|
to jaberi
Re: Jian Ghomeshi $55M lawsuit against CBC being withdrawnsaid by jaberi:lol speaking of Cosby, every time the brothers done something he would give them a stern lecture er shame them and tell them to take responsibility as young black men. He pissed off a lot of the younger people. Told young black men to stop letting their pants fall down as a fashion statement. Well, on SNL last week, a black comedian said the Bill Cosby would have been better off keeping his OWN pants up. |
|
|
to Anav
Re: Jian Ghomeshi, host of Q, sacked by the CBCsaid by Anav:Yes point stated..... except, oh I dont know maybe stated already about 20 times in this thread. In other words nothing original, like a broken record and so easy for a rapist or non rapist to day. The difficulties on coming forward have been discussed (glad Q is getting his day to in court to fry or not to fry). To bad your post does not apply to the poster depicted or to my post. Actually it applies perfectly to the poster - it's pointing out that if you're lanning on making the allegations your story better stack up and not just be trying to cover for something you regret doing. The person you are accusing doesn't have to prove their innocence - you have to prove at least a believable amount your claim -- and unfortunately for some women who are raped (especially date raped) that's damn near impossible as it so often comes down to he said she said - and that's rarely enough to convict someone in a criminal court with our current set of laws. I'm not saying it's always right, or just, or moral, or correct that this is the way our system works -- but - a long time ago a lot of smart people got together and said that was the best way to run a system - no ifs, ands, buts, or exceptions... (except perhaps some of the strict liability offences but those don't yield loss of liberty like a rape conviction would) |
|
|
to PX Eliezer1
Re: Jian Ghomeshi $55M lawsuit against CBC being withdrawnsaid by PX Eliezer1:said by jaberi:lol speaking of Cosby, every time the brothers done something he would give them a stern lecture er shame them and tell them to take responsibility as young black men. He pissed off a lot of the younger people. Told young black men to stop letting their pants fall down as a fashion statement. Well, on SNL last week, a black comedian said the Bill Cosby would have been better off keeping his OWN pants up. lmao...yesssssssssss thx for the reminder, who can forget that pants on the floor lecture he gave twisting his nose same time, making not so funny gestures with his facial features. lol @ comedian on SNL will search for it, need a good laugh... |
|
AnavSarcastic Llama? Naw, Just Acerbic Premium Member join:2001-07-16 Dartmouth, NS |
to Hydraglass
Re: Jian Ghomeshi, host of Q, sacked by the CBCWrong wrong wrong. It has nothing do with the poster but if one flies off the handle and uses an over the top imagination I suppose one could connect the dots. We will have to agree to disagree on the intent of the poster but your other points are obviously germane. Back to the disagreeement. Its not pointing that out at all. What the poster is saying is that if you didnt like the sex or regret having sex with someone you are not particularly fond of, in other words something you decided to do at the time, and now are regretting it.......... In these circumstances the poster is saying dont complain about it. The poster is trying to minimize all instances into this bucket including rape cases. |
|
|
to jaberi
Re: Jian Ghomeshi $55M lawsuit against CBC being withdrawnsaid by jaberi:lmao...yesssssssssss thx for the reminder, who can forget that pants on the floor lecture he gave twisting his nose same time, making not so funny gestures with his facial features.
lol @ comedian on SNL will search for it, need a good laugh... Saturday Night Live took on the Bill Cosby scandal this weekend by turning one of his own famous lines against him.
"Hey Bill Cosby, pull your damn pants up," Weekend Update anchor Michael Che said. "I've always wanted to say that." » www.people.com/article/b ··· hael-che |
|
resa1983 Premium Member join:2008-03-10 North York, ON |
to urbanriot
Re: Jian Ghomeshi, host of Q, sacked by the CBCThe single overcoming resistance charge is a more serious charge than the 4 sexual assault charges combined - essentially if convicted of it, the judge can sentence him to life in prison on that charge alone. » laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/ ··· #docContI'm trying not to find it sad that a single charge can put someone away for longer than someone convicted of multiple rapes would go away for (ie a serial rapist). |
|
|
Overcoming resistance to commission of offence
246. Every one who, with intent to enable or assist himself or another person to commit an indictable offence,
(a) attempts, by any means, to choke, suffocate or strangle another person, or by any means calculated to choke, suffocate or strangle, attempts to render another person insensible, unconscious or incapable of resistance, or
(b) administers or causes to be administered to any person, or attempts to administer to any person, or causes or attempts to cause any person to take a stupefying or overpowering drug, matter or thing,
is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life. Perhaps Parliament thought that those actions posed an even higher risk of death for the victim, compared to rape or sexual assault in general? That's the only rationale that I can think of. |
|
mr weather Premium Member join:2002-02-27 Mississauga, ON |
Funny you mention this, Mrs. Weather and I were talking last night about the "choking law" and wondering what its basis/history was in law? |
|
|
to Hydraglass
said by Hydraglass:It's still up to the victim to prove their claims to convict someone of a crime Funny, I thought that's what the police were for. Proving it is not the victim's job. |
|
|
IamGimli (banned)
Member
2014-Nov-27 9:26 am
said by bt: Funny, I thought that's what the police were for. Actually proving the allegations is the Crown's job. said by bt:Proving it is not the victim's job. Maybe not but providing evidence to allow the Crown to do it's job is. I suspect that's what was meant by the original comment. |
|
koiraHey Siri Walk Me Premium Member join:2004-02-16
1 recommendation |
to mr weather
said by mr weather:Funny you mention this, Mrs. Weather and I were talking last night about the "choking law" and wondering what its basis/history was in law? The maximum penalty for overcoming resistance by choking to commit an indictable offence is life in prison, while the maximum for sexual assault is 10 years. Not often used, the charge of overcoming resistance by choking for the purpose of committing another offence was written into Canadas original Criminal Code in 1892, and until 1972, whipping was one of the prescribed punishments, Osgoode Hall law professor Benjamin Berger said. It is very much like [a charge of] attempt murder except the Crown doesnt have to prove the intent to cause death, Calgary defence lawyer Lisa Silver said. » www.theglobeandmail.com/ ··· 1807355/ |
|
|
to IamGimli
said by IamGimli:said by bt: Funny, I thought that's what the police were for. Actually proving the allegations is the Crown's job. said by bt:Proving it is not the victim's job. Maybe not but providing evidence to allow the Crown to do it's job is. I suspect that's what was meant by the original comment. Aye - not that the victim has to put the case together against the defendant, but that when an investigation is done in the case of an alleged sexual assault it'll likely be up to the victim and the victim alone to provide any and all evidence. A "statement" alone from one person is likely not going to ever lead to a conviction based on our set of laws. On the other hand, a statement from a half dozen people who have no connection to each other and all claim the same thing happened - that's a whole other story - as that in itself demonstrates a pattern of behaviour. While it still might not alone lead to a conviction, it will definitely have more weight in criminal proceedings. Pictures, e-mails, physical evidence, etc. all have far more weight in a court of law - essentially there has to be at least some sort of "proof" that a crime was even committed. |
|
StyvasWho are we? Forge FC! Premium Member join:2004-09-15 Hamilton, ON |
Styvas
Premium Member
2014-Nov-27 12:30 pm
It's an interesting question. I had a client who had been charged with 7 or so counts of domestic assault. Basically, his wife was upset with how he was acting one night and called the cops (I think he might have pushed her or something -- maybe worse), and the cops asked her if it had ever happened before. She described 6 or 7 previous times over the past number of years, and they charged him for all of them.
I have no idea if he did it or not, it's irrelevant. But how on earth do you convict someone on the basis of testimony alone? It's the ultimate he said/she said. I don't know if he ended up convicted or not (I'd finished that contract before the trial), but surely his chances of acquittal were high, unless the judge considers her testimony without any other evidence as the absolute truth. His confidence in being acquitted, however (even in the absence of any evidence) was not high, so he must have been given some impression by a lawyer or someone that he might be convicted.
Any armchair lawyers here know what actually happens in a situation such as that? |
|
|
IamGimli (banned)
Member
2014-Nov-28 10:38 am
It's a crap shoot. If either testimonies (his or his wife's) show inconsistencies or other signs of rehersal/deception chances are the case will go the other way. If there's no obvious flaws in either testimony and both parties seem believable by the judge they'll often find the male guilty and give them a conditional discharge just-in-case. Our legal system is VERY sexist in these matters. |
|
AnavSarcastic Llama? Naw, Just Acerbic Premium Member join:2001-07-16 Dartmouth, NS |
to urbanriot
said by urbanriot:said by Hydraglass:Sorry but we are still an innocent until proven guilty nation. It's still up to the victim to prove their claims to convict someone of a crime, not of the person who is "accused" to prove they didn't do it. Yea, as much as I think Jian Ghomeshi is a tool and believe the accusations, I'm willing to accept that he's not guilty. I feel the same way about Bill Cosby. I believe Ghomeshi is guilty as heck but willing to accept a courts decision. Cosby is protected by time and an even worse lethargy to hold men accountable in the US. (The UVA thing is appalling). |
|
dirtyjeffer0Posers don't use avatars. Premium Member join:2002-02-21 London, ON
1 recommendation |
Cosby is old school...he comes from a time when "harass" was two words. |
|
1 recommendation |
to Anav
said by Anav:(The UVA thing is appalling). Today "Rolling Stone" magazine is doing serious backtracking on the entire UVA (University of Virginia) rape story. » www.rollingstone.com/cul ··· 20141205Damn thing is, any false accusations detract from all the women who truly have been victimized. |
|
|
Heaven forbid anyone merely suggests that sometimes women lie about rape or you're sexist and the most insensitive asshole on the planet. But that's ok, New Jersey is bringing in a bill that will make it illegal to lie to women about your social status in order to get them to sleep with you, they will now be able to charge you with rape even though it was 100% consensual. This nonsense needs to stop. » www.nj.com/politics/inde ··· ime.html |
|
peterboro (banned)Avatars are for posers join:2006-11-03 Peterborough, ON |
said by Kitlope: But that's ok, New Jersey is bringing in a bill that will make it illegal to lie to women about your social status in order to get them to sleep with you, they will now be able to charge you with rape even though it was 100% consensual. That sucks. Now I have to put a disclaimer on my online dating profiles for residents of New Jersey that I'm not really a retired male model and billionaire who likes to cuddle and go for long walks on the beach on my private island estate. |
|
|
Yup. In my case, the 1997 Buick LeSabre that I drive is a dead giveaway. |
|
AnavSarcastic Llama? Naw, Just Acerbic Premium Member join:2001-07-16 Dartmouth, NS |
to PX Eliezer1
Yeah pretty piss poor bit of journalism by the magazine. Their publishing license should be revoked. |
|
|
to Kitlope
said by Kitlope:But that's ok, New Jersey is bringing in a bill that will make it illegal to lie to women about your social status in order to get them to sleep with you, they will now be able to charge you with rape even though it was 100% consensual. New Jersey has 40 state senators and 80 state assembly members, and it's common for them to spout off about one thing or another. Don't take it too seriously. Even if this passed both houses of the state legislature, our governor Chris Christie would veto it. ----- New Jersey has produced many comedians such as Abbott and Costello, Ernie Kovacs, Jerry Lewis, and Flip Wilson. Our state legislators continue that proud tradition. |
|
PX Eliezer1 |
to peterboro
said by peterboro:Now I have to put a disclaimer on my online dating profiles for residents of New Jersey that I'm not really a retired male model and billionaire who likes to cuddle and go for long walks on the beach on my private island estate. You're better off not dating Snooki anyway. (Actually she's from Staten Island, New York, she just visits New Jersey. Governor Christie was [trying] to shut down the bridges to keep her out....) |
|
peterboro (banned)Avatars are for posers join:2006-11-03 Peterborough, ON |
I was more into JWOWW and her twins anyways. |
|
|
|
to PX Eliezer1
they're both vapid and useless |
|
MashikiBalking The Enemy's Plans join:2002-02-04 Woodstock, ON |
to Anav
said by Anav:Yeah pretty piss poor bit of journalism by the magazine. Their publishing license should be revoked. The cause of this is corruption, and the desire for clickbait to drive ad revenue. You'll notice the number of sites using similar tactics in areas not relating to this. The biggest offenders these days of it are sites like rollingstone, vox, and the gawker network. |
|
capdjqBe Kind, Be Calm & Be Safe Premium Member join:2000-11-01 Vancouver |
to Kitlope
said by Kitlope:But that's ok, New Jersey is bringing in a bill that will make it illegal to lie to women about your social status in order to get them to sleep with you, they will now be able to charge you with rape even though it was 100% consensual. What happens if a woman lies? |
|
your moderator at work
hidden : Personal attacks
|
|
to capdjq
Re: Jian Ghomeshi, host of Q, sacked by the CBCsaid by capdjq:What happens if a woman lies? Nothing. Just like in a lot of false rape cases. CNN just put up a article "Should we always believe the victim?" » www.cnn.com/2014/12/05/o ··· pt=hp_t3 |
|
shaner Premium Member join:2000-10-04 Calgary, AB |
to Anav
said by Anav:Yeah pretty piss poor bit of journalism by the magazine. Their publishing license should be revoked. » www.washingtonpost.com/l ··· ory.htmlIsn't it more of an indictment of our hyper sensitive society today that such a story with no corroboration would be so universally accepted as fact? |
|