The Jian Ghomeshi saga

[OttoVonBismarck]

I've decided this case is below the importance threshold required for Languish threads.

[jimmy olsen]

I've decided this case is below the importance threshold required for Languish threads.

Oh? What are you going to do about it?

[crazy canuck]

Trial not going so well for the crown so far after first accuser/witness more or less discredited.

I wouldn't be too quick to jump to that conclusion.  It is the rare witness who has perfectly consistent recall about all the details.  In fact that is often a good indicator of a dishonest or at least an overly coached witness.  A point the Crown will likely make in some form during closing arguments.

[Josephus]

I'll bow down to the wisdom of you lawyers....but, media think otherwise.

In fact they're saying things like:

Her credibility had been demolished beyond repair. Her evidence of such jaw-dropping self-immolating proportions that it verged on farce.

[Barrister]

I'll bow down to the wisdom of you lawyers....but, media think otherwise.

In fact they're saying things like:

Her credibility had been demolished beyond repair. Her evidence of such jaw-dropping self-immolating proportions that it verged on farce.

Don't take legal advice from the media.

[Malthus]

I'll bow down to the wisdom of you lawyers....but, media think otherwise.

In fact they're saying things like:

Her credibility had been demolished beyond repair. Her evidence of such jaw-dropping self-immolating proportions that it verged on farce.

I'll wait to the end of the trial to assess the evidence, but I will say this - don't ever think one can outsmart a good cross-examiner. If it didn't work for Oscar Wilde, it won't work for you. 

[Josephus]

Christ...all I said was it didn't go so well for the prosecution so far. Not looking for legal advice....but generally speaking I wouldn't go to a lawyer to gauge public opinion.

[Jacob]

I've decided this case is below the importance threshold required for Languish threads.

That applies to most of the topics that have threads here.

[derspiess]

I've decided this case is below the importance threshold required for Languish threads.

Seconded.

[Barrister]

Yet we managed over 20 pages talking about it.

The actress Lucy DeCoutere is on the stand today.  She's the one complainant who didn't ask for a publication ban on her identity.  Still on direct.

[Admiral Yi]

Google says: not hott.

[crazy canuck]

Christ...all I said was it didn't go so well for the prosecution so far. Not looking for legal advice....but generally speaking I wouldn't go to a lawyer to gauge public opinion.

If, after cross examination one had the view "boy that witness did well" then there are only really two possible explanations:

a) the cross examiner doesn't know what they are doing; or
b) pleading not guilty was a terrible mistake.

It shouldn't be a surprise that there are inconsistencies that are identified in cross.  It also shouldn't be surprising that the media jumps to conclusions like "not a good day for the prosecution" without a very good idea of whether the inconsistencies are in any way significant once that totality of the crown's case has been heard.  It is the nature of the beast that the media can't/won't wait to make an informed judgment about these things.  Especially in a sensational case like this.  There are still a few reporters out there that stick to reporting facts without all the editorial space filling speculation.  But that doesnt seem to be in fashion.

[Josephus]

The media reported that the first witness was discredited. It's likely she'll never take the stage, or whatever you guys call it, again. Her being discredited may or may not have anything to do with the final outcome but neither I nor the media are saying that.

Trial not going so well for the crown so far after first accuser/witness more or less discredited.

That was pretty much a fact.

In a hockey game if the Canucks go down 2-0 after the first 10 minutes, it's fair game to say "things not going well for the Canucks."

It may very well end up with the Canucks beating the Leafs (likely) 5-2 after three periods. "Things not going well for the Canucks" was fair comment after 10 minutes.

[Barrister]

The media's opinion was that the witness was discredited because she forgot about an email she sent 13 years ago.  The judge may not agree and may well still find the witness credible.

[Josephus]

"forgot"..lol. If I sent a pic of myself in a bikini to Ghameshi, I wouldn't forget...and neither would he.