"This is why we don't come forward" women say after Ghomeshi not guilty decision

[Anonymous1038853]

You're cute but no, us working adults do things like consult on cases where a company was counter suing for malicious damages, and first had to clear themselves of complete wrongdoing in the related charge, not just general lack of evidence to convict, to then be able to counter sue.

I'm becoming increasingly convinced that your brain just blacks out whenever you encounter some inconvenient rhetoric. I wasn't talking about a civil lawsuit, Batman. Perjury is a criminal offense. The crown is responsible for prosecution. That's literally the whole point of the sentence following the one you acknowledged, and the central focus of the response as a whole. You're literally "correcting" me with a point that I already addressed. Maybe if you spent less time groaning about how everyone else supposedly can't read, you wouldn't look so bad when you only acknowledge half of a given argument (And the blatantly facetious half, no less).

[chewie49]

sounds like to me, he had his day in court and was found innocent. so what any of us (including the protesters) thinks or feels or believes is irrelevant. what matters is he was tried and cleared. so any further unsubstantiated claims are just slander at this point

[THE Bigzoman]

HEY.

HEY.

Hey.

Presumption of innocence, innocence, acquittal, guilt, Bill Clinton, and internet circle jerking are ALL THE EXACT SAME THING. Don't you question me you SJW. Feminists are wrong about everything in the world ever. If Bill Clinton couldn't get a little nene in the oval office, then we can't bring ourselves to understand differences in terminology!

I'm pretty sure I gave a serious post to the actual discussion here:

People have the prove a negative idea wrong.

It's possible to prove a negative. It just takes a lot of resources and unheard of scenarios occuring to do so.


Do martians exist? Judging from what we've seen thus far, probably not. But we'd have to check every corner of the universe and fail to find anything we could identify as a martian to say this with 100 percent certainty .

Is quantity demanded/supplied a function of price? Probably, given centuries of economic analysis showing a strong inverse relationship between the two.

The best we can do in cases like this--and all of science/philosophy for that matter--is affirm whether something is probable or not. Isn't that why college faculty use jury decisions as an analogy to explain rejecting and failing to to reject a null hypothesis?

But we've pretty much been at square one since the thread started.

You can address that, or maybe even Bones since he says what I say only smarter and in a more excessively worded manner most of the time anyway.

If not, that's fine to. Just be sure you add quality funny-shit posts to mine instead of attaching serious responses to them.

[Mehrunes]

Are you saying that you've previously stood trial for sexual harassment, Batman?

Or are you just pretending to be a lawyer on the Internet, while freely conflating a civil defamation lawsuit with a crown prosecution for perjury? Between the two of us, you're the only one relying on some unsubstantiated claim of expertise to make your argument for you. In contrast, I've been very detailed and explicit in my points. Let me know when you want to actually address them, rather than spewing abject bullshit.

What's next? You'll ask him to stop breathing?

[Ol Scratch]

I've always found it interesting that some people hold the view that as soon as it comes to crimes of a sexual nature the whole innocent until proven guilty bit should be flung out the nearest window. Lets just hope the fools never actually win this particular argument, I'd really rather the guilty go free than the innocent be imprisoned.

But they're women, man! Women never lie, they have no need to! They're the most purest, magical creatures in all of creation! If they say something it happened, it simply had to have happened exactly as described, no matter how much or how often that description changes from telling to telling! Women are flawless, don't you get it?!

Plus all men are potential rapists, so of course when one is accused of rape it's automatically true. It's their nature. Would you be doubtful if you heard of a tiger attacking a gazelle? No? Same diff! Duh.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Nope.
They have to prove the other party intentionally and maliciously lied.
its entirely possible for you to be completely guilty while doing so -

And to prove that it was a malicious lie, they have to provide a lot of evidence of different facts. If it was apparent they were at least somewhat involved in contention/at odds with the other party, then that "deliberate" or malicious lie could instead be a heated misunderstanding between the two parties. Lack of evidence to convict and evidence of complete non-involvement in any altercation whatsoever are again, important distinctions. Legal battles are very careful and meticulous about wording and compartmentalization of issues, which apparently nobody here is remotely capable of understanding. In the court of MMO-OT anti-SJW circle jerk, it apparently doesn't matter, so all them dirty feministas would be in jail for the crime of being feminists.

[Deleted]

Ghomeshi's scum. And a cautionary tale for anyone who thinks Canada is progressive. We're not; we're just as sexist and bigoted as anyone else.

how does this fucking nonsense parse in your head even?
How in the world can one persons actions be reflective of literally the entire country? - Even your fucking retarded PM 'its the current year' isn't representative of the entire country.

[Anonymous1038853]

Legal battles are very careful and meticulous about wording and compartmentalization of issues, which apparently nobody here is remotely capable of understanding. In the court of MMO-OT anti-SJW circle jerk, it apparently doesn't matter, so all them dirty feministas would be in jail for the crime of being feminists.

Oh my lord. Spare us your pseudo-intellectual drivel.

[Cthulhu 2020]

I'm pretty sure I gave a serious post to the actual discussion here:





But we've pretty much been at square one since the thread started.

You can address that, or maybe even Bones since he says what I say only smarter and in a more excessively worded manner most of the time anyway.

If not, that's fine to. Just be sure you add quality funny-shit posts to mine instead of attaching serious responses to them.

I'm pretty sure mostly serious posts stopped many pages ago. Bones made an interesting word soup, but it was several paragraphs all saying the same thing from different angles. To some armchair lawyer, presumption of innocence, innocence, and acquittal are all the same thing. In a series of legal battles, they all carry extremely distinct meanings. Bones could yell at a Judge all day about them being the same thing, and still be no less wrong about it.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh my lord. Spare us your pseudo-intellectual drivel.

I'm sure you'd fare extremely well in court claiming that presumption of innocence, innocence, not guilty, and acquittals are all exactly the same thing. Why you may very well just turn our legal system on its head with how wordy and long winded you can get saying the exact same thing!

[Dextroden]

And to prove that it was a malicious lie, they have to provide a lot of evidence of different facts. If it was apparent they were at least somewhat involved in contention/at odds with the other party, then that "deliberate" or malicious lie could instead be a heated misunderstanding between the two parties. Lack of evidence to convict and evidence of complete non-involvement in any altercation whatsoever are again, important distinctions. Legal battles are very careful and meticulous about wording and compartmentalization of issues, which apparently nobody here is remotely capable of understanding. In the court of MMO-OT anti-SJW circle jerk, it apparently doesn't matter, so all them dirty feministas would be in jail for the crime of being feminists.

You know, it's hilarious that you complain about being treated like a shitposter and then leave this here.

Also that you do it in a criminal case where the accusers were caught with massive inconsistencies and red flags in their stories. But hey, it's just women hating. It's not like people don't want the justice system to get worse to appease psychopathic protesters.

[Deleted]

And to prove that it was a malicious lie, they have to provide a lot of evidence of different facts. If it was apparent they were at least somewhat involved in contention/at odds with the other party, then that "deliberate" or malicious lie could instead be a heated misunderstanding between the two parties. Lack of evidence to convict and evidence of complete non-involvement in any altercation whatsoever are again, important distinctions. Legal battles are very careful and meticulous about wording and compartmentalization of issues, which apparently nobody here is remotely capable of understanding. In the court of MMO-OT anti-SJW circle jerk, it apparently doesn't matter, so all them dirty feministas would be in jail for the crime of being feminists.

Literally nothing you said had any relation to what i said.
Again then, They have to prove the other party maliciously lied, this may effectively be to prove their innocence, but does not necessarily require it.
this is once again ignoring that what you are talking about is a civil suit for defamation, or legal harassment, false testimony, and not the criminal charge of the false accusation - Are you aware of the distinction between civil law and criminal law?

[Anonymous1038853]

I'm sure you'd fare extremely well in court claiming that presumption of innocence, innocence, not guilty, and acquittals are all exactly the same thing. Why you may very well just turn our legal system on its head with how wordy and long winded you can get saying the exact same thing!

Acquittal is with respect to a specific charge. Innocence is the default status in the absence of proven guilt. One can be without innocence, and acquitted of a given charge, so the terms are not strictly analogous.

Jesus fuck people have this thing about reading that it's like... really hard.

[Mehrunes]

Legal battles are very careful and meticulous about wording and compartmentalization of issues, which apparently nobody here is remotely capable of understanding. In the court of MMO-OT anti-SJW circle jerk, it apparently doesn't matter, so all them dirty feministas would be in jail for the crime of being feminists.

Nobody but you, of course. The chosen one

[Cthulhu 2020]

You know, it's hilarious that you complain about being treated like a shitposter and then leave this here.

Also that you do it in a criminal case where the accusers were caught with massive inconsistencies and red flags in their stories. But hey, it's just women hating. It's not like people don't want the justice system to get worse to appease psychopathic protesters.

Please.

My hyperbole there was tame compared to some of the other crap in this thread. I'm actually intimidated here. No truly, I am. It's really scary. I'm up against grand masters of the shitpost, who will run and hide when there's less than 5 of them together, crying "mods gonna get me if I don't stop!"

[Deleted]

i love your written posts too

I really love your gif responses Bones

[Cthulhu 2020]

Posting random pics is considered spam and against the forum rules. Just thought I'd warn you so we don't have a "mods are bias!" cry.

Might want to go back and edit your post with some content so you don't think the modluminati are targeting you.

[Dextroden]

Uh oh. Looks like somebody is a Mr. Grumpy Gills. (Curse you, Finding Nemo.)

But, seriously Bones, why are you trying to seriously discuss this with Batman? I mean fuck, I was in that stupid college thread with you when he admitted he was there to shitpost.

[Anonymous1038853]

But, seriously Bones, why are you trying to seriously discuss this with Batman?

The only reason I've written up this lecture is for third-party readers, anyway.

I regard everyone seriously. I am a very serious person.

But in all seriousness, my posts aren't really for him. He's clearly either delusional, or dishonest as demonstrated throughout this thread.

[Mehrunes]

Please.

My hyperbole there was tame compared to some of the other crap in this thread. I'm actually intimidated here. No truly, I am. It's really scary. I'm up against grand masters of the shitpost, who will run and hide when there's less than 5 of them together, crying "mods gonna get me if I don't stop!"

Speaking of which, I'm still waiting for your proof of me crying about mod bias because I got infracted. I mean, it's not like you'd be intellectually dishonest and post outright lies, right? Also, how comes a God Emperor of shitposting like yourself is intimidated by mere grand masters, even if there's five of them?

[Anonymous1038853]

Might want to go back and edit your post with some content so you don't think the modluminati are targeting you.

There is content. I've quoted myself to point out your blatant dishonesty (Not that you'd acknowledge that). The gif is supplementary.

If by some slim chance I'm infracted for using an image in tandem with my argument, then that actually would be an abuse of power.