That is not really much of an argument since they dated him again afterwards, and even engaged in sexual activities (the allegations he is currently accused of did not involve sex - apparently they were kissing at the time).
So they already knew what he was like (supposedly).
I am totally confused by all of this. If you go on a date with someone, and when you are kissing them they suddenly start punching or strangling you, why on earth would you see them again??? At the time all of this happened, he was not a celebrity, he was a nobody. They were not beholden or committed to him, he didn't have any power over them, so why do it?
This has the feeling of the Salem Witch Trials, where hysterical women made wild accusations. Perhaps there were witches in the 1700s, but proof was absent in the trials. Similarly in this case, perhaps Ghomeshi assaulted these women, but there is nothing to support the claims. Of the 24 complainants, apparently only 4 were deemed credible by the prosecution (presumably the other 20 were forthcoming about the facts?), and of those four, three are not credible. That leaves one, and given what we've heard, that one is on shaky ground.
Lucy suggested that she continued to pursue a relationship with Ghomeshi after the alleged assault because she was somehow suffering from characteristics of domestic violence even though nothing about her pursuit of Ghomeshi resembles domestic violence. I think she mistakenly believes that the Court and public are fools. At least the six weeks between trial and verdict will give protesters time to re-think their radical stance.