You investigate the allegations against the employee (which I am sure CBC did - they are not stupid). When you have sufficient evidence in hand, you bring the "guy" in and confront him/her with the evidence to see if they deny it or not. Then you tell them they are fired and escort them off the premises. You don't have to answer to anyone on your evidence. A court/tribunal will sort it out at the appropriate time.


----------



## The_Falcon (6 Nov 2014)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Thuc.: This is EXACTLY how it happens in every single case of firing for cause in Canada. You investigate the allegations against the employee (which I am sure CBC did - they are not stupid). When you have sufficient evidence in hand, you bring the "guy" in and confront him/her with the evidence to see if they deny it or not. Then you tell them they are fired and escort them off the premises. You don't have to answer to anyone on your evidence. A court/tribunal will sort it out at the appropriate time.



Beat me to it.  Firing someone does not require the same legal standards as a criminal court (proof beyond a reasonable doubt).  They terminated him rather discreetly (or attempted too).  Ghomeshi, could have been just as discreet, and simply issued a statement that he would be challenging it (through arbitration).  Instead he deliberately, made a big splash re: Facebook, and announcing a civil lawsuit for an outrageous number, both of which were calculated decisions on his part.  I'm sorry, but he is the one who created this situation, and media shyte storm.  From all accounts it sounds like this guy thought he could do no wrong, and could get away with whatever the heck he wanted, and this was just a continuation of that, and as I said before in this last instance he severely miscalculated.


----------



## observor 69 (6 Nov 2014)

From today's TO Star a report on his new defence lawyer, high paid high power help:

"Marie Henein is the lawyer Jian Ghomeshi needs, say justice system observers'
http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2014/11/05/marie_henein_is_the_lawyer_jian_ghomeshi_needs_say_justice_system_observers.html

"Ruthless, smart, hardworking, an exceptional strategist and known for eviscerating cross-examinations, she is a go-to criminal lawyer in high-profile cases" 

Which is why those assaulted are reluctant to report abuse. An experienced lawyer quite capable of destroying a layperson on the stand.


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 Nov 2014)

Baden Guy said:
			
		

> From today's TO Star a report on his new defence lawyer, high paid high power help:
> 
> "Marie Henein is the lawyer Jian Ghomeshi needs, say justice system observers'
> http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2014/11/05/marie_henein_is_the_lawyer_jian_ghomeshi_needs_say_justice_system_observers.html
> ...


KILLER quote from this story ....


> In just a few days for top criminal lawyer Marie Henein, Jian Ghomeshi has gone from punchline to client.
> 
> *“As criminal lawyers we represent people who have committed heinous acts. Acts of violence. Acts of depravity. Acts of cruelty. Or as Jian Ghomeshi likes to call it, foreplay,”* Henein said at a gala on Oct. 29 to big laughs from the crowd of about 450 lawyers, including judges of both the provincial and superior court where his case might be heard if charges are laid ....


----------



## PMedMoe (6 Nov 2014)

Baden Guy said:
			
		

> Which is why those assaulted are reluctant to report abuse. An experienced lawyer quit capable of destroying a layperson on the stand.



True.  I really hope the prosecuting attorney uses this:

Reporter Sidney Cohen noted that Henein had discussed Ghomeshi as recently as last week, in a joke she shared with hundreds of lawyers and judges while acting as emcee at a gala dinner for the Criminal Lawyers Association.

“As criminal lawyers we represent people who have committed heinous acts. Acts of violence. Acts of depravity. Acts of cruelty. Or as Jian Ghomeshi likes to call it, foreplay,” Henein joked to the crowd of lawyers and judges.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dailybrew/jian-ghomeshis-new-lawyer-once-jokes-about-ongoing-160443937.html


----------



## The_Falcon (7 Nov 2014)

Baden Guy said:
			
		

> From today's TO Star a report on his new defence lawyer, high paid high power help:
> 
> "Marie Henein is the lawyer Jian Ghomeshi needs, say justice system observers'
> http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2014/11/05/marie_henein_is_the_lawyer_jian_ghomeshi_needs_say_justice_system_observers.html
> ...



To futher expound on the the highlighted portion, I saw this article in the Toronto Star, and surprisingly I didn't want to punch my computer screen

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/11/06/are_the_lawyers_pursuing_jian_ghomeshis_lawsuit_acting_unethically.html



> By: David Tanovich Published on Thu Nov 06 2014
> As a law professor and one who teaches legal ethics, one of the most troubling parts of the Jian Ghomeshi story for me is the question of the ethics of the civil lawsuit filed by his lawyers against the CBC for a staggering $55 million.
> There are serious systemic problems in our justice system surrounding the treatment of sexual assault complainants. There is a culture of intimidation, denial and blaming by police, lawyers, judges and juries that plays a significant role in explaining why so many women do not report their assault and why there are more acquittals in sexual assault cases than for any other offence
> In my view, lawyers have played a significant role in the silencing of sexual assault. Anyone familiar with the criminal justice system will tell you, if they are honest, that lawyers appear willing to be more zealous in defending a client charged with sexual assault than for any other offence. Indeed, one prominent Ottawa lawyer once told a group of young budding lawyers that their role in cross-examining a sexual assault complaint is to “whack the complainant … if you destroy the complainant … you destroy the head … you’ve got to attack the complainant hard with all you’ve got.” More recently, a senior member of the bar told a group of lawyers that their job was to “kill” the complainant in cross-examination.
> ...



The highlights I think go to show what I was saying earlier.  He (Ghomeshi) wanted to try this case in the court of public opinin, steer the narrative in his favour and keep his (alleged) victims from coming forward.  He was the architect of this public media "trial" with the (possible) complicity of his legal advisors, so if people want to lament something, lament the way these actions tend to silence people who are sexually harrased/abused.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Nov 2014)

Litigation firing alright, litigation - STOPS!


> Jian Ghomeshi's lawsuit against the CBC has been withdrawn.
> 
> Ghomeshi launched the $55 million suit for defamation, breach of confidence and punitive damages last month after alleging in a Facebook post that the CBC fired him over his private sex life. At least 14 people have since alleged that Ghomeshi harassed or assaulted them.
> 
> ...


----------



## cupper (25 Nov 2014)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Litigation firing alright, litigation - STOPS!



Looks like HE got spanked this time. ;D

Wonder if he kept calling out his safe word?


----------



## dapaterson (25 Nov 2014)

Big Ears Teddy has to co-sign the cheque.

You know you had no case when you settle out of court and pay the other side's legal fees.


----------



## The_Falcon (26 Nov 2014)

Jian Ghomeshi has surrendered to Toronto Police and has now been charged with multiple offences, as such he is NOW entitled to all those legal niceties of presumption of innocence and the like.   So from this point forward any discussion of this case must be kept with those principles in mind until a final resolution has been reached

http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/newsreleases/30572



> Man charged in Sexual Assault investigation,
> Faces five charges
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## ModlrMike (26 Nov 2014)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> Jian Ghomeshi has surrendered to Toronto Police and has now been charged with multiple offences, as such he is NOW entitled to all those legal niceties of presumption of innocence and the like.   So from this point forward any discussion of this case must be kept with those principles in mind until a final resolution has been reached
> 
> http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/newsreleases/30572



OK, but he's already been convicted by a jury of his peers...


----------



## The Bread Guy (26 Nov 2014)

And if you're scratching your head at one of the charges ....


> *Overcoming resistance to commission of offence*
> 
> 246. Every one who, with intent to enable or assist himself or another person to commit an indictable offence,
> 
> ...


----------



## The_Falcon (26 Nov 2014)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> OK, but he's already been convicted by a jury of his peers...



 :

If juries can be constituted for the likes Bernardo and Magnotta, I am sure one can be constituted for Ghomeshi as well.  And given the reputation of his defense counsel, I am sure he will be more than adequately served.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (26 Nov 2014)

Now by peers do you mean fellow BDSM members


----------



## Scott (26 Nov 2014)

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> Now by peers do you mean fellow BDSM members



If you read some of what the BDSM community has had to say about this, they do not consider themselvese peers of Ghomeshi. Dan Savage comes to mind, and there was another well written and very thorough debunking of Ghomeshis claims in his initial denial.


----------



## ModlrMike (26 Nov 2014)

Clearly my reference was too subtle. I meant that he's been tried and found guilty in the media, by the media - his peers.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (27 Nov 2014)

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/entertainment/news/cbcs-fifth-estate-to-run-ghomeshi-episode/ar-BBg1kBg

TORONTO — CBC is promising to tell the story of "what really happened" with Jian Ghomeshi in an upcoming episode of "The Fifth Estate."

The investigative program is set to run an hour-long documentary on the disgraced Q radio host Friday, titled "The Unmaking of Jian Ghomeshi."

"There will be numerous revelations that will cast a new light on what happened," executive producer Jim Williamson said in an e-mail.

Williamson said several employees speak up in the episode for the first time about what they experienced. "The Fifth Estate" pursued the story with support from CBC News senior management, and it will focus on what happened inside the CBC, not the criminal investigation, he said.

"In one sense it's a traditional 'Fifth Estate' investigation, the kind we do when there is an important story of wide relevance. But it's untraditional because it is painfully close to home; it's about our own network, and touches on some of our colleagues," he said.

But everyone "The Fifth Estate" approached felt it was critical for the program to "delve deep," no matter how difficult that might be, Williamson said.

"And so people opened up to us and told their stories. And now for the first time viewers will get a much fuller picture about what really happened."

In a preview, Ghomeshi is described as "the breakout success the CBC needed," but says that even as he became ubiquitous on TV, radio and at awards galas, there were "whispers and allegations."

The 47-year-old former CBC star was released on $100,000 bail Wednesday after he was arrested on sex assault charges. His lawyer Marie Henein said he will plead not guilty and will not make any statements to the media.

"The Fifth Estate" has been investigating why Ghomeshi seemed "untouchable" for years and whether people were blinded by his stardom, the episode preview says.

"This is a vital story to tell since it touches so many people in so many different ways. And it has set off an unprecedented national discussion about workplace culture," Williamson said.

The program is CBC's flagship newsmagazine series and has previously run exposes on scandal-plagued public figures, including outgoing Toronto Mayor Rob Ford and Senator Mike Duffy.

Ghomeshi was fired by CBC on Oct. 26 after the public broadcaster said it had seen "graphic evidence" that he had physically injured a woman.

Since his dismissal, nine women have come forward with allegations that Ghomeshi sexually or physically assaulted them. Three of them filed police complaints.

Ghomeshi has admitted that he engaged in "rough sex" but insisted his encounters with women were consensual.


----------



## Kat Stevens (27 Nov 2014)

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> Now by peers do you mean fellow BDSM members



Consent is king with those types. They tend to frown on rapists and sexual predators.


----------



## Robert0288 (27 Nov 2014)

Wouldn't doing this kind of expose risk tainting any potential jury pool if it comes to it?  Also it seems like a very good political move of
 the CBC trying to distance itself


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (28 Nov 2014)

Now more on the grievence process

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/jian-ghomeshis-other-case-the-union-grievance/ar-BBg4YBG


----------



## mariomike (28 Nov 2014)

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> Now more on the grievence process
> 
> http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/jian-ghomeshis-other-case-the-union-grievance/ar-BBg4YBG



“I would be very surprised if the union took this case all the way to arbitration,” Levitt said. 

But, if it does go to arbitration,

"Q.: Are Ontario labour arbitrators' decisions freely available on the internet? 

A.: The Canadian Legal Information Institute (CanLII) web site provides free access to awards filed with it by Ontario labour arbitrators 
http://www.labourarbitrators.org/faq.htm


----------



## armyvern (29 Nov 2014)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> Consent is king with those types. They tend to frown on rapists and sexual predators.



And, Kat for the win.  

Safe word always issued out ... no safe word; no consent.


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 Jan 2015)

And 72 days after JG gets shown the door ....


> The Canadian Broadcasting Corp said on Monday it has placed two executives at the heart of a scandal involving former radio personality Jian Ghomeshi on leaves of absence, effective immediately.
> 
> The CBC's head of human resources and industrial relations, Todd Spencer, and its executive director of radio, Chris Boyce, will both take an unspecified break from their duties, the public broadcaster said on Twitter ....


And here's the memo:





Source


----------



## PMedMoe (8 Jan 2015)

Jian Ghomeshi faces three new charges

Three new charges of sexual assault have been laid against fired CBC radio host Jian Ghomeshi.

During a brief court appearance this morning in Toronto, court heard three new alleged victims have come forward.

Ghomeshi was already facing five criminal charges — four counts of sexual assault and one of choking — stemming from alleged incidents involving three other women.

More at link


----------



## mariomike (9 Feb 2016)

From College Park,

Feb 9, 2016 
Judge at Ghomeshi sex assault trial to look at evidence from Crown witness
http://www.680news.com/2016/02/09/judge-ghomeshi-sex-assault-trial-look-evidence-crown-witness/

Feb 8, 2016 
Ghomeshi's accusers exchanged 5,000 messages before and after going to police
http://www.680news.com/2016/02/08/ghomeshis-accusers-exchanged-5000-messages-before-and-after-going-to-police-2/

Feb 7, 2016 
Ghomeshi emails reveal growing importance of 'digital debris' to trials
http://www.680news.com/2016/02/07/ghomeshi-emails-reveal-growing-importance-of-digital-debris-to-trials/


----------



## a_majoor (12 Feb 2016)

Christine Blatchford has a good article about the end of the trial and the collapse of the prosecution's case. There actually is a lesson for us here; the new starting point seems to be a presumption of guilt which is used to try and steamroller the defendant, and whatever you think of Jian Ghomeshi himself, his reputation was dragged through the mud by what now turns out to be unsubstantiated complaints (the evidence shows the women often continued to have contact with and relations with the accused, so there was obviously some element of consent).

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-defence-team-a-contrast-to-over-delicate-view-of-women-around-ghomeshi-trial

The only way to protect _yourself_ in this environment is to use extreme defensive measures, such as saving every email, tweet, social media posting or even (as is sometimes the case in the US where this sort of thing is in high gear in US Colleges) recording the entire event on video. Hardly the sort of environment that fosters trust or cohesion.

Obviously the definitions of assault, harassment and inappropriate behaviours need to be tightened up considerably, and complainants need to have evidence collected right away (including reporting to the police and a rape kit, if necessary), otherwise this turns into a "she said/he said" circus.


----------



## The Bread Guy (12 Feb 2016)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Christine Blatchford has a good article about the end of the trial and the collapse of the prosecution's case.


At least according to her, without any account of the prosecution's case in that piece - I'm curious to hear/read what the judge says about everything that went on in the courtroom.


----------



## Privateer (12 Feb 2016)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> (the evidence shows the women often continued to have contact with and relations with the accused, so there was obviously some element of consent).



With respect, that reasoning is entirely false.  Whether you choose to stay with someone does not mean that you consented to past conduct.  An abused partner may stay on for many reasons.  It does not mean that the abuse is consented to.


----------



## mariomike (12 Feb 2016)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> The only way to protect _yourself_ in this environment is to use extreme defensive measures, such as saving every email, tweet, social media posting or even (as is sometimes the case in the US where this sort of thing is in high gear in US Colleges) recording the entire event on video.



They seem to have an App for everything these days,
http://we-consent.org/index.php/41-apps-abcd/101-we-consent-app
"Each partner is prompted to state his or her name, the name of the other partner, and to state explicitly “yes” to sexual relations. If the second partner is feeling coerced, he or she can state “forced yes” and the app creates a record of the coercion. The We-Consent™ App records video and audio, which are encrypted, sent initially to cloud storage, and then stored off-line. The recordings are only available to law enforcement, university disciplinary proceedings, or by subpoena. They are NOT available to the users—which prevents misuse."

CBC.ca
Sexual consent app 'Good2Go' takes the guesswork out of hooking up
http://www.cbc.ca/newsblogs/yourcommunity/2014/09/sexual-consent-app-good2go-takes-the-guesswok-out-of-hooking-up.html
"Just when you thought that dating in the digital age couldn't possibly get any more complicated (or weird,) a new app that allows prospective partners to give each other sexual consent via smartphone has entered the game."


----------



## PMedMoe (12 Feb 2016)

Privateer said:
			
		

> With respect, that reasoning is entirely false.  Whether you choose to stay with someone does not mean that you consented to past conduct.  An abused partner may stay on for many reasons.  It does not mean that the abuse is consented to.



 :goodpost:


----------



## Colin Parkinson (22 Feb 2016)

Privateer said:
			
		

> With respect, that reasoning is entirely false.  Whether you choose to stay with someone does not mean that you consented to past conduct.  An abused partner may stay on for many reasons.  It does not mean that the abuse is consented to.



It may be a bit different, he had no legal, fiscal, child care or matrimony hold over them and did not dwell together. They had much more freedom of choice.


----------



## vanderkalin (5 Mar 2016)

Privateer said:
			
		

> With respect, that reasoning is entirely false.  Whether you choose to stay with someone does not mean that you consented to past conduct.  An abused partner may stay on for many reasons.  It does not mean that the abuse is consented to.


With equal respect, I've always thought your reasoning applied to partners who were cohabitating. Otherwise it's as simple as not seeing the person again.


----------



## Scott (6 Mar 2016)

vanderkalin said:
			
		

> With equal respect, I've always thought your reasoning applied to partners who were cohabitating. Otherwise it's as simple as not seeing the person again.



To you, perhaps. But not for everyone. Broad generalizations don't work here.


----------



## a_majoor (6 Mar 2016)

In this particular case, there was the element of consent, the continued relationships and the lack of "hold" the accused had (as mentioned upthread, he had no legal, fiscal, child care or matrimony hold over them and did not dwell together.)

The case was sensationalized from the first, and reading Blatchford's articles it is clear that the prosecution case collapsed as it was revealed that there were continuing relationships between the accused and the complainants which had gone unmentioned earlier, as well as a seeming collusion between at least two of the accusers via email exchanges, which also had been unnoticed by the prosecution. The prosecution's case collapsed when it became clear that these elements were "on the table" for the defense.


----------



## azoute (6 Mar 2016)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> In this particular case, there was the element of consent, the continued relationships and the lack of "hold" the accused had (as mentioned upthread, he had no legal, fiscal, child care or matrimony hold over them and did not dwell together.)



I agree with you for the most part, but I must say that consent was never proved. It was just alleged by the defense when the prosecutor attacked the credibility of the witnesses (to do just that). Evertyhing you named contributed to create a doubt (in my opinion), but I just wanted to clarify that consent was not proved.


----------



## Ludoc (6 Mar 2016)

azoute said:
			
		

> I agree with you for the most part, but I must say that consent was never proved. It was just alleged by the defense when the prosecutor attacked the credibility of the witnesses (to do just that). Evertyhing you named contributed to create a doubt (in my opinion), but I just wanted to clarify that consent was not proved.


It is not necessary to prove consent, people are presumed innocent. The burden is on the prosecution to prove he commited the crime, not the defence to prove he did not.


----------



## azoute (6 Mar 2016)

Ludoc said:
			
		

> It is not necessary to prove consent, people are presumed innocent. The burden is on the prosecution to prove he commited the crime, not the defence to prove he did not.



I know! I stated that, in this case, consent was not proved by the defense. I don't mean to say the defense _has_ to prove anything. It was just to clarify what the defense did and did not.


----------



## mariomike (24 Mar 2016)

Mar 24, 2016 

Ghomeshi found not guilty of all charges in sexual assault trial
http://www.680news.com/2016/03/24/ghomeshi-found-not-guilty-of-all-charges-in-sexual-assault-trial/


----------



## Privateer (24 Mar 2016)

The judge's reasons for judgment are here: http://www.ontariocourts.ca/en/24Mar16.pdf


----------



## Colin Parkinson (24 Mar 2016)

_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._

Not one but 3 cases of the above. I hope the case is instructive to lawyers and police as to what evidence should be collected and advice to their clients. I can imagine the Crown having a sinking feeling as the witnesses stories unraveled.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (24 Mar 2016)

Actually, Colin, the Crown prosecutors are used to this.

In our system, they don't meet in advance with the witnesses and prepare them, the way commercial lawyers will with their clients or the defence will in a criminal case. The crown attorneys rely on the evidence gathered by the police and simply offer the witnesses to the court. They ask them questions getting them to present their case, and let the defence poke holes at them if they can. 

Ultimately, in theory, the Crown doesn't care if a person is found guilty or not as a result of trial. Their job is to put what evidence they have which contains sufficient facts to warrant being put to a trier of fact (judge or jury) to such trier to ascertain guilt or absence of guilt.

The people who should be wary here are the "feminists" who pander constantly  that, contrary to human nature and the whole non-verbal realm of communication, consent requires a signed contract entered into after a 50 question questionnaire on intent 5 years down the road (I exaggerate on purpose, please don't crucify me). The Court just reminded them that the issue of consent is not that straight forward that it requires a positively expressed and provable in court  "YES", and that human nature is more complex than that where criminal intent is concerned.


----------



## Privateer (24 Mar 2016)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> The Court just reminded them that the issue of consent is not that straight forward that it requires a positively expressed and provable in court  "YES", and that human nature is more complex than that where criminal intent is concerned.



You will not find that in the reasons for judgment.  That is not part of what the court said.  It is not implied in the judgment.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (24 Mar 2016)

Now, I hope Ghomeshi sues CBC for wrongful dismissal and gets a big chunk of that $675 million that was given to CBC.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (24 Mar 2016)

Privateer said:
			
		

> You will not find that in the reasons for judgment.  That is not part of what the court said.  It is not implied in the judgment.



I suggest you read paragraphs [135] and [136] of the reasons for judgement.


----------



## Good2Golf (24 Mar 2016)

Could the sexual assault victims now pursue civil litigation in the same manner that the Simpson and Goldman families pursued OJ Simpson (and succeeded) with civil litigation after the state's criminal prosecution failed?    ???

Regards
G2G


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (24 Mar 2016)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Now, I hope Ghomeshi sues CBC for wrongful dismissal and gets a big chunk of that $675 million that was given to CBC.



Which he would lose anyway.

The standard of proof in civil matters (which covers employment) is balance of probability (i.e. a fact is more likely to have occurred than not). Moreover, the actual conduct he engaged in, which he did not deny engaging in, just that it was consensual, is still one that does not befit a celebrity like him who wishes to stay "on the air". 

It reflects badly on the CBC to employ someone like that, and that would be sufficient to warrant dismissal.


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (24 Mar 2016)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Could the sexual assault victims now pursue civil litigation in the same manner that the Simpson and Goldman families pursued OJ Simpson (and succeeded) with civil litigation after the state's criminal prosecution failed?    ???
> 
> Regards
> G2G



I would be interested to see if there is any military investigation into Mrs DeCoutere's testimony as she is a current serving officer in the CAF. Op Honour?


----------



## mariomike (24 Mar 2016)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Could the sexual assault victims now pursue civil litigation < snip >



Jian Ghomeshi could still be target of civil case, lawyer says
http://globalnews.ca/news/2598761/jian-ghomeshi-could-still-be-target-of-civil-case-lawyer-says/

Saw this in the above article,

The Ghomeshi ticket.  "Court lady says the last time she handed similar ones out were for the Bernardo trial."


----------



## Scott (25 Mar 2016)




----------



## GR66 (25 Mar 2016)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Actually, Colin, the Crown prosecutors are used to this.
> 
> In our system, they don't meet in advance with the witnesses and prepare them, the way commercial lawyers will with their clients or the defence will in a criminal case. The crown attorneys rely on the evidence gathered by the police and simply offer the witnesses to the court. They ask them questions getting them to present their case, and let the defence poke holes at them if they can.
> 
> ...



I'm not so sure about the highlighted portion.  A family member of mine was a Crown witness in a criminal case and had extensive preparation with the crown including mock cross-examination so that he was very clear on what to expect of the whole experience.  I don't know enough about the system to know if this is normal or if it's different for Crown witnesses vs. complainants.


----------



## brihard (25 Mar 2016)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Actually, Colin, the Crown prosecutors are used to this.
> 
> In our system, they don't meet in advance with the witnesses and prepare them, the way commercial lawyers will with their clients or the defence will in a criminal case.



That has not been my experience. The crown witness coordinators will work with the crown to assist in trial preparation when circumstances merit it. Obviously this is not done all the time, and equally obviously the Ghomesi trial is a botch job. But I suspect his next upcoming trial will not feature the same mistakes.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (25 Mar 2016)

Next trial?


----------



## mariomike (25 Mar 2016)

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> Next trial?



Jian Ghomeshi: What does a not guilty verdict mean for his next sexual assault trial?
http://globalnews.ca/news/2598994/jian-ghomeshi-what-does-a-not-guilty-verdict-mean-for-his-next-sexual-assault-trial/


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (25 Mar 2016)

Thanks


----------



## mariomike (25 Mar 2016)

Sheep Dog AT said:
			
		

> Thanks



You are welcome.


----------



## TCBF (27 Mar 2016)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> I would be interested to see if there is any military investigation into Mrs DeCoutere's testimony as she is a current serving officer in the CAF. Op Honour?



- After her next O Group, her Sgt approaches her: "Ma'am, can you give me that O Gp again?"
  Her:  "Why Sgt?"  
  The Sgt: " I just want to see if you can tell the same story twice in a row."
  8)


----------



## TwoTonShackle (27 Mar 2016)

TCBF said:
			
		

> - After her next O Group, her Sgt approaches her: "Ma'am, can you give me that O Gp again?"
> Her:  "Why Sgt?"
> The Sgt: " I just want to see if you can tell the same story twice in a row."
> 8)



BZ... You could sell tickets to that event.


----------



## The Bread Guy (27 Mar 2016)

TCBF said:
			
		

> - After her next O Group, her Sgt approaches her: "Ma'am, can you give me that O Gp again?"
> Her:  "Why Sgt?"
> The Sgt: " I just want to see if you can tell the same story twice in a row."
> 8)


Tough room ...


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Mar 2016)

The amount of butt-hurt going on online right now, over this trials outcome, is amazing.


----------



## The Bread Guy (27 Mar 2016)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> The amount of butt-hurt going on online right now, over this trials outcome, is amazing.


Like in politics, everyone has their preferred player, with a few binary-thinking folks seeing the other player(s) as evil, not worth of the air they breathe and worth trashing big time.


----------



## ModlrMike (27 Mar 2016)

There is a frightening amount of sentiment to change the law so that the defendant has to prove the didn't assault the complainant. Quite the slippery slope removing the presumption of innocence.


----------



## PuckChaser (27 Mar 2016)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> There is a frightening amount of sentiment to change the law so that the defendant has to prove the didn't assault the complainant. Quite the slippery slope removing the presumption of innocence.


Probably the same people who were decrying C-51 taking away due process. If the progressives have their way, we'll have a full out thought police and precognition unit arresting people.


----------



## cavalryman (27 Mar 2016)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Probably the same people who were decrying C-51 taking away due process. If the progressives have their way, we'll have a full out thought police and precognition unit arresting people.


If you're a progressive, _1984_ is a 'how-to' manual, not a cautionary tale.


----------



## ModlrMike (27 Mar 2016)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Probably the same people who were decrying C-51 taking away due process. If the progressives have their way, we'll have a full out thought police and precognition unit arresting people.



1984 meets Minority Report


----------



## Fishbone Jones (27 Mar 2016)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> 1984 meets Minority Report



I fear it's more a 1984 and Atlas Shrugged scenario that we are moving into and I don't mind saying, it's making me very uncomfortable. Haven't pulled out the prepper handbooks and cookbooks yet, but I've been eyeing my bookshelf.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (27 Mar 2016)

The self-righteous media circus surrounding this case is disgusting.  I have no doubt Ghomeshi is probably a grade A ******* but this was more of a smear campaign than an actual trial.  The "victims" come across as a bunch of vindictive idiots.  

DeCouture hired a publicist for christ sakes.  Next up, a tell-all book available at Chapters.  Anything to make a buck I guess.


----------



## mariomike (10 May 2016)

May 9, 2016 

Ghomeshi's sex assault charge to be withdrawn in favour of peace bond: source
http://www.680news.com/2016/05/09/jian-ghomeshi-avoiding-second-assault-trial-by-peace-bond-report/
A sexual assault charge laid against former CBC radio star Jian Ghomeshi is expected to be withdrawn Wednesday, a source has told The Canadian Press.

In exchange, Ghomeshi will first have to sign a peace bond.


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 May 2016)

Does that mean the trio of "victims" can't contact him either?


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (10 May 2016)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Does that mean the trio of "victims" can't contact him either?



Or that they can't publish books/articles saying he's guilty and defaming him?


----------



## Remius (10 May 2016)

Different case guys.


----------



## a_majoor (11 May 2016)

Watching this story on the news the other day you could see the lynch mob mentality. The man was cleared of all charges, the testimony of the witnesses demonstrated that tho activities were consensual and continued, witnesses undermined their own case by collaborated via emails yet we still have screaming mobs carrying signs that call for "justice".

I rather doubt that they are calling for prosecutions for malicious prosecution, perjury or defamation, however.....


----------



## jollyjacktar (11 May 2016)

Chronicle Herald Cartoon 11 May 16   ;D


----------



## Eaglelord17 (11 May 2016)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Watching this story on the news the other day you could see the lynch mob mentality. The man was cleared of all charges, the testimony of the witnesses demonstrated that tho activities were consensual and continued, witnesses undermined their own case by collaborated via emails yet we still have screaming mobs carrying signs that call for "justice".
> 
> I rather doubt that they are calling for prosecutions for malicious prosecution, perjury or defamation, however.....



The one that made me shake my head was the 'believe the survivors' hashtag that was floating around for a bit. Why would I believe them? They were proven to be lying in court and as such, believing them would be stupid. I know people who call the whole justice system 'broken' because of the fact they need to provide evidence, it really blows my mind. I guess it is just easier to win the publics opinion as the burden of proof there is exceptionally low.


----------



## mariomike (11 May 2016)

Apology by Jian Ghomeshi to former CBC employee Kathryn Borel
http://www.680news.com/2016/05/11/text-apology-by-jian-ghomeshi-to-former-cbc-employee-kathryn-borel/


----------

