Jian Ghomeshi no longer with CBC

[peter12]

As Jen Gerson (National Post) said, it looks very doubtful that the Crown actually did its due diligence here. Same goes with Toronto police. These witnesses are woefully unprepared.

[Kjesse]

So, it looks like, from the testimony from around 4:15 to 4:30 or so this afternoon, on Tuesday when she realized other contact or other communication between her and Ghomeshi, which she didn't tell the Crown about, was likely to come up in her testimony from the defence, her own lawyer contacted the Crown to say, "hey there are things you don't know, care to hear about them?".

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by peter12

As Jen Gerson (National Post) said, it looks very doubtful that the Crown actually did its due diligence here. Same goes with Toronto police. These witnesses are woefully unprepared.

Like I said after yesterday, it feels like the Crown were taking this case for granted. This is entirely on them if Jian gets off because he's not innocent of attacking them. What the Crown had to prove was that it wasn't consensual and that these women were afraid or incredibly distrusting of Mr. Ghomeshi but were intimidated about going forward.

Instead, because the Crown has been on their heels with these revelations, the defense has been able to start painting a picture of women who were not only not afraid of the defendant but were also seeking to resume contact after the fact. This isn't the case of long term abusive relationships either. These were sexual trysts that have far less emotional attachment and investment that usually creates that sort of situation.

Someone has to lose their job if he walks from this.

[peter12]

It is appalling to me that she was asked about procedures that should have been made clear to her by the police when she first approached them.

It is actually ironic that in their haste to counter the rape-culture allegations, and appear sensitive, that the legal authorities may have failed to do what is most central - investigate violations of the law, and then, to uphold the law.

This is the problem, to me, with this whole rape-culture phenomenon - it really causes us all to lose our heads as we rush to retweet the latest hashtag in support of victims, but fail to systematically, and methodically do the proper duty in defending those victims.

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Totally unfair to the lawyer. She's doing her job, and she's doing in incredibly well.

Yeah she's great at her job. She really is. But because she's so awesome at her job, an abuser of woman looks like he's going to get off. Because she's so awesome at her job, other victims are going to look at this case, see what they have to go through when being cross-examined and won't report those crimes (I know two women who have told me this as the exact reason they didn't report their assaults).

I get that everyone is entitled to the best defence that money can buy. I get that lawyers have a job to do. But as an outsider who knows nothing about legal proceedings or lawyers in general, it just sucks to see these high priced lawyers be so damned good at their jobs that a scum bag like Gomeshi looks like he's going to get away with it. We can be sure that future victims of sex crimes will look at this case, see the result, and not report the crimes committed against them. This is already the case anyways.

It just sucks that somebody who committed acts like this can get away with it because his lawyer is good at twisting around words and making someone look bad when they are on the stand.

Again , I know nothing about legal proceedings or lawyers in general, so I'll just be on my way

[peter12]

The point brought up repeatedly by all analysts is that the central story - that Ghomeshi punched women in the head, without warning- has not been addressed once by the defence.

Certainly, standard practice by defence lawyers is to make sure allegations are not repeated during cross-examination, but it still stands. Details may be left out, and there may be inconsistencies, but the trial is by no means over already.

One thing that hasn't come up yet is the purported video evidence that led to the CBC firing him in the first place. Does the Crown have this sitting in their back pocket?

On the bright side, this guy will never work in entertainment media again.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by peter12

CBC has a live-blog.

As people said, she probably sent emails. She has done a great job of eroding witness credibility all the way through. So what happens if Jian is acquitted? Does he sue CBC?

Not a chance. He would have to go under oath in a civil trial.

Also, he was fired for incidents at CBC, not because of this trial.

[woob]

Huntingwhale, your frustration may be better suited for the Crown lawyers, as they're the ones who seem to have not done their homework and are allowing the "scumbag lawyer" to turn their trial upside down.

[CaptainCrunch]

i give full credit to any woman who are victims that are willing to step forward and basically get destroyed in the process in the courts.

unfortunately we have to be sure before we send some one away to prison for a long time that the story is actually valid and true.

Unfortunately it seems like the courts don't take into account the victims frame of mind after and during an assault and just are looking for the surface err facts.

To me there is little relevancy in the fact that a victim communicated by email months after the assault or sent a picture of herself in a bikini.

i do know that a lot of victims of date rate blame themselves for it happening and some of them act in the way above as a way of being sure.

One of the victims said that she was trying to entrap her assaulter.

its irrational actions caused by a extremely personal and frightening experience.

But there's no leeway in these proceedings for the victims.

I know after reading this why woman and male victims don't come forward, the process is absolutely painful and carried out without mercy.

To be honest at one time, when i was young I wanted to be a lawyer. I think i would have been a good one as well, but i tend to think after years of defending criminals that I know were guilty, that even though i am doing to job of providing a vigorous defense that I would put a gun in my mouth and pull the trigger.

It just seems to me that defending criminals would be soul devouring.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

Yeah she's great at her job. She really is. But because she's so awesome at her job, an abuser of woman looks like he's going to get off.

You're vitriol is aimed at the wrong person or people. You should be mad at the Toronto police and the Crown Counsel in charge of this case.

Edit- One thing I keep forgetting to mention is that Judge is much better at cutting through bull #### than a jury is. Even still, I can't help but feel we may only see something for the unprovoked punch, and that is unlikely bare much of a sentence for him. Probation at worst.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by troutman

Not a chance. He would have to go under oath in a civil trial.

Also, he was fired for incidents at CBC, not because of this trial.

didn't he already file a 50 million dollar lawsuit against the CBC?

[peter12]

Oh shoot, I had no idea that Henein was the lawyer that got David Frost acquitted.

[Johnny199r]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

i give full credit to any woman who are victims that are willing to step forward and basically get destroyed in the process in the courts.

unfortunately we have to be sure before we send some one away to prison for a long time that the story is actually valid and true.

Unfortunately it seems like the courts don't take into account the victims frame of mind after and during an assault and just are looking for the surface err facts.

To me there is little relevancy in the fact that a victim communicated by email months after the assault or sent a picture of herself in a bikini.

i do know that a lot of victims of date rate blame themselves for it happening and some of them act in the way above as a way of being sure.

One of the victims said that she was trying to entrap her assaulter.

its irrational actions caused by a extremely personal and frightening experience.

But there's no leeway in these proceedings for the victims.

I know after reading this why woman and male victims don't come forward, the process is absolutely painful and carried out without mercy.

To be honest at one time, when i was young I wanted to be a lawyer. I think i would have been a good one as well, but i tend to think after years of defending criminals that I know were guilty, that even though i am doing to job of providing a vigorous defense that I would put a gun in my mouth and pull the trigger.

It just seems to me that defending criminals would be soul devouring.

How would you know that all the people you were defending are guilty? Do you know that some people actually aren't guilty? Or only guilty of some, not all, of the things they're accused of?

Do you know how many people plead guilty just so they can get out of jail when there is not nearly enough evidence to convict, but they don't want to wait a year for a trial?

[peter12]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...tify-1.3432721

It's the police that collect evidence around which to build a case, not the Crown.
And Rosenthal said there's "absolutely" no way that investigating officers would ask about emails that are a dozen years old.
Lerner said the prosecution would likely have tried to defuse any potential bombshells by having the complainant frame the evidence herself while being questioned by the Crown.
"In a big case you like this, you don't want surprises," the former prosecutor says. "Strategically, you want to address that head on so that it reduces the impact."

[peter12]

Background on the Crown Prosecutor, Michael Callaghan.

“He’s a very capable prosecutor, but he combines that with a real sense of fairness,” said Mark Sandler, a well-known defence counsel who faced off against Mr. Callaghan in the so-called “crossbow killer case” in 2012, in which Mr. Sandler’s client, Zhou (Peter) Fang, admitted killing his father after years of being abused by him.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle28460982/

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

Again , I know nothing about legal proceedings or lawyers in general, so I'll just be on my way

You should have done this to begin with. What a ridiculous thing to say. If your ire should be directed at anyone, it's the Crown lawyers, who don't appear to have done a good enough job of trial prep, and the police who investigated.

[Blaster86]

I hate saying this, but that first witness is also to blame. She lied to the police when they asked her a question. She set her self up to be crucified.

[troutman]

Other things to note:

- Jian did file a wrongful dismissal suit against CBC. He withdrew his claim and had to pay CBC's legal fees.

- Crown lawyers are not allowed to prepare or coach witnesses.

http://www.cfra.com/NationalCP/Article.aspx?id=497283

A Judge should not be distracted by MH's tactics as a jury might be. MH has never confronted the complainants about whether the hitting and choking took place or not.

[Johnny199r]

Originally Posted by troutman

Other things to note:

- Jian did file a wrongful dismissal suit against CBC. He withdrew his claim and had to pay CBC's legal fees.

- Crown lawyers are not allowed to prepare or coach witnesses.

http://www.cfra.com/NationalCP/Article.aspx?id=497283

What a Crown should ask to a witness is "is there anything else to this that I'm not aware of? It's going to come out at trial by the defence."

When I was a Crown I had text messages, Facebook messages, pictures etc thrown at me during trial by the defence all the time. Of course the witness never tells the Crown about that stuff.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by troutman

Other things to note:

- Jian did file a wrongful dismissal suit against CBC. He withdrew his claim and had to pay CBC's legal fees.

- Crown lawyers are not allowed to prepare or coach witnesses.

http://www.cfra.com/NationalCP/Article.aspx?id=497283

I was a witness in an assault and crown prepped me.