Article content continued

She is one of three women behind five charges against Ghomeshi — four counts of sexual assault and one count of overcoming resistance by choking. He’s pleaded not guilty.

Continue reading…

[/np_storybar]

To get there, Ontario Court Justice William Horkins would have had to overlook no fewer than a dozen major, glaring inconsistencies in testimony — along with a handful of what he assessed to be deliberate lies — from the women on which the entire case was based. There was no physical evidence: no pictures taken after the alleged assaults, no hospital records, no DNA. A conviction, thus, would have to rely on sworn testimony from credible witnesses, based on recollections of events from more than a decade ago — stories that had been told and re-told in the media several times over, before the Crown would even get a chance to deliver its opening statements. It’s a wonder, actually, that this case ever made it to trial.

To find Ghomeshi guilty of sexually assaulting the first witness, Justice Horkins would have had to ignore the fact that she situated the alleged assault in a car that Ghomeshi didn’t own at the time of the alleged incident. He would have had to accept the notion that she forgot that she sent Ghomeshi a picture of herself in a bikini after allegedly being assaulted again at his home — which is theoretically possible — even though she told police no fewer than six times that she had no further contact with him. And he would have had to overlook the fact that her version of events “shifted significantly” from one media interview to the next.