Jian Ghomeishi alleged sexual assault.

He can get off most of the charges, but one charge,over coming by choking should stick. You can't consent to being choked even in S&M sex.
 
Slim Jim said:
He can get off most of the charges, but one charge,over coming by choking should stick. You can't consent to being choked even in S&M sex.
Click to expand...

Well, not quite.

You can consent to sadomasochistic acts that do not result in "bodily harm", and another person can act on the basis of that consent, but only if you are conscious. Once you lose consciousness, you are no longer able to give consent. Unless the S&M results in a need for medical care to treat injuries, I don't see how any charges would be achievable for a consensual S&M encounter.

http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2011/2011scc28/2011scc28.html

There is also the issue as to whether the "choking" was applied to overcome resistance, or whether it was part of consensual autoerotic asphyxiation. How do you prove one or the other?

Remember, all that is needed to avoid this charge is reasonable doubt, and a LOT of doubt appears to have been cast on the testimony of the complainants thus far.
 
Last edited:
The Defence just shredded the first witness and pretty much sliced and diced the second. The Crown sure didn't put a lot into prepping witnesses. Reasonable doubt is looking pretty good so far.
 
Slim Jim said:
He can get off most of the charges, but one charge,over coming by choking should stick. You can't consent to being choked even in S&M sex.
Click to expand...

What if you choke on a M&M? Let's keep the law out of bedrooms and off kitchen tables. Who needs a he said/she said between the sheets?
 
I was calling this out when he got busted. Theses bitches went back for more. No case
 
Thru a series of comical hijinks I stumbled upon Youtube MGTOW videos reporting true female nature only after the Jian Gomeshi got charged. I had prejudged him based on white male (you know what I mean) privilege. I think those girls are up to no good.
 
I'm not even sure why this Jian fella is famous?

I know there was an interview with an actor who was ****** off about questions about his acting because he was being interviewed as a musician.

Never hear any of the music on the radio?

So Jian was some kind of a god at the cbc?

Are they hiring?


Seems like a easy enough gig?


This creep prays on women and smashes them in the head and chokes them. Gets charged. Loses his job.

Then we find out these women still want to sleep with him afterwards.

I didn't know that's how you get a follow up date?

I'm doing it all wrong.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Its unfortunate for this guy as he was presumed guilty. If he is found innocent, he'll never get his life back.
 
@nakkers Moxy Fruvous was where I knew him from. Enjoyed their music. Never cared for anything he did afterwards.
https://youtu.be/-00zjEq9PNs

Sent from a Samsung Galaxy far, far away using Tapatalk
 
Clem said:
Its unfortunate for this guy as he was presumed guilty. If he is found innocent, he'll never get his life back.
Click to expand...

And yet his life after will still be better than most peoples if the popularity of redemption movies is any kind of barometer. I stumbled on to Q @CBC a few years back, and I don't mind saying, I found his show eminently listenable. And then I heard he treated his support staff poorly. I thought why do privileged white (you know what I mean) guy often act like @**holes? I never got a straight answer. Maybe the trial will shed light on the matter.
 
Jayv said:
Interesting if he is found not guilty whether or not he will go after the CBC for 50 million.

http://news.nationalpost.com/arts/c...lationship-with-star-radio-host-jian-ghomeshi
Click to expand...

Even if he gets a not guilty verdict on the sexual assault charges, that does not clear him of allegations of non-criminal sexual harassment of his co-workers.

Also, the threshold of evidence required for criminal conviction (beyond a reasonable doubt) is much higher than that required for a civil action (balance of probabilities). Evidentiary standards are lower in civil actions, and any civil action started by him would open the floodgates for all sorts of evidence, ordinarily not admissible at criminal trial, to be brought in by a flood of potential witnesses. Given the nature of that evidence and its implications on his character, does anyone really think he would want to spend a few more years in the limelight of public notoriety that a trial would bring?
 
Last edited:
Jayv said:
What does he have to lose at this point?
Click to expand...

More.

More money spent in legal fees with little hope of recovering that money from his accusers.

More public notoriety. If found not guilty, he at least goes away and can claim with at least a small measure of authority that he was "vindicated" at trial. If he goes to civil action, even more of his (to many) unsavoury predilections will be exposed by potential witnesses. If he does not win that civil action, any "vindication" he may have won (assuming a not-guilty verdict) at his criminal trial will be completely lost.

More time in his life spent in limbo. He can't move on to other things with what is left of his life if he is still mired in past accusations.
 
More public notoriety? Hardly. I think his stock has significantly risen during the past week and that's a good thing for him.

CBC will fold like a cheap suit when being sued, after all it's not really their money is it.
 
Last edited:
Jayv said:
More public notoriety? Hardly. I think his stock has significantly risen during the past week and that's a good thing for him.

CBC will fold like a cheap suit when being sued, after all it's not really their money is it.
Click to expand...

Again, his criminal charges have little to do with allegations of sexual harassment by him towards other CBC employees.
 
Even after all these evidance, proving these women have been lying throughout the entire process, the woman loving, man hating CBC is still shamelessly trying to defend the women. No matter what these women do and no matter how much they lie, CBC still greets them with open arms just for being a woman. Yet they demonize men regardless of how innocent they may be. Which in this case so far, seems pretty obvious for anyone who has been foloowing it,

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/jian-ghomeshi-trial-defense-1.3436841
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom