Ghomeshi Trial – Will witness collusion be his ticket out?

“And by “collusion,” I don’t simply mean a conspiracy to lie. Collusion in law can include the kind of inadvertent tainting of someone’s evidence coming from the repeated exposure to another person’s version of events.”

Ghomeshi’s fortunes have turned

It was advertised as the Canadian media trial of the century, where the former star of CBC Radio’s Q was facing four counts of sexual assault and one of overcoming resistance by choking involving three women between 2002 and 2003. Only actress Lucy DeCoutere asked the court to lift the usual publication ban on her name. Similar stories, similar facts, they seemed to have power in their number.

And then they crashed and burned.


I don’t doubt that the women were assaulted without consent but the “omissions”  in testimony and the interactions between at least two of them have tainted their credibility.

Their gleefully expressed desire to see Ghomeshi get his just desserts isn’t going to help their cause either.

I know that the “assaults” have to be considered in isolation of the victim’s behavior pre and post incident.

But in light of all that has been revealed I doubt the judge could rule for conviction.

There appears to be a lot of blame to spread around among the police, the crown and the witnesses themselves.

It all looks like a politicized legal lynch mob was unleashed to punish a douchebag when public shaming had already done the job.

And then of course there’s the CBC and the media who aided and abetted Ghomeshi throughout his reign.

It reminds me a bit of the Sony email hack, it was fun to confirm that the folks running Hollywood really were scumbags.

This is Canada’s version and our “Stars” are even more pitiful given the pathetically small stakes involved.

No one looks good in this mess.

Let’s see what Twitter is up to.