Ontario Court rejects the right to wear niqab

Niflmir

A modern nomad
Dec 18, 2006
3,460
58
48
Leiden, the Netherlands
The purpose of a court is to determine the truth.

And since we routinely use facial expressions as clues to determining whether a person is telling the truth, or what they're feeling as they speak, the face of a witness has to be uncovered when testifying.

It's as simple as that.

Except that using facial expressions as a lie detector have been as discounted at using a diviner's rod to find water: it is superstitious nonsense.

So yeah, it is as simple as that: seeing a person's face serves no purpose.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Except that using facial expressions as a lie detector have been as discounted at using a diviner's rod to find water: it is superstitious nonsense.

So yeah, it is as simple as that: seeing a person's face serves no purpose.

Is it your opinion that facing your accuser, in court has no benefit what so ever? Never has, never will??
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
The purpose of a court is to determine the truth.

And since we routinely use facial expressions as clues to determining whether a person is telling the truth, or what they're feeling as they speak, the face of a witness has to be uncovered when testifying.

It's as simple as that.


Apparently, it isn't that easy; just ask Nimflr, he'll tell ya.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,399
14,305
113
Low Earth Orbit
When the Supreme Court of Canada grants rights to a specific group of individuals (that no other Canadians can enjoy) based on religion, then your legal system has been skewed to facilitate a certain group and no, Canadians have done absolutely nothing to prevent it.
Yup. It happens.
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
It would be interesting if it were true.
I did a quick google and could only find American stats. It does make sense though from a purely psychological perspective because all of the factors are in place to produce it. The Facts about Domestic Violence - Violence Against Women Online Resources

They also apparently put up with more sexual abuse in the workplace because of fear of deportation. That might also factor into domestic abuse.



Futures Without Violence: Features: Immigrant Women and Domestic Violence

Human Rights Watch Report Finds Immigrant Women Suffer Sexual Abuse To Avoid Job Losses, Deportation
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,399
14,305
113
Low Earth Orbit
So nationals sexually assaulting people who can't defend themselves makes for high immigrant domestic abuse?

Sounds like BS to me.
 

Niflmir

A modern nomad
Dec 18, 2006
3,460
58
48
Leiden, the Netherlands
Is it your opinion that facing your accuser, in court has no benefit what so ever? Never has, never will??

It is my opinion that you are equivocating on the definition of the word "face" and so your question doesn't make any sense.

All things which run have legs. (True statement.)
A river runs. (True statement.)
Therefore a river has legs. (False conclusion because of equivocation on the word run.)

That is your argument laid bare, only you are equivocating on the word face. There is no benefit in baring the face of a witness to the court, there is benefit in facing them in a court. If you don't understand the difference in the two uses of the word face, I wonder how you ever passed English class.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,399
14,305
113
Low Earth Orbit
I guess CIs, should have to show their faces then? They can adjust to living with looking over their shoulder the rest of their lives without any legal protection.

Have you ever been given disclosure that had a picture of your accuser in it or just their name and the municipal address?
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
It is my opinion that you are equivocating on the definition of the word "face" and so your question doesn't make any sense.

All things which run have legs. (True statement.)
A river runs. (True statement.)
Therefore a river has legs. (False conclusion because of equivocation on the word run.)

That is your argument laid bare, only you are equivocating on the word face. There is no benefit in baring the face of a witness to the court, there is benefit in facing them in a court. If you don't understand the difference in the two uses of the word face, I wonder how you ever passed English class.

I failed English.
Got slammed last night for a missing comma. Whew, the world almost ended on that one I tell ya.

Does facing your accuser in court, provide you the defendant with any benefit when defending yourself?

Does a judge and or Jury gain any benefit from facing the accuser in court?
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,399
14,305
113
Low Earth Orbit
This is an Us Vs. Them and has nothing to do with reality.

I failed English.
Got slammed last night for a missing comma. Whew, the world almost ended on that one I tell ya.

Does facing your accuser in court, provide you the defendant with any benefit when defending yourself?

Does a judge and or Jury gain any benefit from facing the accuser in court?
Why do CIs get a pass?
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
I guess CIs, should have to show their faces then? They can adjust to living with looking over their shoulder the rest of their lives without any legal protection.

Have you ever been given disclosure that had a picture of your accuser in it or just their name and the municipal address?

There are rulings on that. You know that as well as I.
 

Niflmir

A modern nomad
Dec 18, 2006
3,460
58
48
Leiden, the Netherlands
I failed English.
Got slammed last night for a missing comma. Whew, the world almost ended on that one I tell ya.

Does facing your accuser in court, provide you the defendant with any benefit when defending yourself?

Does a judge and or Jury gain any benefit from facing the accuser in court?

Read my post again, please. I answered your question.