What a wild, weird week! The bodies from the Parliament Hill shootings and the Quebec murder-by-car had not been buried, their meaning not yet processed, when the CBC announced last Sunday it was severing ties with its most famous radio host, Jian Ghomeshi, for reasons unspecified.
By that evening, Ghomeshi had specified his version in a defiant Facebook post about his penchant for "consensual" "rough sex" and the "jilted ex-lover" out to get him. He would sue the CBC for $55 million.
By morning, the ping-pong of news/counter-news had careened into accusations far more sinister: not one ex-lover, but several women, all accusing Ghomeshi, not of consensual sex, but of unprovoked, unwanted violence.
Then events pin-balled. More women, more stories, eerily similar -- out-of-nowhere punches, face-turned teddy bears, "you-must-leave" to those who cried or complained. Debates about who knew what when; who should have done what before… the graphed torrent of "unlikes" on Ghomeshi's Facebook page… his crisis management team ditching him… brave women making public their j'accuse… the announcement of a police investigation…
It all reminded me of another time, another public figure, another story.
As with Ghomeshi, there had long been stories about 1970s Nova Scotia Premier Gerald Regan's relationships with women. But few knew details until someone -- a man whose own darker motivations were partisan and personal -- unleashed the genie from that bottle long after Regan had left office.
By the time it was over, in 1998, more than 30 women told police of Regan's alleged unwanted sexual advances, up to and including rape. There were charges. There was a trial on the most serious of them. In court, Regan's high-powered defence attorney grilled the accusers relentlessly. The jury, ultimately, found him not guilty.
But the jury of public opinion -- armed with the evidence presented in court under oath and cross-examined, including evidence the jury didn't hear -- was able to render its own informed verdict.
We shouldn't hold our breaths for a legal ending we may want in the Ghomeshi case. There are complicated rules about admissibility of evidence, legitimate, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt bars for conviction.
But due process is still the best process we have.
We should be grateful to the women who have taken the first brave step along that road.
This article first appeared in Stephen Kimber's Halifax Metro column.
Photo: Kat Hagedorn/flickr
Thank you for reading this story…
More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.
rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.
So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.
And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.