I think we have to face the fact some statements by the witnesses in the Ghomeshi trial were in fact inconsistent.
I think it’s important to make sure it’s remembered that
1- the judge states jumbled statements by traumatized witnesses to be “of little concern” to their credibility.
2- The judge acknowledges that the behaviour of victims may not follow the expectations.
Did you know…
One of the witnesses denied what she said to the police after the video of her saying it was played in court. (para 32)
It’s not that the statements contradicted evidence. It was that the statements contradicted previous statements, all of which given with confidence, comfort, and under oath (para 65).
The story told with very consistent confusion multiple times was suddenly very clear when told in court. (para 63)
The witness swore she was never playful with the accused after the abuse. Emails to the contrary surfaced. (para 82-84)
I believe you see my point. But you can read the judgment here http://www.ontariocourts.ca/en/24Mar16.pdf
I think it’s important to note, for the current and future Canadians, that maybe those witnesses were inconsistent beyond what was reasonable as a victim. That the inconsistencies discussed here doesn’t apply to other victims and that they can come forward without worrying about their accusations turning into a Ghomeshi trial.
The thing is… how to do that while being sensitive to these witnesses who are going through true hell.