« I was right: Trump lost by promising to deal with Democrats | Main | The Ghomeshi trial shows that the Canadian judicial system still works »

February 08, 2016


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


The only hopeful thing from this trial is that Gomeshi is gone.


If Gomeshi had punched you in the face and you didn't cry afterwards then he's not guilty of assault right?


He wouldn't be guilty of sexual assault.


I guess that flew right by you. If a woman is raped and then phones the guy who raped her later then he's not guilty? Is that how it works?


It is important to find based on the evidence, not our distaste for Gomeshi's practices.


Who did Ghomeshi rape?

All I see are a bunch of witnesses who gave wildly inconsistent testimony.

Ever heard of reasonable doubt?


Cincinnatus, there are many who would convict a person based on the accusation of rape alone. What those people don't understand is that they do much more harm than good. But I'm sure you already understand this.
To James, proof is needed to convict, period. So is a presumption of innocence. So far it looks like the proof is as shaky as the presumption of innocence is.

The comments to this entry are closed.

e-mail address

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 02/2008

Blogging Tories

  • Blogging Tories