Judging the Ghomeshi verdict
Jian Ghomeshi is not guilty and that’s that. The verdict delivered by Judge William Horkins was based on a careful examination of the truth behind the complainants’ accusations and that gives me assurance in our legal system.
“The shame brigade,” as columnist Rosie DIMANNO put it, does not represent the interests of victims of sexual assault, whether it is men or women; neither does it represent the attitudes and opinions of many women in general.
The deportment of the protesters in front of the courthouse on March 24 was deplorable. The topless woman displaying the message, “Women Declare Ghomeshi Guilty” does not represent my values as a woman.
Sexual assault is a serious problem. Lucy DeCoutere and her followers have turned it into a farce, and done nothing but a huge disservice to real victims who may need to seek justice in the court of law. DeCoutere and her followers need to stop blaming our legal system, Horkins, Marie Henein, the police, and the Crown for her own downfall.
The case is over. Victims of sexual assaults should not be scared away by this case. Instead, lessons could be learned about how best to prepare oneself for trial. Libuse Balogh, King City The justice system is in need of a major overhaul in terms of how it deals with cases of sexual assault. Victims of sexual assault should be treated with respect and dignity and not “blamed” for their assault. Memory, particularly over an extended period of time, can be fickle and unreliable.
Having said that, let’s respect real victims of sexual assault and not demean them by referring to the three complainants in the Ghomeshi trial as “victims.” Each one of them maintained a connection with the accused, either by words or actions, after the alleged assaults (as much as a year after).
The three, singly or collectively, lied, fabricated evidence, knowingly omitted evidence and conveniently “forgot” what they communicated in emails and letters. That they should be poster women for real sexual assault victims is a travesty. A.H. Shearer, Toronto Re Consent is still the key, Editorial March 25 Consent is not the “key” in the difference between rape and sex any more than it is the key between kidnapping and having someone over to your house, or between a holdup and giving someone a gift. By your — and the judge’s — definition, a battered woman who stays with her batterer was not really beaten; someone who develops Stockholm Syndrome was not really kidnapped; and someone who has been sexually or racially harassed but who does not quit their job was not really harassed. Their continued presence would be proof of their consent and thus the absence of a crime.
Force, coercion, power differences, fear, extortion, cultural expectations and a host of gendered and other social factors are also relevant in determining the difference between crimes and ordinary social interactions. Karen Wendling, Guelph, Ont. Soul searching is not enough. The odds of these three women making this conspiracy up is laughable. The system needs to change to work for the victims that we have, rather than the imaginary victims that we would like to have, and to ensure cases like this are prosecuted successfully. And the Star needs to be active in pushing for that change. Jason Dumelie, New York, N.Y. Re The troubling message from the Ghomeshi trial, Opinion March 25 It’s obvious that Anna Leventhal did not read the judgment of Judge Horkins as she totally missed his message. Horkins understood that victims of violence have complicated reactions to assaultive behaviour. He also knew that witnesses testifying to historical offences may have lapses of memory.
His real message was that “navigating” the criminal justice system “is really quite simple: tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.” Witnesses must do so to the best of their ability, from their initial complaint to police right through to the trial. This means answering fully direct questions put to them by police in initial investigations, not suppressing obviously relevant evidence, and not fraternizing with other witnesses so their evidence might be tainted by collusion.
As Horkins wrote, “the harsh reality is that once a witness has been shown to be deceptive and manipulative in giving their evidence, that witness can no longer expect the court to consider them to be a trusted source of the truth.”
Witnesses need only heed the real message of the Ghomeshi decision and the potential for a conviction will improve. Marion Lane, Toronto I stand with these three women. I have four daughters and one granddaughter. This is personal. The law has to change. What would the Supreme Court say? Elinor Egar Reynolds, Halifax, N.S. Re Time to drop distinct crime of sexual assault,
Opinion March 29 After reading Reid Rusonik’s article, I had tears in my eyes. Never has anyone so succinctly cleared up my many and conflicting thoughts about this subject, and the Ghomeshi case in particular. Sharon Riley, Niagara Falls I cannot sympathize with these women. Why should they be allowed to resurrect Ghomeshi’s alleged assaults when they were prepared to forgive them and pursue what might have been an even more violent relationship with him? There’s only so much you can do to protect people from their own bad decisions. Mirek A. Waraksa, Toronto Why do accused persons have the right to not take the stand in their own defence? Shouldn’t they be required to give evidence in their own words instead of hiding behind a lawyer? Wouldn’t this be a “fair and even” ground on which to base the evidence being considered? Mrs. Marva Chung, Mississauga It was indeed a sad and humiliating result for the victims. However, by lying and distorting the facts, the result could not have been other than it was. Frances Weingarten, Toronto Ghomeshi is probably guilty of being a creep, but based on the evidence he was obviously not guilty of what he was charged with. The system worked, as well as any system made by fallible human beings, can work. We should not change it, because an ideologically based social media hate campaign demands that we should. Marcus Shields, Brampton Now that Ghomeshi has been found not guilty, could we have him back at CBC Radio, hosting Q? Please. Kathy Millard, Toronto Once again women are told how they should behave. And reprimanded for not obeying the rules of engagement. And so the violence continues. Iva MacCausland, Woodstock, Ont. I understand the outrage over the Ghomeshi trial, but I think it should be directed at the Crown prosecutor, who did a terrible job. The judge had little choice, given the very bad case presented. Bruce Nagy, Toronto The cringe-inducing spectacle — women raked over the coals and humiliated; a man protected in a cloak of silence, asked no questions — must change. If Justin Trudeau is a feminist, this is his opportunity to act, to change the system. Judy Steed, Toronto
“The judge had little choice, given the very bad case presented.” BRUCE NAGY TORONTO
Re
Judge shreds the three women as he finds Ghomeshi not guilty, March 25 This headline is disturbing and misogynistic. The judge didn’t shred the women. He shredded their testimony. Your readers deserve objective and respectful reporting. In this case, we didn’t even have to read between the lines, we just had to read your front-page headline. Shame on you.
and Debra D’Souza, Keswick Re No justice for anyone with Ghomeshi verdict, March 26 I disagree with Edward Keenan. There is, it turns out, considerable justice with the Ghomeshi verdict.
Horkins ruled, in no uncertain terms, that the Canadian criminal justice system does not allow criminal defendants to be convicted on falsified statements to police and collusion among crown witnesses, both of which were clearly present in this case. That, as a prominent defence attorney covering the trial pointed out, is a significant victory in itself, not just for Ghomeshi, but for all accused.
The mind boggles as to how Keenan could possibly view such an outcome as a failure of the criminal justice system when in fact it was a resounding affirmation of exactly how the criminal justice system in this country is supposed to work. K. Alan Fenton, Toronto If this trial produced any good it was to emphasize once again the difference between law and justice. Law is a process whose application may or may not produce justice. We do not have courts of justice, but courts of law, supported, and occasionally restricted, by arcane rules of procedure. Justice by definition is never flawed, only denied at times in a court of law.
These descriptions would help the protesting public understand the sometimes bizarre judgment rendered by a court. Raymond Peringer, Toronto The attack on the legal standing of alleged victims of sexual violence brings to my mind the treatment of rape victims in Saudi Arabia, who are routinely punished for having brought violence upon themselves.
The reasoning, if one may call it that, is that the victim put herself in a situation where she was defenceless against the perpetrator. This is usually based on her having been outside the home without the requisite male accompaniment. Thus, courts grant her no legal standing, and she finds herself severely punished.
Make no mistake, the Ghomeshi verdict is a reactionary counterattack against years of progress in protection of victims of sexual violence. Al Eslami, North York The Ghomeshi trial offers useful lessons. We need to support women getting physical evidence (rape kits, drug tests, etc.) as soon as possible, give them the right to have this evidence held without charges laid until they are ready to proceed (to protect women in relationships and to give them time to get some perspective on the events), and provide support for women to strategically prepare their sworn statement.
The justice system is a battlefield, not a warm hug of compassion. This case progresses our collective understanding of how we can assist women to use this system more effectively. Andrew Bray, Toronto A good defence would not be very good if it allowed comments to go unchallenged, especially when there is evidence that disputes the version of events as remembered, lo, these many years later. That is not shocking. Time rarely stands still, events and circumstances change.
Join all the marches and protests if you want but it does not alter the verdict; it does not make it black and white, good conquers evil, etc. Catherine Hetu, Merlin, Ont. How silly of me. I thought Jian Ghomeshi was on trial, not the victims. Charles Dickens was right: “The law is an ass.” Mignon Elkins, Toronto