NDP MP Breaks Silence On Allegations Against Liberal MPs

[captain morgan]

Here is what I find troubling about this. Anyone can make an accusation against anyone. For instance: If Twila accuses me of sexual assault, but doesn't lay charges and there is no trial, should I be destroyed publicly with no way of defending myself?

Without charges this is still a "he said she said." If true, she should lay charges. If she doesn't lay charges, then Trudeau acted on hearsay and therefore acted without just cause. Innocent until proved guilty.

There are many 'IF' scenarios that can be applied.

It is conceivable that the Lib MP could have come forward first and made some form of complaint as well... Sure, he would not be taken seriously by the media, society, etc but this brings into question exactly how the consent issue is considered overall.

Probably fair to say that it's not so much mutual consent as much as it is 1 party consent

 

[relic]

Rcs, man you're trying some hard to pin this on Trudeau.

 

[captain morgan]

 

[Colpy]

As the accusation is sexual assault and not simply sexual harassment, I have a little more sympathy for Trudeau's position.

Yes, innocent until proven guilty.

Yes, the accusation itself is more than a little sketchy......as she did not say no, she just didn't say yes.

But imagine, for a moment, that Trudeau shrugged it off.........and then it became public. He would be crucified. Bye-bye lady vote.

Troubling.....why in the world would a woman not simply say no to sex she did not want?

It makes absolutely no sense.

I still think Justin went off half-cocked, and should have dealt with this in private, but he is a "progressive", and as such must play to the (idiotic) progressive masses, who would crucify him if the accusation ever became public.

An untenable position.

 

[Colpy]

The NDP MP said she played on a sports team with Mr. Pacetti and that after a team event in March, Mr. Pacetti invited her to his hotel room for a drink. “We do not have real homes [in Ottawa], so it’s not abnormal to go to a hotel room,” the MP said.
Once inside, she sat in a chair while Mr. Pacetti sat on the bed, she said, adding that she had been drinking but was not drunk.
“At one point, he pointed to the part beside him, of the bed, and said come here... I just said, no, I’m really fine on my chair,” she said. She then went to the washroom “to try to think what to do, to leave,” she said.
“I was just trying to think, to think what I will do, but it was clear at that point I didn’t want to have sex with him. And, in my head, he wanted to have sex.” She decided to leave, and went back into the room, past Mr. Pacetti, she said.
“He just grabbed me when I passed near to him, and then we had sex with no explicit consent from me. I froze, in fact,” said the MP, who explained she was a victim of assault in the past. “...It was late, I was tired… It makes you unable to think really fast, losing control of how to react.”
The NDP MP provided a condom and said she did not say yes or no to Mr. Pacetti’s advances. Initiatives launched in Canada in recent years, including at universities and by police forces, have stressed the importance of explicit consent as part of so-called “yes means yes” campaigns.
After intercourse, the NDP MP said, she dressed and left the hotel. She was in pain for three days afterward, she said, but chose not to come forward. “Sometimes talking about it gives you more trouble than trying to deal with it on your own with other medical support,” she said.


NDP MP details abuse allegation, calls for probe - The Globe and Mail


My emphasis.


I'm sorry, reaching into your purse and getting a condom is not the act of a woman that "froze".


Had I been Justin, I'd have laughed in the needy little twit's face. Then told her to grow up, press charges or STFU.



Of course, I don't have to appeal to idiotic "progressives".

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

Rcs, man you're trying some hard to pin this on Trudeau.

I'm not trying to pin anything on Trudeau. I would say the same of Harper. I defended Jian Ghomeshi right up to the point the women came forward. I don't believe in throwing people under the bus without definitive proof.

It's is morally and ethically objectionable. We live in a democratic society that claims to observe the presumption of innocence. That we can destroy people publicly without any due process is troubling to me and it should be to everyone.

 

[personal touch]

Something is missing from this whole story of allegations,there is something i am not getting,something is just not adding up,i believe this is because there is missing or absent information.
There seems be double speak within the presentation of the story,I am not sure where or who starts or ends with the double speak behaviour,an independent body must be established ,certainly the RCMP resources will not be called in to establish who or what is double speaking,but then again this is a good political scape goat,who knows where the RCMP will come in on this one,they have nothing better then to do.

How this information is designed and more so the correct process to glean the information is important in establishing the real facts,all individuals involved need safe places to tell their stories and present clarity upon the information.
I find the whole evening as presented and described as somewhat sketchy,with alcohol involved what does interpretation mean?I find people who kiss and tell of strange character to begin with,this is not to be mixed up with individuals who assault their kissers,so these ideaoligies contribute to further curosities of psychology, I would rather snoop on the people then the incident itself.
I will assume Canadian taxpayers will be on the hook for millions of dollars in deternining what "explicit consent"really means in Ottawa.What Canadians will find out is in the end, is something simple and out of sorts happened in that hotel room, for example" **** sex' could have not been part of the "explicit consent" agreement package,possibly there was a trunk full of sex toys,maybe some bondage,role playing?,whatever it is,it all proves to be filled with good insights into what "explicit consent"means in Ottawa.
I for one am going to be watching the outcome of this process.

 

[personal touch]

i think taking peoples clothes off,fondling,or pleasuring ones self while someone is passed out is an act of assault?,even if objectives were consentual up to the point of none alertness,there are so many possibilities when it comes to alcohol,hotel rooms,etc.

According to Stockwell Day, on tv tonight, she was at the bar with 'the accused " till closing,went to his room for more drinks and supplied the condom.

of course "Stock"had something to say about the whole ordeal,he has an inside track to knowledge in what really happened in that hotel room,"Stock"knows everything,"Stock is glorified in Ottawa,he is a "religious man,he is a truth seeker""Stock"is a Conservative heavy weight,he believes in fair process"Stock"has held office of the highest government departments,including the "Public Safety"Minister,he is on the inside track on what happens in private lives,and stands on guard for truth and democratic process,he is the model of what us Canadians receive in the intelligence department,he also loves to operate a ski doo
of course "stock"would know about the condom,so much so, he just could not wait to announce his new found knowledge to the Canadian public,this my folks is what is in charge of Canadian decison making,this is ongoing scary