Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
EvilJoven
Mar 18, 2005

NOBODY,IN THE HISTORY OF EVER, HAS ASKED OR CARED WHAT CANADA THINKS. YOU ARE NOT A COUNTRY. YOUR MONEY HAS THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND ON IT. IF YOU DIG AROUND IN YOUR BACKYARD, NATIVE SKELETONS WOULD EXPLODE OUT OF YOUR LAWN LIKE THE END OF POLTERGEIST. CANADA IS SO POLITE, EH?
Fun Shoe

T8R posted:

Finally, now I can quit my well paying job and just sit around all day being poor on taxpayer dime.

I won't be quitting my job with the intent of being poor but I will be quitting my job with the intent of trying a different career the day mincome is actually implemented.

The reason why I'm not doing that anyway is because as it is if I try it and it doesn't work out I'm basically sentencing my wife and I to spending the rest of our lives in poverty.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Postess with the Mostest
Apr 4, 2007

Arabian nights
'neath Arabian moons
A fool off his guard
could fall and fall hard
out there on the dunes
Just your bi-monthly reminder that the Federal Liberals and Ontario Liberals are totally separate entities and nothing alike.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/justin-trudeau-to-attend-whitby-oshawa-byelection-rally-with-kathleen-wynne-1.3435818

quote:

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is set to appear Tuesday at a rally with Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne for the Liberal candidate in an upcoming provincial byelection east of Toronto.

The Ontario Liberal Party issued a statement from candidate Elizabeth Roy saying there has been "tremendous support" from Liberal MPs and MPPs and she looks forward to welcoming Trudeau and Wynne to the riding.

...

Wynne took an unusually high-profile role in campaigning for Trudeau during the federal election campaign, which saw Ontario play a large role in sweeping Trudeau to a majority government.

flakeloaf
Feb 26, 2003

Still better than android clock

In Ghomeshichat, his lawyer is arguing that engaging with someone who abused you retroactively makes that abuse okay.

Some tweets from the trial posted:


Henein says that, only now, under cross-examination, has DeCoutere admitted she had pursued a friendship w/ Ghomeshi after the assault.

Email DeCoutere sent to Ghomeshi hours after the incident, "You kicked my rear end last night and that makes me want to f*** your brains out."

DeCoutere explaining that she didn't mean "I liked it when you choked me...I had conflicted feelings about Mr. Ghomeshi."

Regardless, Mr. Ghomeshi choked me with no consent...he slapped me with no consent..."

"I think you are magic and would love to see you again," said DeCoutere in an email she sent Ghomeshi 13 days after the assault.

:v: Well I didn't want you to stick me in the arm with that heroin needle, but now that you've done that I'm having a hell of a great time!

Because abused people always act completely rationally and cloister themselves forever, and they certainly never try to own their degradation or turn poo poo into poo poo-ade.

Risky Bisquick
Jan 18, 2008

PLEASE LET ME WRITE YOUR VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENT SO I CAN FURTHER DEMONSTRATE THE CALAMITY THAT IS OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM.



Buglord

flakeloaf posted:

In Ghomeshichat, his lawyer is arguing that engaging with someone who abused you retroactively makes that abuse okay.


:v: Well I didn't want you to stick me in the arm with that heroin needle, but now that you've done that I'm having a hell of a great time!

Because abused people always act completely rationally and cloister themselves forever, and they certainly never try to own their degradation or turn poo poo into poo poo-ade.

The problem with this is that she is against a judge and not a jury. The judge will see through that for what it is, crap.

Juul-Whip
Mar 10, 2008

Helsing posted:

While I have trouble getting all that upset about giving people assistance in fighting ISIS, I also can't help but think that we've just switched from accidentally bombing civilians to accidentally training the death squads that will be terrorizing them in a couple years.

The US led international coalitions we're participating in don't have the best interests of the region in mind and while there's always going to be some compelling human rights justification for intervening *just this time* at the end of the day the result always seems to be a catastrophe. And that's without even going into the hypocrisy of condemning ISIS while sending military equipment to Saudi Arabia.
"Accidentally," lol.

namaste friends
Sep 18, 2004

by Smythe
This lawyer, Henein has gotten everyone off from that attorney general with road rage to fuckin noted pedophile hockey figure David Frost. Ghomeshi is getting off (lol) no matter what.

Blood Boils
Dec 27, 2006

Its not an S, on my planet it means QUIPS

Cultural Imperial posted:

This lawyer, Henein has gotten everyone off from that attorney general with road rage to fuckin noted pedophile hockey figure David Frost. Ghomeshi is getting off (lol) no matter what.

She is literately the best defence lawyer in the country. On the other hand, it might still count as assault to hit someone without warning or safe-words?


http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2016/02/05/cross-examination-of-lucy-decoutere-continues-at-jian-ghomeshi-trial.html

"As reporters lined up outside the courthouse early on Friday morning, a young man with a skateboard ran up the steps and began banging on the doors and muttering threats and insults at the waiting group. He removed a power tool from his bag, turned it on and was in the process of reaching into his bag again when he was tackled by a reporter. The police were called and escorted the man away in handcuffs."

yessss everyone go crazy

flakeloaf
Feb 26, 2003

Still better than android clock

Not that it makes her any less of a really good lawyer, but I thought Bryant's charge was withdrawn because there was no hope of convicting a guy for running over a drunk man who reached into a moving car to try to steer it into things after having spent the last several weeks dicking around in that same intersection and provoking motorists; and Frost's acquittal was partly because of police collusion (group note-taking is very bad), partly because of perjury from his other victims who testified in his defense, and partly because of the crowns' perplexing inability to call any witnesses who knew fuckall about hockey.

more like dICK
Feb 15, 2010

This is inevitable.

jm20 posted:

The problem with this is that she is against a judge and not a jury. The judge will see through that for what it is, crap.

The judge will say the women should have kept their knees together and Jian will go free hth

Count Roland
Oct 6, 2013

jm20 posted:

Who are we training exactly? The Iraqi Kurds? The Syrian Kurds? The Turkish Kurds? :v: The Iranian Kurds that can get training in Iraq? :aaaaa:

Iraqi Kurds. I believe the KDP (in power in Iraqi Kurdistan), under Barzani (President) is getting most of the foreign support of Kurdish groups.

Unfortunately Barzani is a bit of an rear end in a top hat, his elected term ended over the summer, and he's stayed in power due to the current crisis. He and his KDP have fought civil wars with other Kurdish groups (namely the PUK, let by Talibani) and have frequently switched sides.

The KDP is not friendly with the PKK (Turkey) or YPG (Syria). Turkey backs the KDP these days.

The YPG are actually kinda good- in a literal communist sorta way. But backing for them is more quietly because Turkey really hates it.


I root for the Kurds, but they're not united, and there's a very good chance they will fight amongst themselves. I'm not sure how I feel about Canada training the shittier of these groups to fight better.

Math You
Oct 27, 2010

So put your faith
in more than steel
Mother Canada got killed. Woohoo!

Also blackberry laying off an unknown number of employees.

CLAM DOWN
Feb 13, 2007




Math You posted:

Mother Canada got killed. Woohoo!

Also blackberry laying off an unknown number of employees.

"approximately 200 employees have been impacted in Canada and Florida"

http://mobilesyrup.com/2016/02/05/blackberry-reportedly-cuts-35-of-waterloo-workforce-including-significant-blackberry-10-devices-staff/ see: update

namaste friends
Sep 18, 2004

by Smythe
Eat poo poo y'all

ZShakespeare
Jul 20, 2003

The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose!
Eat from the trashcan of ideology

SulfurMonoxideCute
Feb 9, 2008

I was under direct orders not to die
🐵❌💀

The death of Mother Canada is another step in killing Harper's lovely legacy once and for all. I've been doing a lot of studies on the parks and how politics affect them, and it's been a huge relief to see all the poo poo they've been pressured into doing being reversed so quickly. Hopefully soon they'll start funding scientific research and employing wardens to stop the increased poaching the mountains have seen in the last few years.

namaste friends
Sep 18, 2004

by Smythe
wow that's racist who are you to judge chinese traditional medicine

MA-Horus
Dec 3, 2006

I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of how awesome I am.

gently caress traditional "medicine" aka "use this rhino ivory because you have a tiny dick"

Postess with the Mostest
Apr 4, 2007

Arabian nights
'neath Arabian moons
A fool off his guard
could fall and fall hard
out there on the dunes

flakeloaf posted:

In Ghomeshichat, his lawyer is arguing that engaging with someone who abused you retroactively makes that abuse okay.

You know she just has to prove reasonable doubt right tumblr?

PT6A
Jan 5, 2006

Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

MA-Horus posted:

gently caress traditional "medicine" aka "use this rhino ivory because you have a tiny dick"

It's actually worse than that. Ivory comes from elephants, among other things, and while nothing justifies hunting elephants for their tusks, ivory is a pretty nifty and unique material. Rhino horn is made of keratin, the same poo poo that's in your fingernails.

Seat Safety Switch
May 27, 2008

MY RELIGION IS THE SMALL BLOCK V8 AND COMMANDMENTS ONE THROUGH TEN ARE NEVER LIFT.

Pillbug
I haven't heard of the increased poaching before, is that just like casual "no wardens around, gonna shoot me a doe" or more professional stuff?

flakeloaf
Feb 26, 2003

Still better than android clock

Ikantski posted:

You know she just has to prove reasonable doubt right tumblr?

If your explanations are half as bad as your ad-homs, there's no way you're telling us how how emailing a guy tomorrow might make a reasonable trier of fact wonder if that makes it okay for him to have beaten and choked you yesterday.

Postess with the Mostest
Apr 4, 2007

Arabian nights
'neath Arabian moons
A fool off his guard
could fall and fall hard
out there on the dunes
His lawyer isn't saying its cool to beat women. She's saying that, based on those emails, there's reason to doubt Lucy's story (that it wasn't consensual).

flakeloaf
Feb 26, 2003

Still better than android clock

I put more stock in her statement today that she didn't consent to being treated that way at the time than I put in his lawyer's allegation that things she said after the fact could be taken to mean that she did, but it's not my opinion that matters and I'm naturally biased against defense-created theories. Proving consent is an even shittier part of a judge's job than having to endure arguments about how someone who said she didn't want to be beaten and choked really was asking for it.

Mr Luxury Yacht
Apr 16, 2012


Isn't part of the point that what he did couldn't be considered consensual under any legal circumstances (I.e. you cannot consent to assault)?

flakeloaf
Feb 26, 2003

Still better than android clock

No. Assault is by definition an unwanted touch, but you can definitely consent to someone hitting or choking you. Whoops, I hosed up. That is quite literally false and stupid and wrong.

flakeloaf fucked around with this message at 04:24 on Feb 6, 2016

ductonius
Apr 9, 2007
I heard there's a cream for that...

Seat Safety Switch posted:

"no wardens around, gonna shoot me a doe"

More like "no warden around, gonna kill moose until I find one that I like" and it takes them fifteen dead moose to find it.

Or some guy plugs eight [forest herbivore] and then calls everyone he knows with a tag out to make it 'legal'.

cheese sandwich
Feb 9, 2009

It's not assault if she liked it :v:

Postess with the Mostest
Apr 4, 2007

Arabian nights
'neath Arabian moons
A fool off his guard
could fall and fall hard
out there on the dunes

flakeloaf posted:

I put more stock in her statement today that she didn't consent to being treated that way at the time than I put in his lawyer's allegation that things she said after the fact could be taken to mean that she did

That's exactly it. It would have really helped the prosecution if Lucy had mentioned those notes before seeing the first witness shredded in cross examination.

I think he's guilty but I don't think her testimony is going to help prove that. Hopefully the next witness is better but it sounds like she remembered some stuff today too.

B33rChiller
Aug 18, 2011




Cultural Imperial posted:

wow that's racist who are you to judge chinese traditional medicine

"chinese traditional medicine" ie. Shoot an elk, and leave it to rot in the woods.

Meat Recital
Mar 26, 2009

by zen death robot

Black Bones posted:


http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2016/02/05/cross-examination-of-lucy-decoutere-continues-at-jian-ghomeshi-trial.html

"As reporters lined up outside the courthouse early on Friday morning, a young man with a skateboard ran up the steps and began banging on the doors and muttering threats and insults at the waiting group. He removed a power tool from his bag, turned it on and was in the process of reaching into his bag again when he was tackled by a reporter. The police were called and escorted the man away in handcuffs."

yessss everyone go crazy

Given this is the Ghomeshi trial, I hope it was a power tool with a dildo on the end.

bunnyofdoom
Mar 29, 2008

I've been here the whole time, and you're not my real Dad! :emo:
It was a power saw without a blade.

PT6A
Jan 5, 2006

Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

flakeloaf posted:

No. Assault is by definition an unwanted touch, but you can definitely consent to someone hitting or choking you.

Really? I'd always heard that, with relation to things like BDSM, you actually could not consent to being hit, legally speaking. I think it's a difficult subject, because obviously the ability to consent to assault could be used to cover up abuse, but on the other hand I don't think consensual behaviour between people of sound mind should be illegal unless it causes serious injury. I'm actually interested in this: can anyone cite a Canadian precedent either way?

flakeloaf
Feb 26, 2003

Still better than android clock

Now you've got me thinking about it too, and it turns out I'm pretty much dead wrong.

R v Welch 1995 ON CA posted:

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/1995/1995canlii282/1995canlii282.html

The trial judge was correct in removing the defence of consent as a consideration from the jury in respect of the charge of sexual assault causing bodily harm. Both the English and Canadian Law Reform Commissions would have Parliament enact legislation that recognizes consent as a defence to an assault except where serious injuries result, with long-term consequences, and the American Model Penal Code proposes consent as a defence where the harm is "not serious". However, a victim cannot consent to the infliction of bodily harm upon himself or herself unless the accused is acting in the course of a generally approved social purpose when inflicting the harm. The consent of the complainant in this case, assuming that it was given, could not detract from the inherently degrading and dehumanizing nature of the conduct. Although the law must recognize individual freedom and autonomy, when the activity in question involves pursuing sexual gratification by deliberately inflicting pain upon another that gives rise to bodily harm, then the personal interest of the individuals involved must yield to the more compelling societal interests which are challenged by such behaviour.

[snip]
Section 273.1 defining "consent" makes it clear that the consent as defined applies not only to sexual assault (s. 271) and sexual assault with a weapon (s. 272) but also to aggravated sexual assault (s. 273). In the latter case, a person committing the sexual assault also assaults, wounds, maims, disfigures or endangers the life of the complainant. As I have suggested earlier, the public policy considerations stressed in Jobidon would vitiate consent as a defence to a sexual assault where the complainant suffered the serious injuries necessary to support the offence of aggravated assault.

Even if the complainant had consented to the act or acts of sexual intercourse, which is not the finding made herein, there is no evidence that she consented to the infliction of the bodily harm which she sustained upon her person. If the facts had resulted in a finding of consent to the infliction of bodily harm, public policy considerations would vitiate a defence based on such a consent.

:words:

The common law authorities to which I have referred do not sanction such conduct.

"R v AJ 2008 ON CJ 195 posted:

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/2008/2008oncj195/2008oncj195.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAPY29uc2VudCBjaG9raW5nAAAAAAE&resultIndex=6

The common law has “set limits on the types of harmful actions to which one can validly consent, and shelter an assailant from the sanctions of our criminal law” (par.43). The Court acknowledged that courts have long recognized limits on consent to assault: “It is not in the public interest that adults should willingly cause harm to one another without a good reason”( par.110). The Court acknowledged that such limits on the freedoms of adults may seem “paternalistic, a violation of individual self-rule”. However it concluded that our law does have such limitations because “criminal law is paternalistic, to some degree- top down guidance is inherent in any prohibitive rule” (par.120).

In Jobidon, the Court vitiated consent between adults intentionally applying force to cause serious hurt or non trivial bodily harm to each other in the course of a fight. However it did reflect that “further limitations will be found to apply in other circumstances”. It went on to suggest that a criminal charge would be barred in cases where “ the activities have pro social value and the intent of the actors is to produce a social benefit for the good of the people involved..” ( par. 128). Finally, it clarified that consent will only be nullified in cases where the actions cause “any hurt or injury to the complainant that interferes with the health or comfort of the complainant and that is more than mere transient or trifling in nature” as per s.267(2) of the Code.

I was extrapolating from the "You can consent to a surgeon cutting into you and a boxer can consent to being punched in the face, so therefore..." but numerous courts have explicitly disagreed with that thinking. Even if you both agree you consented to being choked unconscious or being beaten during sex, judges have said that this consent literally doesn't count and the person who beat you is guilty anyway.

I learned a thing today; thanks PT6A!

flakeloaf fucked around with this message at 04:24 on Feb 6, 2016

Postess with the Mostest
Apr 4, 2007

Arabian nights
'neath Arabian moons
A fool off his guard
could fall and fall hard
out there on the dunes

PT6A posted:

I'm actually interested in this: can anyone cite a Canadian precedent either way?

There was a UFC in Toronto.

PT6A
Jan 5, 2006

Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

Ikantski posted:

There was a UFC in Toronto.

Fair point. I wonder if martial arts are covered separately from, shall we say, domestic situations. Any kind of MMA or boxing competition has doctors on-site and is being observed by arguably neutral observers, so I think it's a completely different situation anyway.

Unfortunately, I think this is a situation where someone always gets hosed over, no matter what you do. Either you end up protecting abusers, or you end up prosecuting people who were legitimately involved in consensual striking (or whatever you want to call it).

flakeloaf
Feb 26, 2003

Still better than android clock

Notwithstanding that MRAs and their stupid ideas about "rape by regret" can all gently caress off, such a thing has been spotted in this country: Remember that woman who let her husband render her unconscious and then have sex with her getting mad at him later and having him charged? That's your zebra-unicorn, folks.

Ghomeshi's an ordinary horse.

Postess with the Mostest
Apr 4, 2007

Arabian nights
'neath Arabian moons
A fool off his guard
could fall and fall hard
out there on the dunes

PT6A posted:

Fair point. I wonder if martial arts are covered separately from, shall we say, domestic situations. Any kind of MMA or boxing competition has doctors on-site and is being observed by arguably neutral observers, so I think it's a completely different situation anyway.

A competition does and is monitored by the athletic commission. There are lots of mma and boxing gyms where people spar with no supervision very legally. That's the comparison that usually gets drawn.

Legit Businessman
Sep 2, 2007


.

Legit Businessman fucked around with this message at 16:51 on Sep 9, 2022

flakeloaf
Feb 26, 2003

Still better than android clock

They've both agreed that the assault choking and hitting took place. He alleges it was consensual. The case law I hamfistedly quoted (I am quite obviously not a lawyer) seems to suggest that you can't consent to anything that might be aggravated assault, which was mentioned in the same breath as chokey sex. Is this poor judge going to have to wade into those waters again to offer a new opinion on whether choking and hitting during sex would be the sorts of things one could legally consent to? Do the opinions offered in Welch and JA not support the idea that we still can't consent to certain things that might be bad for us?

I'm not getting in your face here, I honestly do want to know because I clearly don't understand it and I like ending the day smarter than I was when it started :)

quote:

Remember that we like to think that a dozen guilty people go free before a single innocent person is found guilty in our criminal justice system. This is why we have "proof beyond a reasonable doubt". Is it reasonable that someone who was assaulted would then turn around and send bikini pictures to the person that assaulted her? .

On the other hand, stress is a normal reaction to an abnormal situation and everyone reacts differently to it. My knowledge of the intricacies of case law is pretty pitiful but I know enough about victims to know that trying to crawl inside their heads is a crap shoot. The objective reasonableness of her actions is wiiiiide open to interpretation and who knows how the judge is going to take that. Her inconsistent statements create problems that are a lot easier for layfolks to predict; they demand answers and they raise doubt. That's the defense's job, and he's quite entitled to be asking those questions.

Somebody fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Sep 9, 2022

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

SulfurMonoxideCute
Feb 9, 2008

I was under direct orders not to die
🐵❌💀

Seat Safety Switch posted:

I haven't heard of the increased poaching before, is that just like casual "no wardens around, gonna shoot me a doe" or more professional stuff?

http://m.metronews.ca/#/article/news/calgary/2014/02/04/illegal-grizzly-bear-slayings-soar-in-2013-alberta-officials.html

Looks professional, bear gall bladders are a traditional medicine thing. This happened after the 2012 budget slashes for park funding and there were mass layoffs of park employees, including wardens. Poaching is often found areas that aren't under federal protection, but with the lack of wardens to protect the park grizzlies, it just opened up way more opportunity to exploit different populations in remote areas where they're less likely to get caught.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply