Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We have to be careful not to confuse this trial with domestic violence. This had nothing to do with domestic violence because none of these women were in a domestic relationship with Jian. Each of them was on a first date when they realized that he was not a nice man. In fact, they were all somehow connected with him through his notoriety as a CBC host, and even after they perceived that he was violent, one had sexual activity with him, and the other expressed a desire to have sex with him on more than one occasion.
This was not a case of an abused woman who is caught in the abuse-honeymoon cycle, and no actions or interpretations of women in domestic abuse relationships apply here.
I have no problem with the verdict. It is right and just. I have not heard men protesting the verdict (other than a couple of politicians who in theory should remain neutral), nor have most women protested the verdict. A group of people, including a woman who removed her shirt (go figure), seem to believe that the justice system made a mistake when three colluding, dishonest women were not believed. Perhaps they are not feminists. Perhaps they are some strange TV-land version of reality.
The fact that the women were proven liars, two of the three canoodling with their alleged attacker immediately after the alleged attack, means that their claims cannot be taken at face value.
If the question is whether all men are rude at some time or another, the answer is yes. Should they be prosecuted for being lewd in a work environment, or should they lose employment?
Comments like this strongly suggest someone just does not get it.
A not guilty verdict does not mean these women where lying. It means there was not enough evidence to prove without doubt that he committed the crimes.
Maybe a person who thinks the way Lieneke does needs to be a victim before they get it?
Do I personally think that someone who makes/ exhibits conduct and comments that are sexist, racists, homophobic or otherwise considered offensive should be provide with disciplinary actions which could include termination YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!! If a person's actions that harm others have no consequences then there is nothing to ensure they are being considerate and respectful of other people.
Not sure why certain people can not see the bigger picture in these issues ... ex if you want be treated fairly and with respect you need to be willing to do this for other people. In shorter form if your not giving it, then don't expect to get it back. Respect should always be a 2 way street!
Maybe justice for a person like Jian who tries to pull this type of behaviour randomly without consent on other person is getting beaten to a pulp? Maybe the expression those who don't learning from hearing need to learning for feeling covers this idea.
Comments like this strong suggest someone just does not get it.
A not guilty verdict does not mean these women where lying. It means there was not enough evidence to provide without doubt that he committed the crimes.
Maybe a person who thinks the way Lieneke needs to be a victim before they get it?
Do I personally think that someone who makes exhibits conduct and comments that are sexist, racists, homophobic or otherwise considered offensive should be provide with disciplinary actions which could include termination YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!! If a person's actions that harm others have no consequences then there is nothing to ensure they are being considerate and respectful of other people.
No sure why certain people can not see the bigger picture in these issues ... ex if you want be treated fairly and with respect you need to be willing to do this for other people. In shorter form if your not giving it, then you don't expect to get it back. Respect should always be a 2 way street!
I totally get it. Four women met a celebrity who showed interest in them. His reputation with women preceded him. They discovered within hours that he indeed had a propensity for violence. Like it or not, they all withheld information from the court, two of them about initiating sexual contact with Jian immediately after the alleged assault. They all waited 10 years to find each other. All four women colluded prior to trial, in direct violation of a ruling of the court. That is the big problem!
I get that this has nothing to do with domestic violence.
I get that this is violence. If the witnesses had fully disclosed their interactions with the accused, there would have been a chance of a guilty verdict. However, non-disclosure of crucial facts, and collusion, were their downfall. Who exactly is to blame for that?
What is the bigger issue surrounding violence against women? It is a fact of life from Iran, in the Middle East, to Iranians in Canada - that much we cannot deny. Violence against women is centuries old, and a way of life in some cultures.
The only bigger picture I see is that when a group of women have an opportunity to make change, they should take that responsibility seriously. These women failed in terms of making change for violence against women due to poor character.
No woman in her right mind goes on one date with a man, learns that he is violent, and then pursues a sexual relationship with him ... unless he is a celebrity, and then we know they are not chasing love.
I totally get it. Four women met a celebrity who showed interest in them. His reputation with women preceded him. They discovered within hours that he indeed had a propensity for violence. Like it or not, they all withheld information from the court, two of them about initiating sexual contact with Jian immediately after the alleged assault. They all waited 10 years to find each other. All four women colluded prior to trial, in direct violation of a ruling of the court. That is the big problem!
I get that this has nothing to do with domestic violence.
I get that this is violence. If the witnesses had fully disclosed their interactions with the accused, there would have been a chance of a guilty verdict. However, non-disclosure of crucial facts, and collusion, were their downfall. Who exactly is to blame for that?
What is the bigger issue surrounding violence against women? It is a fact of life from Iran, in the Middle East, to Iranians in Canada - that much we cannot deny. Violence against women is centuries old, and a way of life in some cultures.
The only bigger picture I see is that when a group of women have an opportunity to make change, they should take that responsibility seriously. These women failed in terms of making change for violence against women due to poor character.
No woman in her right mind goes on one date with a man, learns that he is violent, and then pursues a sexual relationship with him ... unless he is a celebrity, and then we know they are not chasing love.
The truth is a complicated thing. Neither of us were there and will ever know what really happened. All these factors likely do come in to play.
I am not sure what the Iranian link to this is? Jian grew up in Canada and there are no credible unbias statistics to prove that violence again women/ assaults in Canada vs Iran are higher or lower as most domestic violence is not reported anywhere in the world.
If you out of no where decide to start choking me, but tomorrow we go out for coffee. That did not mean you did not assault me? That also does not mean that what was done was okay. I did not agree to allow you to do that to me. I have never heard of this type of action being considered socially acceptably?
The verdict is what it is. I have met this character in person. He presents as a stereotypical narcissistic self absorbed person that most people in this industry are. The actions and conduct claimed against him don't surprise me. It is not too likely any of these women where angles. Also still does not mean he did not do what they said he did.
The truth is a complicated thing. Neither of us were there and will ever know what really happened. All these factors likely do come in to play.
I am not sure what the Iranian link to this is? Jian grew up in Canada and there are no credible unbias statistics to prove that violence again women/ assaults in Canada vs Iran are higher or lower as most domestic violence is not reported anywhere in the world.
If you out of no where decide to start choking me, but tomorrow we go out for coffee. That did not mean you did not assault me? That also does not mean that what was done was okay. I did not agree to allow you to do that to me. I have never heard of this type of action being considered socially acceptably?
The verdict is what it is. I have met this character in person. He presents as a stereotypical narcissistic self absorbed person that most people in this industry are. The actions and conduct claimed against him don't surprise me. It is not too likely any of these women where angles. Also still does not mean he did not do what they said he did.
This isn't about who else was there, this is about what the witnesses said in court under oath. That is the core of the problem.
Jian arrived in Canada after living in England. His parents are Iranian. His sister, an educator, is single other than an adopted daughter.
Would you go for coffee with a man you didn't know other than a "date" where he choked you? If you would, counselling is strongly recommended. However, if you are a captain in the Air Force, chances are you do not need counselling, so what is the real story? Does a Canadian Air Force Captain have such poor judgement so as to chase a sexual relationship with a stranger who is guilty of assault? We can't have it both ways here. Is she worthy of her rank, does she need counselling, did this happen as it was told?
If the witnesses had disclosed the fact that they had one date with a stranger, discovered he was violent, described the violence, and then stated that the very next day they were eager to establish a sexual relationship with that stranger, would police have laid charges?
Not likely.
Jian Ghomeshi would have been a man who was fired under circumstances with grave concerns. That was the end of his career. Instead, we had this circus-of-omission trial that achieved nothing more than a crazy woman taking off her shirt in front of news cameras. That result lies squarely with the witnesses.
The truth is a complicated thing. Neither of us were there and will ever know what really happened. All these factors likely do come in to play.
If you out of no where decide to start choking me, but tomorrow we go out for coffee. That did not mean you did not assault me? That also does not mean that what was done was okay. I did not agree to allow you to do that to me. I have never heard of this type of action being considered socially acceptably?
The verdict is what it is. I have met this character in person. He presents as a stereotypical narcissistic self absorbed person that most people in this industry are. The actions and conduct claimed against him don't surprise me. It is not too likely any of these women where angles. Also still does not mean he did not do what they said he did.
No, this issue is not complicated at all. It is very simple. Our society functions based on the law, not conjecture or emotion, doesn't it?
The fact is, after so many years, none of these women can bring an iota piece of evidence to prove that Ghomeshi violated them against their will, is that right? Whether it is one woman, or 1000 women, or the entire female population in the world, does that matter? We as citizens should learn to respect the law, and anyone who can't be proven guilty is innocent - you may not like the result, but if we deviate from that principle, we may end up in a very dangerous situation. It should have absolutely nothing to do with "this character", whether he is likable or not, or the probability of him committing the crime according to what we "guess". If there is no evidence, there is no crime. Please don't bring your personal emotion into this. That's not how it works.
And need I say it is these very women who ruined their case entirely by hiding certain facts and providing conflicting testimony? Why should they do that? Shouldn't they be ashamed of themselves? You simply can't selectively decide to offer pieces of facts and hide the rest, for whatever reasons, because once it's found out, your reliability collapse.
If I choked you yesterday, and you go out to coffee with me, that didn't mean I didn't assault you, or that my action is OK. However, it depends on what kind of concrete evidence you can bring forward - as an outsider, how can people know you are telling the truth and are not framing me? Your being a woman is not enough and doesn't give you any more credibility as men and women are equal. And your going out with me to coffee the next day does cast doubt on whether the crime actually happened for a jury or judge, because this kind of action is suspicious.
I don't know why people can't be rational about this. The law is about what you can prove. It is simple as that. Ghomeshi may not be innocent, but it is 100% right to let him walk free. Those women just have to deal with it, and next time, come forward with physical evidence immediately (and don't lie in front of the court).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Anyone have a sharp object to pop this bubble?
