|
Guy Cloutier and his UNDERAGE sex scandal
|
View this Thread in Original format
| FunKenLouis |
What do you guys think of that?
should he be punished more severly then another person cuz hes a public image and should give the exemple
i think the story is pretty horrible and he got lucky not to have his trial.... cuz im pretty sure we would have learned even worst stuff |
|
|
| FunKenLouis |
:nervous:
Les accusations
Guy Cloutier a plaid� coupable aux accusations suivantes :
Attentat � la pudeur
Agression sexuelle de 1983 � 1987
Agression sexuelle sur une enfant de moins de 14 ans
Tentative d'entrave � la justice
Il avait notamment �t� accus� des d�lits suivants :
Tentative d'entrave � la justice en 2004;
Grossi�re ind�cence de 1978 � 1987;
Attentat � la pudeur de 1978 � 1983;
Voies de fait de 1984 � 1986;
Agression sexuelle de 1983 � 1987 et 2001;
Agression sexuelle arm�e entre 1985 et 1986;
Attentat � la pudeur (sur une autre victime). |
|
|
| Bronze |
25 ans de prisons...minimum...
mais on sait bien...
5ans------ et seulement un sixi�me de la peine sera purg� en prison...
Quel bon syst�me de justice nous avons! |
|
|
| FunKenLouis |
| system judiciaire canadien = le plus flexible au monde?? |
|
|
| malek |
| hmmm je sais pas, mais on dirait que la victime etait complaisante... avaler un million de $ pour fermer sa yeule pour un boute... je sais pas mais c'est quasiment de la complicite... |
|
|
| FunKenLouis |
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
hmmm je sais pas, mais on dirait que la victime etait complaisante... avaler un million de $ pour fermer sa yeule pour un boute... je sais pas mais c'est quasiment de la complicite... |
le mek avait vraiment des remords la
GRAVE
il la dit quand il a ete taper sans le savoir |
|
|
| KrinKer |
c'erst dr�le mais me semble qu'avec l'�ge des victimes lorsque les actes on �t� perp�trer, je le trouev pas si coupable que sa, a kkpart, chu sur que certaine que l'une des victimes, a un certain moment, �tait consentante.
Entk
On s'en kaliss, reste que le gars est millionaire pareil !
KrinKer |
|
|
| malek |
| quote: | Originally posted by KrinKer
c'erst dr�le mais me semble qu'avec l'�ge des victimes lorsque les actes on �t� perp�trer, je le trouev pas si coupable que sa, a kkpart, chu sur que certaine que l'une des victimes, a un certain moment, �tait consentante.
Entk
On s'en kaliss, reste que le gars est millionaire pareil !
KrinKer |
je sais pas mais quand je penses agressions sexuel, c'est avec de la violence avec un couteau a la gorge... ou qqchose du genre.
bof... Je connais pas vraiment les lois apres tout. |
|
|
| KrinKer |
En fait
Y'as agression sexuelle lorsque l'un des deux partis n'est pas consentant ... et ... mettons que la loi est tr�s large ce qui laisse place a beaucoup d'abus de la part des femmes ( bin oui, c'est rare qu'une femme soit accus� d'agression sexuelle )
Encore une preuve qu'au qu�bec, la soci�t� patriarcale que nous avions est tranquillement en train de changer vers une soci�t� matriarcale ...
KrinKer |
|
|
| malek |
| quote: | Originally posted by KrinKer
En fait
Y'as agression sexuelle lorsque l'un des deux partis n'est pas consentant ... et ... mettons que la loi est tr�s large ce qui laisse place a beaucoup d'abus de la part des femmes ( bin oui, c'est rare qu'une femme soit accus� d'agression sexuelle )
Encore une preuve qu'au qu�bec, la soci�t� patriarcale que nous avions est tranquillement en train de changer vers une soci�t� matriarcale ...
KrinKer |
damn, on parle de plusieurs fois par semaine, dans pleins de places differentes... y ressmble plus a un sugar daddy |
|
|
| KrinKer |
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
damn, on parle de plusieurs fois par semaine, dans pleins de places differentes... y ressmble plus a un sugar daddy |
Mon id�e la dessus c'est que y'�tais le sugar Daddy de Nathalie Simard ( oop l'ai dit ) pis y'as arr�ter un moment donner parce que elle ne lui rapportait plus d'argents pis a c facher parce que il ne lui donnait plus assez d'argent donc a l'a essayer de l'extorquer, sa pas marcher donc a la poursuivie !
KrinKer |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
He's almost as bad as Bill Graham:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Article...icle.asp?ID=221
Bill Graham: Canada�s Latest Shame
By Jamie Glazov
FrontPageMagazine.com | February 14, 2002
SOMETIMES I am so embarrassed to live in Canada. I really think I might have to move to the U.S. soon.
We just had a new Minister of Foreign Affairs appointed by the Liberal government. His name is Bill Graham.
Guess who Bill Graham is?
He is a Member of Parliament and a former Law Professor at the University of Toronto who is notorious for having been involved in the gay sex trade. And he engaged in this activity as a married man with two children.
Lawrence Metherel, a former teen male prostitute, has long ago disclosed that he had a sexual relationship with Graham dating back to 1980, when Metherel was 15 years old. In a recent interview with a Canadian magazine, Metherel said that, for 15 years, Graham provided him with regular support payments of up to $1,500 a month.
Like how do you even take a guy like Graham seriously?
How does an individual like this even get appointed to his position?
Does the Prime Minister sit in Cabinet and say: �Ok, we need Bill Graham to be the new Foreign Affairs Minister.�
And then someone says, �You mean Bill Graham who was involved in the gay sex trade?�
And then the Prime Minister says, �Yeah.�
And then everyone nods and agrees?
I don�t get it.
Oh yeah, I forgot: Canada is really tolerant.
What I still respect about America is that, despite the reality of Bill Clinton, Bill Graham would never be appointed Secretary of State. Graham knows that � and that�s why he hates America. That explains why, immediately upon taking office, he announced that Americans were bad and Canadians were good. He boasted that, "We have been able to become a multicultural society where we are able to be more tolerant with one another than the Americans ever have had to do, inside their own country, and when it comes to outside they feel that they can have their will."
Wow, I bet that old Bill never minds when someone tries to interfere in his personal �will� in his private life, right?
Canada now has a Foreign Affairs Minister whose credentials basically involve an undying obsession with promoting same-sex marriage legislation. In his latest round of activism, Graham supported a same-sex marriage bill that emphasized that Valentine's Day was �a perfect time to remind Parliament that the relationships of gay and lesbian people are just as strong, just as loving, just as worthy of full recognition and respect and celebration as those of heterosexuals.�
Let me get this straight: Valentine�s Day is a �perfect time� to trivialize the sacredness of the nuclear family unit? It�s a perfect time to minimize the importance of children having, as an optimum ideal, both a father and a mother in their lives?
I just don�t get it.
So who is actually going to take Graham seriously? Picture being the President of the United States and meeting with this guy to discuss some international crisis. When Graham starts talking about Palestine or something, could you even pay attention to what he was saying? How seriously can you take an old man who is married and has two children but has simultaneously had, and still might have, a 15-year-old boyfriend?
If you were sitting in a room with Graham and he was going on about nuclear weapons proliferation, wouldn�t you be nervously eyeing the various emergency exits � just in case you had to make a run for it if, well, you know, Bill made a move on you or something like that? Wouldn�t it also be ridiculous that you had to wear running shoes with your suit? And you�d have to wear running shoes because, well, you know, just to make sure that you got away as fast as you could in case Billy ran after you.
And what kind of small talk would you make with this guy between foreign policy talks? If he asked you about your wife and kids, would you ask him about his wife and kids � or about some guy named Jerome? What if he actually started talking about Jerome? Would you want to hear it?
I can see it now, Bill saying to Colin Powell, �Oh, I kicked Jerome out. I didn�t feel he was contributing enough, and besides, he was very verbally abusive.�
What would Powell say after Graham said this? Would he nod like he understood?
I just don�t know.
But Canada has a new Foreign Affairs Minister.
Wonderful.
:whip: :whip: |
|
|
|
|
