CanPol Megathread: Big Changus

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > CanPol Megathread: Big Changus

Jordan7hm: Feb 17, 2011; Lipstick Apathy

Ikantski posted:

I feel lucky to live in a society where the quality of evidence in the ghomeshi trial results in a not guilty. : Ghomeshi will be moving out of his mom's house shortly.

I read a pretty interesting take from a criminal defense attorney who said that despite it all the fact the defense never actually said the claims were false might end up preventing reasonable doubt on at least one or two of the charges. Apparently even in the closing statements the defense danced around saying he didn't do it.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 14:47

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 3, 2024 22:05

terrorist ambulance: Nov 5, 2009

Jordan7hm posted:

I read a pretty interesting take from a criminal defense attorney who said that despite it all the fact the defense never actually said the claims were false might end up preventing reasonable doubt on at least one or two of the charges. Apparently even in the closing statements the defense danced around saying he didn't do it.

Linku? That is a Correct Opinion

# ? Mar 24, 2016 14:52

Jordan7hm: Feb 17, 2011; Lipstick Apathy

terrorist ambulance posted:

Linku? That is a Correct Opinion

Phone posting. If I can find it again I'll link it.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 14:54

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

Jordan7hm posted:

I read a pretty interesting take from a criminal defense attorney who said that despite it all the fact the defense never actually said the claims were false might end up preventing reasonable doubt on at least one or two of the charges. Apparently even in the closing statements the defense danced around saying he didn't do it.

Just playing the devil's advocate but what would your defence be if somebody you dated filed a police report that you slapped them 13 years ago? Nuh-uh? The defence doesn't have to prove that Ghomeshi didn't put his hands on the girls neck, they just have to provide reasonable doubt and proving that the three witnesses were colluding and withheld significant, important information from their police reports seems to provide that. I don't think it adds much to have Jian on stand saying "Uh, no I didn't", I think that's kind of implicit in his not guilty plea. But yeah, I'd like that article too if you find it.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:05

flakeloaf: Feb 26, 2003; Still better than android clock

@sarahboesveld , ex NatPo and now Chatelaine writer, is livetweeting the judge's reasons pretty well

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/with_replies

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:08

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:

@sarahboesveld , ex NatPo and now Chatelaine writer, is livetweeting the judge's reasons pretty well

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/with_replies

https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vertical=news&q=ghomeshi&src=typd

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:11

flakeloaf: Feb 26, 2003; Still better than android clock

I find one person's coherent, literate account of what the judge is saying a lot easier to parse through than the cacophony of everyone saying the same thing amid a gaggle of whiny randos shouting about how they want to do horrible things to him, but to each his own.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:12

Jordan7hm: Feb 17, 2011; Lipstick Apathy

Ikantski posted:

Just playing the devil's advocate but what would your defence be if somebody you dated filed a police report that you slapped them 13 years ago? Nuh-uh? The defence doesn't have to prove that Ghomeshi didn't put his hands on the girls neck, they just have to provide reasonable doubt and proving that the three witnesses were colluding and withheld significant, important information from their police reports seems to provide that. I don't think it adds much to have Jian on stand saying "Uh, no I didn't", I think that's kind of implicit in his not guilty plea. But yeah, I'd like that article too if you find it.

If I didn't do it I would probably say that or have my defense say that.

Anyway it's here: http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/bl...e-attorney-says

quote:

He could have said to her, “I did these things,” in which case her hands are tied. She cannot tell the witness she lied. But she could question everything around it. So if Ghomeshi said, “I didn’t do this” or “It was consensual, we were kissing and she said, ‘Put your hands around my neck,’ ” then that’s a different story. But Henein didn’t put that to the complainants. If he had said, “I did do these things exactly as they are,” then it would have been very difficult for her to say, “You’re lying about these things.”

...

A: I wasn’t there for the first witness, but from what I read, and even in closing submissions, it was interesting because (the defence team’s) Danielle Robitaille didn’t say it was a lie, it didn’t happen.

But at the end Henein made a very clever final submission — she said the truth is between the lines. She didn’t say they lied. She said you cannot rely on what they said — which is an interesting closing. The judge is not being told it’s not true. But it may not be enough for reasonable doubt.

It was a very clever presentation of the evidence from the defence’s perspective. Sometimes she was skirting around the issue. And I think at the end of the day they made a bald assertion. They were helped by complainants who made terrible mistakes

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:18

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

quote:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/federal-budget-tax-haven-revenue-1.3504628?cmp=rss

Federal budget relies heavily on CRA recouping tax-haven revenues

Budget books billions in new tax revenues in areas where Canada Revenue Agency has poor track record

This week's federal budget is banking on $10 billion in new tax revenues over the next five years in areas where the Canada Revenue Agency has a poor track record: collecting bad debts and cracking down on offshore tax havens.

The Finance Department says recovering that money will cost the agency only about $800 million in extra staff and resources � for a better than 10-to-1 cash windfall for the federal treasury.

But some critics are sounding the alarm, saying the Liberal government should not be counting its chickens before they hatch.

Highlights of Bill Morneau's first budget
Analysis: Who are the Liberals' middle-class winners?
Analysis: From 'beer and popcorn' to 'most significant social policy'
"There are inherent risks with booking revenues in the fiscal framework before they are realized," said Sahir Khan, former assistant parliamentary budget officer and now at the University of Ottawa.

Dennis Howlett
Dennis Howlett, executive director of Canadians for Tax Fairness, welcomes the budget's new money for catching tax cheats, but wonders whether the agency can increase efforts as quickly as proposed. (CBC)

"There have been significant issues in the past from government proactively booking savings from efficiency initiatives before those savings were achieved, leading to program-integrity pressures."

The main budget document says the Canada Revenue Agency will get much better at collecting outstanding tax debts, recovering an extra $7.4 billion over the next five years, at an additional cost of just $352 million.

Increasing writeoffs

The agency, however, has been writing off increasingly large amounts of tax debt in recent years. Writeoffs hit $2.9 billion in 2014-15, the latest available Public Accounts figures, up 50 per cent from five years earlier.

The Finance Department has also booked another $2.6 billion in extra revenues from fresh efforts to "crack down on tax evasion and combat tax avoidance." Costs to recover that money are budgeted at $444 million.

The agency says it is creating a new branch on April 1 dedicated to aggressive tax planning, criminal investigations and new "strategies to combat offshore tax avoidance."

But critics have said the CRA actually treats the rich with kid gloves when it comes to tax havens.

'CRA's record on big tax-evasion cases has been abysmal'
- Dennis Howlett of Canadians for Tax Fairness
CBC recently exposed a secret 2015 deal the agency offered some wealthy investors who put millions of dollars in an Isle of Man tax shelter directed by KPMG. The deal allowed them to avoid the normal penalties by simply paying back taxes and modest interest on income they failed to declare.

Laval University tax professor Andre Lareau has said the deal should be withdrawn, and NDP Leader Tom Mulcair called for a probe into the KPMG affair.

Dennis Howlett, executive director of Canadians for Tax Fairness, said he welcomes the new money the Liberal government is putting into chasing down offshore tax cheats.

CBC Investigates: CRA offered amnesty to wealthy KPMG clients
Critics want hearings into CRA amnesty
KPMG tax 'sham' used by at least 25 wealthy Canadians: document
"Up to now, the CRA's record on big tax-evasion cases has been abysmal," he said. "Can CRA ramp up that quickly?"

The agency has been cutting its overall workforce faster than most other departments, with its latest spending plan calling for another 400 jobs eliminated.

Need transparency

Howlett said the agency not only needs to beef up its own auditing staff, but the Justice Department should hire more prosecutors to take offshore tax cheats to court.

"Now, none of them get taken to court," he said. "They've got to take some of these big-time tax cheats to court and make an example of them."

Mostafa Askari, the assistant parliamentary budget officer, questioned how the government was able to put uncertain tax-haven revenues in the budget.

CANADA-POLITICS/
Revenue Minister Diane Lebouthillier's office provided no details on how the Canada Revenue Agency plans to increase tax revenues by $10 billion over five years. (Chris Wattie/Reuters)

"It's not very safe to book that kind of revenue ahead of time," he said, adding that the government needs at least to provide more details on how and when the agency will produce the additional revenue.

"There are certainly some issues there in transparency."

Asked for details on the initiative, a spokeswoman for National Revenue Minister Diane Lebouthillier said only that the minister is "confident that budget 2016 proposes important investments to prevent tax evasion and improve compliance to ensure all Canadian taxpayers pay their fair share."

"Not taking action here results in a cost to governments and taxpayers which reduces the fairness and integrity on the tax system," Chloe Luciani-Girouard said in an email.

The Liberal budget counting on 10B from tax cheats you say. Let's look at prior history

quote:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/cra-kpmg-anger-at-secret-deal-1.3479792

CBC INVESTIGATES

Secret tax deal for wealthy KPMG clients sparked anger inside Canada Revenue Agency

Canada Revenue Agency offered amnesty in $130 million offshore 'sham'

Both the tax cheats and the facilitator walked away without penalty :lol:

@ budget

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:28

Jordan7hm: Feb 17, 2011; Lipstick Apathy

They collected the money though. Which is the revenue that the feds are banking on, not additional penalties or fees.

e: or rather, the amnesty was in exchange for the money. I dunno if everyone took them up on that or what

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:30

velvet milkman: Feb 13, 2012; by R. Guyovich

https://twitter.com/HilaryBeaumont/status/713010353010040833
Jesus

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:33

Frosted Flake: Sep 13, 2011; Semper Shitpost Ubique

Can someone break down the credibility issues with the witnesses? I understand broadly why consistency is important but witness 1 seems to have forgotten minor details.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:38

Jordan7hm: Feb 17, 2011; Lipstick Apathy

Trees and Squids posted:

https://twitter.com/HilaryBeaumont/status/713010353010040833
Jesus

Nobody deserves to be hit especially in the context of sexual violence but holy gently caress she is dumb.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:38

Frosted Flake: Sep 13, 2011; Semper Shitpost Ubique

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/status/713011982861905920

e: As a serving Captain in the RCAF, what could the implications of Lucy's lack of credibility be?

Frosted Flake fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Mar 24, 2016

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:40

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

Frosted Flake posted:

Can someone break down the credibility issues with the witnesses? I understand broadly why consistency is important but witness 1 seems to have forgotten minor details.

Witness #1:

Sent him a bunch of hangout emails after the SA, didn't mention that to police

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/status/713008671043641346

Witness #2:

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/status/713011377053388804 and see above

Witness #3:

Apparently gave him a handy in the car sometime after the SA but also did not include that in police report. #2 and #3 sent thousands of facebook messages to each other lining their stories up.

Edit: Whoa

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/status/713012466972659712

Postess with the Mostest fucked around with this message at 15:45 on Mar 24, 2016

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:42

flakeloaf: Feb 26, 2003; Still better than android clock

Frosted Flake posted:

e: As a serving Captain in the RCAF, what could the implications of Lucy's lack of credibility be?

Lacking credibility isn't a service offense. If her boss wanted to be a jerk about it, (s)he could consider it a leadership failure but that'd be one hell of a stretch. Witnesses/complainants in SA cases who straight-up lie are, so far as I know, basically never charged with mischief or perjury.

e:

https://twitter.com/HilaryBeaumont/status/713014674455969793

:ohdear:

flakeloaf fucked around with this message at 15:54 on Mar 24, 2016

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:51

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

Jordan7hm posted:

Nobody deserves to be hit especially in the context of sexual violence but holy gently caress she is dumb.

It's not always "deserves." Some people are into that kind of thing.

Like sex itself, it should only ever be done consensually, though.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:52

Frosted Flake: Sep 13, 2011; Semper Shitpost Ubique

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/status/713013922547171328

jfc Lucy!

e:

flakeloaf posted:

Lacking credibility isn't a service offense. If her boss wanted to be a jerk about it, (s)he could consider it a leadership failure but that'd be one hell of a stretch. Witnesses/complainants in SA cases who straight-up lie are, so far as I know, basically never charged with mischief or perjury.

Ah okay. Still not a great situation to be in, I'm sure.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:52

flakeloaf: Feb 26, 2003; Still better than android clock

Frosted Flake posted:

Ah okay. Still not a great situation to be in, I'm sure.

Definitely not. Having a judge conclude you "deliberately intended to mislead the Court" isn't the sort of thing you want to see on a promotable PER.

e: I suppose it could also be scandalous/disgraceful conduct by officer, but again... find the will to actually charge her.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:55

Frosted Flake: Sep 13, 2011; Semper Shitpost Ubique

flakeloaf posted:

Definitely not. Having a judge conclude you "deliberately intended to mislead the Court" isn't the sort of thing you want to see on a promotable PER.

Or this.

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/status/713015119681171456

I would not want to be the first pte she sees when she gets back to work. drat.

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/status/713015336526712832

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:56

flakeloaf: Feb 26, 2003; Still better than android clock

Meh. You're allowed to want to gently caress any way you like. If she wasn't blowing the bottle in uniform, nobody at work ought to care. (They totally will)

Also yeah I don't see a lot of eye contact in her future at work.

https://twitter.com/HilaryBeaumont/status/713016287014883328

:stonk:

# ? Mar 24, 2016 15:58

Jordan7hm: Feb 17, 2011; Lipstick Apathy

She treated the whole thing like a PR campaign from the very beginning and it was weird then (the interview on the current especially) and it's weird now.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 16:10

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

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/status/713020225080287232

# ? Mar 24, 2016 16:12

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

At the very least what I've gathered from the trial is that single celebrities don't need to swipe right to get their Netflix and chill on. I wonder how Netflix and chill would be if you were watching your own show on Netflix at the moment :psypop:

# ? Mar 24, 2016 16:13

Frosted Flake: Sep 13, 2011; Semper Shitpost Ubique

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/status/713020596435615745

Well, that's it then.

e: It seems like he's starting a discussion about how reasonable doubt works and the job of the Crown.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 16:15

flakeloaf: Feb 26, 2003; Still better than android clock

Frosted Flake posted:

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/status/713020596435615745

Well, that's it then.

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/status/713021303809150977

And I'll form the head!

# ? Mar 24, 2016 16:16

flakeloaf: Feb 26, 2003; Still better than android clock

https://twitter.com/HilaryBeaumont/status/713023822069424128

And there it is, goodnight everybody

# ? Mar 24, 2016 16:26

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

These sluts were literally asking for it so why are you all confused :confused:

# ? Mar 24, 2016 16:29

Frosted Flake: Sep 13, 2011; Semper Shitpost Ubique

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/status/713024020384354304

Ouch. With no material evidence those witnesses did not do the Crown any favours.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 16:30

Kafka Esq.: Jan 1, 2005; "If you ever even think about calling me anything but 'The Crab' I will go so fucking crab on your ass you won't even see what crab'd your crab" -The Crab(TM)

Cultural Imperial posted:

These sluts were literally asking for it so why are you all confused

Agreeing with a CI post.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 16:32

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

I wonder how much hhllp got paid for the trial.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 16:37

Kenny Logins: Jan 11, 2011; EVERY MORNING I WAKE UP AND OPEN PALM SLAM A WHITE WHALE INTO THE PEQUOD. IT'S HELL'S HEART AND RIGHT THEN AND THERE I STRIKE AT THEE ALONGSIDE WITH THE MAIN CHARACTER, ISHMAEL.

Acquitted all charges. The real winner: HHLLP.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 16:46

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

Cultural Imperial posted:

These sluts were literally asking for it so why are you all confused

I stopped paying attention to this circus act after Big Ears Teddy did it really come to light that these girls were literally asking for it?

If so God drat.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 16:52

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

EvilJoven posted:

I stopped paying attention to this circus act after Big Ears Teddy did it really come to light that these girls were literally asking for it?

If so God drat.

https://twitter.com/sarahboesveld/status/713015336526712832

# ? Mar 24, 2016 16:54

Frosted Flake: Sep 13, 2011; Semper Shitpost Ubique

If anyone is in Ottawa, Carleton is having a panel discussion this afternoon.

http://carleton.ca/fpa/event/grappling-with-ghomeshi-the-day-the-verdict-comes-down/

Title could be better...

# ? Mar 24, 2016 16:56

Pinterest Mom: Jun 9, 2009

https://twitter.com/BorkowskiNews/status/713023374625218560
:canada:

# ? Mar 24, 2016 17:04

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

carleton: still a garbage university

# ? Mar 24, 2016 17:06

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

Pinterest Mom posted:

https://twitter.com/BorkowskiNews/status/713023374625218560

lol this judge literally moderates r/mra

# ? Mar 24, 2016 17:06

mik: Oct 16, 2003; oh

Pinterest Mom posted:

https://twitter.com/BorkowskiNews/status/713023374625218560

Uh, isn't the stereotype the exact opposite? That women who file sexual assault complains are just having morning-after regrets? Christ

# ? Mar 24, 2016 17:07

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 3, 2024 22:05

The Gunslinger: Jul 24, 2004; Do not forget the face of your father.; Fun Shoe

I think he means the calls in the media for some sort of separate legislation for sexual assault victims. There have been a few disturbing articles in the press since the trial started that seemed to be saying there should be a presumption of guilt.

I don't see anything wrong with his ruling, they all undermined their own credibility and the Crown/Police did a poo poo job investigating.

# ? Mar 24, 2016 17:10

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > CanPol Megathread: Big Changus

«‹›2341 »