Jian Ghomeshi, well known, well respected radio host fired for Sexual Assault

[dotr]

The complainant, a dancer and artist whose name is under publication ban, said she knew Ghomeshi in passing through the arts community and went to dinner with him on the Danforth after meeting him at a dance festival where she was performing.

She told the Crown that she went out with Ghomeshi again despite reservations because he was charming and she began to second-guess herself, thinking she might have misread the situation.

“I am notoriously known for given second chances, and third chances,” she said.

She said she felt belittled by Ghomeshi when, prior to them going home together, he told someone at the bar that “We are not seeing each other, we are just f---ing.”

But she still went home with him, she said, because there was a “Jekyll and Hyde” thing going on.

By this point there were “warning bells” she said, but the final “bell” came at another party in Parkdale, when Ghomeshi told her that her best friend was manipulative, controlling and did not have her best interests at heart.

They left together in his car but they had an argument about his comments, she said. Her last words to him before she got out of the car were: “You are f--ing crazy. Lose my number. Don't ever call me again.”

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...i-back-in-court-for-second-week-of-trial.html

 

[Ardy]

As to Ghomeshi's email records, we don't know if the Crown did already get his records and didn't find anything or if they didn't seek his records at all.

The Crown has presented snippets of some emails...........so it is unclear the depth of their probing into his email records.

Given his planning ahead, it wouldn't be surprising it Ghomeshi was very careful in his correspondence with the women.

If it was his intent to trap them...........he would have been careful not to trap himself.

 

[dotr]

http://www.thestar.com/news/insight...lt-trial-one-floor-above-ghomeshi-porter.html

The sex assault trial one floor above Ghomeshi: Porter
Woman accusing fellow York University PhD student of raping her gets grilled on the stand.

There was a strange déjà vu in the courtroom, as tweets from the Ghomeshi case floated upstairs. The women were in the early stages of dating the men they accused. The alleged assaults happened in private. There were no witnesses, besides the victims.

This could describe the vast majority of sexual assault cases.

The glaring difference was that Gray woke up later that morning, left the apartment and the next day went to the hospital for a rape kit. Then she phoned her employer, York University, looking for advice and support. (She later filed a human rights complaint against the university for failing to have clear policies and protocols for students who are sexually assaulted by classmates or staff. The case is currently in mediation.)

Two days after the incident, she went to the police.

She did everything we as a society tell rape victims they should do, if they want justice and want us to believe them.

So far, that doesn’t seem to have helped her.

 

[Ardy]

As he is charged with a indictable criminal offense, it was Ghomeshi's decision to proceed with a Judge only, or full jury trial.

Interesting that he chose a Judge only trial, and it is evident the trial has sped along more quickly than it would have with a jury present.

The Judge would have had to spend considerable time advising the jury on what to consider..........and perhaps more importantly what to discard from testimony given the unfolding events.

It could also affect a possible future appeal, as a Judge would be more able to parse testimony than a jury member who had heard it in court.

After the verdict is rendered, the Judge will issue a full written explanation of his reasoning in the verdict. That will be interesting to read in the context of this trial.

 

[Ardy]

For those who wish to follow the live trial, the CBC has a good blog where the testimony is more fully covered than through tweets.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ghomeshi-trial-1.3438245

 

[Ardy]

5,000 emails plus phone calls between this witness and DeCoutere...........after meeting each other as witnesses ?

A Facebook message to lie and say Ghomeshi "forced" the kissing..............? Media interviews and a publicist ?

Yikes..........this witness isn't helping the Crown's case at all.

 

[bluesneakers]

not trying to be cheeky.....do we know that Jian was bisexual?

I believe at least two men have come forward but I think they said it was inappropriate fondling or something similar, and one man (I don't think one of the victims though) said Ghomeshi told him he was bisexual.

 

[Ardy]

Good Lord it is getting worse..........

DeCoutere and this witness went to "our" publicist to arrange media interviews...........before going to the police.

It is looking even worse for DeCoutere and becoming obvious her main intention of "coming forward" was to obtain public attention.

This is sounding like they are sitting around discussing how they will set everything up.

If they met because they were both "witnesses"..........who told them about each other ? The police ? The Crown ?

It would be very unethical conduct for the police or Crown to arrange for witnesses to know or meet each other.

 

[Crosby87]

Mr. Ghomeshi will face trial in June on an additional charge of sexual assault stemming from an alleged workplace incident in January, 2008, when he was host of Q on CBC Radio One.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ssed-in-the-case-so-far-day5/article28476713/

 

[Ardy]

Hopefully, the complainant in the next trial wasn't discussing the case and making publicity arrangements with DeCoutere.

The third witness just testified that the police were seeking an independent lawyer for her, but she wrote to them and said she was going with DeCoutere's lawyer.

She also said she applied for "compensation", which she said was for therapy.

Now the witnesses is being caught up in lies she said in court this morning under examination by the Crown.

The witness and DeCoutere discussed the defense getting hold of their correspondence with each other.

At this point it sounds like Don Meredith is singing in the background............"turn out the lights this trial is over".

 

[Ardy]

These women will be lucky if they aren't facing perjury charges as a result of their testimony, but I think it likely the Judge will issue a scathing condemnation in his judgement.

 

[Crosby87]

Following this morning’s hearing, the Crown said they consented to an application by the defence to allow a “relevant” portion of the complainant's sexual history to be testified about during the trial.

The second and third witnesses both said they were choked by JG yet he was only charged with one count of overcome resistance by choking.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...i-back-in-court-for-second-week-of-trial.html

 

[Ardy]

This complainant just admitted the 4th complainant in the next trial , was also part of the group discussing the case.

The defense lawyer is already building a defense for the next trial, which may not even happen now given the admissions in this trial.

This is the worst witness for the Crown to date. She is not as good at 'acting" as DeCoutere and is literally falling apart under cross examination.

It has become clear there was a group, appearing to be headed by DeCoutere who planned their testimony to resemble each others.

It isn't surprising then that the allegations show a consistent pattern. The complainants planned for it to appear so.

This is embarrassing for women right's advocates and a corruption of the legal process.

Given what has come out of the trial, Ghomeshi may very well decide to sue them for libel and defamation.

 

[Ardy]

Thanks for the link to another reporter Crosby87.

I wish Canada had open trials for television coverage. This "twitter" type of public access leaves much to be desired.

Each of the reporters is only picking out small parts of the testimony and to gather a full understanding a person has to go from one reporter to another.

Total nonsense in my opinion. If we allow public reporting..........why not live television coverage ?

 

[Woodland]

I tried very hard to understand the three witnesses, I really did, but can't do it any longer.

Pretty pizzed at the last two - a serious set back for women wanting and trying to get justice for any type of assault where there were no witnesses. Women are lucky if we've 'only' gone back to 1950 or so.

Just as pizzed at the Crown as well - he should have pulled the plug last Friday - or even this morning. He knew by then what was coming - he has contributed, imo, to the set back.

A very sad state of affairs created by a bunch of clowns and affecting many for years to come.

Jmo.

 

[Ardy]

This trial makes life more difficult for those who rightly oppose abuse, and it also highlights how a person with less ability to pay for lawyers and investigators might have no chance at trial.

We need to seriously look at the justice system in abuse cases. Perhaps there should be intensive investigation by social workers or doctors or somebody before the wheels of justice get set in motion.

Unfortunately as the current system stands........it is police policy to make an arrest in a complaint. It is Crown policy to process the complaint. It is defense lawyers policy to attack complainants.

That system is wrong at every level.

 

[Crosby87]

Thanks for the link to another reporter Crosby87.

I wish Canada had open trials for television coverage. This "twitter" type of public access leaves much to be desired.

Each of the reporters is only picking out small parts of the testimony and to gather a full understanding a person has to go from one reporter to another.

Total nonsense in my opinion. If we allow public reporting..........why not live television coverage ?

I would have preferred to watch the trial live but how would the identities of the witnesses be protected if it was?

 

[otto]

5,000 emails plus phone calls between this witness and DeCoutere...........after meeting each other as witnesses ?

A Facebook message to lie and say Ghomeshi "forced" the kissing..............? Media interviews and a publicist ?

Yikes..........this witness isn't helping the Crown's case at all.

I think it's time for the crown to withdraw charges. Regardless of what this was 13 years ago, today it looks like three angry women who, for personal reasons, are determined to destroy Ghomeshi's life. This isn't about a fantastic defence lawyer, this is about very questionable witnesses. Why did the witnesses think that they could lie to police and prosecutors, and withhold critical evidence, during a criminal trial? They should be charged for misleading authorities.

 

[otto]

This complainant just admitted the 4th complainant in the next trial , was also part of the group discussing the case.

The defense lawyer is already building a defense for the next trial, which may not even happen now given the admissions in this trial.

This is the worst witness for the Crown to date. She is not as good at 'acting" as DeCoutere and is literally falling apart under cross examination.

It has become clear there was a group, appearing to be headed by DeCoutere who planned their testimony to resemble each others.

It isn't surprising then that the allegations show a consistent pattern. The complainants planned for it to appear so.

This is embarrassing for women right's advocates and a corruption of the legal process.

Given what has come out of the trial, Ghomeshi may very well decide to sue them for libel and defamation.

Given that Lucy, the third witness, and the fourth witness have acted in concert suggests to me that it's over, that no witness is credible. We know that the first witness has problems with credibility because she was assaulted in Ghomeshi's yellow volkswagon, a vehicle that Ghomeshi didn't own until three months after she alleges that she was assaulted.

Prosecutors need to stop this now. Ghomeshi will go down in history as the first Canadian celebrity targeted by crazy female fans.

 

[dotr]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/the-ghomeshi-trial-turns-into-a-fiasco/article28659769/
Margaret Wente
Feb. 08, 2016

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 won’t 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.

Gillian Hnatiw, was quick to remind us, “Violence against women is not about the behaviour of the woman … It’s 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.”

She’s right – to a point. What happened after their encounter doesn’t change what happened during it. And (to me, at least) the women’s allegations have the ring of truth. But a criminal conviction needs more than that. It needs witnesses who are consistent, credible and open.