Jian Ghomeshi no longer with CBC

[troutman]

Coaching is a no no. Some preparation ok within ethical limits.

[Blaster86]

Prep isn't the same as coaching. Prep usually goes over what they're going to ask you so you're not caught off guard by them, and preparing you for the defense going at you with hot knives trying to carve you up.

If they are telling you what to say after they tell you what they're going to say, then that's coaching and that is illegal.

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by troutman

Other things to note:


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

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

Hold on, they absolutely can -- and I would suggest must -- prepare their witnesses, as the article says. When the article talks about coaching, and while that's a fine line, it means they can't suggest testimony to a witness to get them over certain problems in the case. They absolutely can refresh a witnesses' memory and make sure the witness has all of the details available to them, including going through their statements and emails and their recollection. They can not however plant testimony to a witness-- they have to seek the truth.

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by troutman

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.

One of the seminal rules of cross-examination (again calling out MBates for comment) is you don't want to get into a situation where the witness simply keeps repeating the allegation.

MH could say, "I put it to you you were never actually hit", and they will say all day all night: "yes I was". But it doesn't get to the truth or falsity of the statement-- the issue is, can the witness be believed, beyond a reasonable doubt.

What MH is doing is showing that some of what these witnesses are saying, around the periphery of their testimony, is not only untrue, but somewhat shocking to the point each of the first two witnesses, it could be argued, have an agenda. In the case of the first witness, one example is, she said "she was thrown out like trash" but a year later sent bikini pics and told the police she never had contact beyond the initial encounter. In the case of the actress, she reveled in the attention the accusation brought her.

These things do not necessarily mean these ladies are lying. I'd suggest they still are likely telling the truth about the essence of what happened. But here we are dealing with proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If the cross examination provides reasonable doubt with the witnesses' testimony, in that they don't have enough credibility, that's how these charges may not stick.

[PeteMoss]

Meh... I don't really see anything so far as being that effective, more theatric than anything.

Who cares if these people emailed the guy after the fact or even flirted with him after the fact. The question is did he do what he's accused of by multiple people. You need to take a huge leap to assume a bunch of people just decided to accuse a guy for what different reasons.

If a friend of mine punched me in the face and knocked me out, whether or not we stay friends after the fact has nothing to do with whether or not what he did was illegal or a crime.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

If a friend of mine punched me in the face and knocked me out, whether or not we stay friends after the fact has nothing to do with whether or not what he did was illegal or a crime.

I agree. But I guess there are situations when it is legal to knock your friends out. Sign a waiver and you're in business in any mma/boxing gym in the city. Short of a waiver, if you're in a gym, participating in a combat sport, you would likely be deemed consented just because of the circumstances Those circumstances don't exist in someone's bedroom. This trial has to establish two things, did he assault someone, and was it consensual or not. The mixed up car is a pointless alley. I'm guessing the evidence of post assault dating is intended to suggest that the assaults were consensual. I'm just hoping the judge will understand psychology and trauma. People stay married to their rapists. People fall in love with their captors. It's still rape and it's still kidnapping.

I jtotally hate this whole thing. One of those no one wins situations. I just hope the next person he dates is Ronda Rousy's training partner.

[GGG]

Isn't this case based around just two elements.

Did the hitting take place
Was it consensual.

The person assaulted could have enjoyed the punching and it's still non consensual if he didn't obtain consent in advance. It appears that Gomeshi will take the stand and at that point he will need to have details on how he obtains consent.

So while the periphery noise she is generated may cast some credibility issues none of these things in my mind get to reasonable doubt without Gomeshi directly providing an alternative

[PeteMoss]

So far today - everything seems to be centered around the emails after the fact and the part where she didn't tell the police about them beforehand. Could be an issue of having more than one accuser hurts the defense since they had to reveal the email defense to the first witness so the crown and future accusers can frame the emails as they want in their questioning.

[woob]

Originally Posted by GGG

Isn't this case based around just two elements.

Did the hitting take place
Was it consensual.

The person assaulted could have enjoyed the punching and it's still non consensual if he didn't obtain consent in advance. It appears that Gomeshi will take the stand and at that point he will need to have details on how he obtains consent.

So while the periphery noise she is generated may cast some credibility issues none of these things in my mind get to reasonable doubt without Gomeshi directly providing an alternative

I think the idea is that by amplifying the "noise" and painting a picture that DeCoutere didn't disclose all relevant info and is inconsistent, that they can hope to raise reasonable doubt to her recollection of the night in question.

[troutman]

Man with electric saw threatens reporters outside Jian Ghomeshi trial in Toronto

Police arrest 19-year-old who was tackled by reporters

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...onto-1.3435182

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Who cares if these people emailed the guy after the fact or even flirted with him after the fact. The question is did he do what he's accused of by multiple people. You need to take a huge leap to assume a bunch of people just decided to accuse a guy for what different reasons.

It matters a lot. While it is unlikely that all these different people accusing him are doing it because they have an axe to grind other than being sexually and physically assault, only three of them are witnesses and complainants in this trial. If the defense can make it look like any one of these three DID have said axe, and only hopped on board with this after the fact as a petty type of revenge or attention seeking it will severely mitigate any sentence.

People forget, in most cases a good defense counsel's job isn't to get their client off free and clear, it is it mitigate the damage, so to speak.

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

If a friend of mine punched me in the face and knocked me out, whether or not we stay friends after the fact has nothing to do with whether or not what he did was illegal or a crime.

It's not that black and white. If there is consent, and it was something both sides knew was a possibility it becomes much less "illegal".

[GGG]

Originally Posted by woob

I think the idea is that by amplifying the "noise" and painting a picture that DeCoutere didn't disclose all relevant info and is inconsistent, that they can hope to raise reasonable doubt to her recollection of the night in question.

I understand the strategy and attacking the credibility of the victim is how you would defend yourself if are guilty or innocent. I just think that Gomeshi will have to take the stand to defend himself.

The damage done to the victims credibility isn't sufficient to get the case tossed

[woob]

Originally Posted by GGG

I understand the strategy and attacking the credibility of the victim is how you would defend yourself if are guilty or innocent. I just think that Gomeshi will have to take the stand to defend himself.

The damage done to the victims credibility isn't sufficient to get the case tossed

Yeah, you're likely right on that.

[peter12]

Wrong thread.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

It matters a lot. While it is unlikely that all these different people accusing him are doing it because they have an axe to grind other than being sexually and physically assault, only three of them are witnesses and complainants in this trial. If the defense can make it look like any one of these three DID have said axe, and only hopped on board with this after the fact as a petty type of revenge or attention seeking it will severely mitigate any sentence.

People forget, in most cases a good defense counsel's job isn't to get their client off free and clear, it is it mitigate the damage, so to speak.




It's not that black and white. If there is consent, and it was something both sides knew was a possibility it becomes much less "illegal".

Good point.

[peter12]

So I am following the line of questioning by the defense, and it seems pretty flimsy. If this is all it boils down to, what can the Crown do in response? Seems like it is fairly common for people who are assaulted or taken into the confidence of an abusive relationship have a hard time not going to the abuser for validation.

If you read some of the experiences of Ghomeshi's past victims, his MO is to make people feel like they are irreplaceable, and then discard them suddenly.

[troutman]

Michele Mandel Verified account ‏@MandelSun LD: It doesn't make sense unless you're trying to squash it down & move on. "When dealing with trauma, it's not a straight line." #Ghomeshi

Corey Atad ‏@CoreyAtad
Once again, #Ghomeshi defence relying on disproven notion that victims will naturally refrain from contact with their abuser.

marianne boucher ‏@CityCourtsTO #Ghomeshi complainant says it was inevitable she would "re-encounter him" was trying to humanize him.

[troutman]

Anne Kingston Verified account ‏@anne_kingston New email May 19/04: How busy are you gonna be at Banff...I wanna play with you..Pims on terrace? Chance encounter in broom closet #Ghomeshi

The "broom closet" email is the most problematic matter raised on Cross so far . . .

Did Jian keep a file on each of his relationships? Who has emails from 13 years ago?

Michele Mandel Verified account ‏@MandelSun Henein: "You didn't tell them about this right?" Shows her karaoke photo You sent it to #Ghomeshi "Proof that you can't live without me."

Ash Mogg ‏@ashmogg Women everywhere raised & socialized to act the exact way that will get them crucified during a sexual assault case. #Ghomeshi #NotTheOnion

[peter12]

She is getting crushed here.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I assume there will be experts who will testify to explain all of this.