วีดีโอ

So, now there is advanced consent? You guys have done several videos on there being no such thing as advanced consent in Canada. But a female can establish in advance that condom use is a requirement for consent?

I would be fascinated to know if the courts in Canada view the woman lying about birth control is sexual assault in the same manner as stealthing?

Have there been any cases in Canada where an accused (male or female) has been charged with sexual assault by way of the "fraud" pathway ... but the fraud in question is not "stealthing," but rather discovering later that they misrepresented their own identity, culture, religion, marital status, age, profession, or income/wealth? Imagine the avalanche of cases if that kind of fraud becomes linked to the criminal code definition of sexual assault as well.

Question is will a woman who deliberately sabotages birth control by stopping the pill or puncturing a condom and not informing their partner committing sexual assault or is it financial abuse trying to create a child that the father will be obliged to take financial responsibility for.

Women accusing men of stealthily trying to impregnate them is the ultimate psychological projection. The real problem is women trying to get themselves pregnant and baby-trap their man of choice.

Always a fascinating and educational discussion. Thanks guys.

Jesus was perfect, john 3:16 bro

Re establishing authenticity of a voice recording, it might once have been sufficient to simply note the sound of the voice & mannerisms, but this,su rely, should no longer be the case. Ai-powered voice cloning is now v advanced, & getting better by the day. I've seen ostensibly convincing video footage of public figures such as Elon Musk saying things I know they never said. If u guys were to, say, issue a challenge, for someone to create audio, if not full video, of u, Joseph & Diana, apparently plotting a crime, I would bet it would be at least superficially convincing. Now anyone who knows u both even vaguely would immediately be pretty certain the clip was not real, but only because of that familiarity. What tho if a similar technique were employed against some hapless, technically naive person, someone without access to good legal counsel. If there was other supporting evidence (which might well also be in some way fake / misrepresented) it is not hard to imagine an innocent person ending up wrongfully convicted.

Indicators on case files to provide general markers on the face of the case file . Real data . This would have to be inputed by the accused because the court clerks are so Honerable

Wouldn't that case you discussed a while ago where a fake account was created suggest the need to establish provenance of an electronic communication?

This is why I recorded all activities between the police, etc. and myself. I had a Sheriff's deputy write up a report that was completely wrong and only corrected and reissued the report after I produced the recording. He didn't know I was recording him. He should have been recording me. I'm not sure if his camera was on or not. I don't know if the initial report was in error or on purpose.

I’m picturing that US Debt clock. But it’s my money paying him.

there are instances where people have been convicted of murder despite the victim's body never being found.

5:20 LOL! relax!

credible = convincing reliable = able to be trusted

While I was acquitted based on W.(D)., the prosecutor, in closing, tried to argue that W.(D). did not apply, but did not give reasons. Also, the judge, as a trier of fact, found that the 'corroborating witness' did not corroborate any actus reas. The bottom line is, in Canada, we have a legal regime that invites false allegations of sexual assault, where women have no liability of false allegations. When I made a formal complaint of a Section 140 offense, the police refused to take it seriously, and made manifestly false statements in a VPB meeting about my complaint. People should know, in Canada, police and prosecutors do not care about your charter rights and freedoms wrt sexual assault. The police will lie about facts to cover their ass.

I must strongly disagree with this idea that the historical requirement for corroborating evidence, or any historical definition of "beyond a reasonable doubt" that required it, created a problem for SAs that took place entirely behind closed doors. If anyone, child or adult, tells you that they saw a ghost, do you then become a believer in the idea that ghosts exist and walk among us? If you don't, i.e. you continue to doubt that there are ghosts among us even after someone tells you that they saw one, then you concede that the testimony of a single witness isn't enough to overcome reasonable doubt, since there's always a reasonable possibility that a witness could be lying or delusional no matter how straightforward they might seem. If an actual SA occurs behind closed doors, such that the only initial evidence is the victim's word, the victim can go to the police and the police can use all kinds of investigative techniques to gather corroborating evidence that wasn't available initially. They can try to trick the suspect into talking about it when they think they aren't being recorded, they can conduct some kind of sting operation with a decoy victim, they can get a search warrant for the suspect's electronic devices and look for incriminating emails and text messages, etc. This is actually much easier to do now, in the twenty-first century, than it was back when the corroboration requirement was in vogue. Charging someone, let alone convicting, on as much evidence as a ghost sighting is lackadaisical and reprehensible. It makes a mockery of the idea of "beyond a reasonable doubt" and puts the administration of justice into disrepute in the eyes of those who care about objective truth.

Our laws and judicial system have become so out of touch from reasonableness that people are socially paralyzed…I see this playing out in my kids generation. Political whims have corrupted our system of law, making it socially unmanageable.

No one should ever be ARRESTED, let alone trialed and convicted of SA over a case of mistaken identity like that. Yes, it is VERY SAD that a poor girl was scared by a doofus drunk guy. But we should not be putting people in jail for that.

th-cam.com/video/yQ1pO-tZbYA/w-d-xo.html

I will add some things that you should also know: * Anyone can go to the police and invent an accusation, no evidence is required. She can text you the most perverted things and still accuse you of kissing without consent if you dont pay her dinner. No evidence required and her messages will not save you. She can hide or delete the messages without any consequence. * Sexual assault is a broad set actions that most understand as rape, but even an unwanted kiss can be sexual assault and gossiping will have people saying you raped someone when you are not even accused of it and no sex was involved. This was specially designed to defame men. * Making false accusations is free, consumes no time and one can fail to attend on court day without any consequences. Complainant just need to say someone touched you without consent to make any medical examination less invasive. * A lawyer will cost you many thousands and you will spend so much time in paperwork, court attendance, etc and suffer mentally. It is the perfect revenge strategy and there is nothing you can do about it. * Suing back for defamation or false accusation is not realistically possible as it is expensive, time consuming and requires solid evidence as in a video of the moment she is referring too. * Police are supposed to not charge you without evidence, and prosecutor are supposed to drop charges if no evidence. This is not working due to fear of feminism. You have in court stupid cases where his husband slaps her bum without consent, and police and courts have to spend so much time in this d*mb cases. I cannot stress how bad things are and it is a shame politicians don't do anything about this. Stand up and write your representatives.

6:20 "one day you and i will be certified" 😂😂🎉🎉

💔

Years ago I was in a relationship with someone who looked a lot like my ex. Same height, hair style, body type. While downtown, a friend saw me, and her from behind. He proceeded to give her a hug. Not knowing it was someone he never met. Fortunately, everything was good. No charges. But that scenario is very possible.

She LICKED her hand omg yuk. Yuk yuk

OMG this is sooooooo cool these old school dudes! mmm ❤❤❤❤

0:00 I would like to compliment Diana and Joseph on the new water-based podcast format. Really glad to see that. Kudos to everyone!!

So here is a question with this new law/ case law: This regime seems to force the defendant onto the stand. Should no evidence other than accusation exist, the defendant is forced to take the stand as long as the accuser can tell a coherent story. This seems to rub against the defendants rights, so how does the law deal with this?

Power imbalance or power balance are valid descriptive terms. But the term "power dynamic" is woke nonsense and should be scrapped.

4:50 JDRD (2006) is another case that created case law.

What does WD stand for? 3:50 Oh, it is the initials of an accused in a 1994 case.

1:30 When Canadians say "evidence" they often mean "testimony". The word can mean both testimony and physical evidence in Canda (and UK and maybe other places).

I've been watching Diana Davison since she was in Vancouver. It would be interesting to know her story and how she has come to her beliefs.

Such an immensely informative and fun channel! Keep up the great content 👍

I was totally fooled by your thumbnail. I really thought that you guys had a shiny new set! My missus looked over my shoulder and asked: "Is that AI?" And it was. Thanks for your hard work. I really appreciate the expertise you bring to the subject.

Do these cases go to trial based on the Crown, or is there an advocate on the side of the complainant? I base this on my experience on a jury for an SA trial. "No-one would believe me, I'm a man". The truth comes out at the very end...

Looking forward to this one. So much of our SA law seems designed to creatively overcome this standard of proof. The 276/278 regime seems to shift the burden of proof almost, such that an accused must exonerate themselves from a predetermined guilt. Cory J in Lifchus, describing the essential elements of reasonable doubt, says it is “not a doubt based upon sympathy or prejudice; rather it is based upon reason and common sense; it is logically connected to the evidence or absence of evidence” Do 276/278 not manufacture an absence of evidence (due to… sympathy)?! The prohibited inferences have then been stretched so far that they are being used to bar normal, sound reasoning. These draconian laws have disfigured the standard of proof beyond recognition. If the absence of evidence is logically connected, then such dramatic bars to admitting evidence must surely obliterate the standard in practice. Is it still beyond a reasonable doubt if the accused has to defend themselves with their hands tied behind their back?

Good Girl Jane 2022 1h 57m th-cam.com/video/9XwPc6w4Bt4/w-d-xo.html Failing to find intimacy in her broken home, a lonely young girl falls hard for a charming drug dealer and becomes entangled in his meth ring run by LA teens.

In California We Decided That their is no reasion that Judicial officers are the only one that that hold the authority to issue Poliminary Injuctive orders, . So without making g the new kids on tne Blick show their math , we want law enforcement to be like Sylvester Stallone I. That movie Judge Dread . I'm talking about EPOS the emergency protection order. . . I have to literly say it.... "I AM THE LAW" ANYONE. It's worrying , the Cop can issue the EPO , doesn't have to even serve the guy , just file it at the court , and now the court can issue a real judicial injuction order and the EPO is all you need . The EPO that doesn't even have to be given notice of. No checks and ballences I can't find a place the public can even check to see if one has been issued on yourself . This is America. Might make a great episode

Stop interrupting her so much.

“You need to feel like a person of worth, in a world of meaning” 13:20 - nail on the head Diana! Such an insightful comment.

Interesting that women want to date men who by definition are stronger, earn more, are older, larger and generally more competent than themselves but also want to weaponize that to accuse those same men of exerting power imbalance on them. The cognitive dissonance is astounding. Anyways, great analyst as usual. Please advise the dude and others to stay away from girls below 18. Most women will interpret that as a predator man even though the girl might have the man wrapped around her pinky.

Ty... Use bud flower instead. Smh

How is a conditional withdraw with a peace bond a good idea? The 'claimant' already made one false accusation, why give something else for her to weaponize against the guy she falsely accused?

I can't say I am much of a watch guy, but I am not tuning out. Having a splash of humanity here and there is always a good thing :)

I thought perjury was illegal.

Love this breakdown of the nuanced power dynamic. Very enlightening.