<description>Sponsored by EasyDNS
https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord

## Episode Description

In Episode 194 of Not on Record, seasoned Canadian criminal defense lawyers Joseph Neuberger and Michael Lacy dive deep into the realities of jury trials in Canada. Sparked by a recent National Post article exploring the inner workings of juries, they debate whether they'd choose a jury or a judge-alone trial if charged with a serious offense. The discussion covers the impact of the 2019 abolition of peremptory challenges, the challenges of selecting an impartial jury in today's polarized climate, the importance of storytelling and engagement in jury addresses, cultural shifts affecting civic duty and bias, and why many defense lawyers now lean toward bench trials especially in sexual assault cases. With candid insights from decades of trial experience, dog interruptions, and a call to restore peremptory challenges, this episode is a raw look at the strengths, flaws, and uncertainties of Canada's jury system.</description>

EP#194 | Jury or Judge Alone? Criminal Lawyers Reveal What They'd Pick (You Won't Believe It)

<description>Sponsored by EasyDNS
https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord

In Episode 193 of Not On Record, the team dives deep into the controversial resurfaced clips of popular Twitch IRL streamer Nina Lin (2–3M followers), where she and another female streamer engage in highly sexualized “pranks” on male colleagues and strangers—including twerking on an unwilling assistant and slapping a man’s buttocks during a massage—sparking accusations of sexual assault. The hosts explore the glaring double standard: why a male streamer doing the exact same thing would be instantly canceled, de-platformed, and possibly charged, while Nina received only short bans and mocked the backlash. A raw, unfiltered conversation about consent, weaponized allegations, male victims, puritanical overreach, and whether “just a prank” content has finally crossed the line in 2025’s hyper-sensitive climate.

Nina Lin videos - https://www.youtube.com/shorts/wyUhfIa-6bE
https://www.reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/comments/1oisvvw/disguisedtoast_opens_up_about_his_situation_with/
https://arazu.io/t3_1orhucq/?timeframe=all&amp;category=hot

Website: http://www.NotOnRecordpodcast.com 
Sign up to our email list - http://eepurl.com/hw3g99 Social Media Links 
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/NotonRecord 
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/notonrecordpodcast/ 
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@notonrecordpodcast 
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/notonrecord 
Telegram: https://t.me/NotOnRecord 
Minds: http://www.minds.com/notonrecord 

Audio Platforms Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4F2ssnX7ktfGH8OzH4QsuX Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/not-on-record-podcast/id1565405753 
SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/notonrecord  
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-842207 
For more information on criminal law issues go to Neuberger &amp; Partners LLP http://www.nrlawyers.com. 
Produced by Possibly Correct Media www.PossiblyCorrect.com</description>

Sponsored by EasyDNS
https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord

In Episode 193 of Not On Record, the team dives deep into the controversial resurfaced clips of popular Twitch IRL streamer Nina Lin (2–3M followers), where she and another female streamer engage in highly sexualized “pranks” on male colleagues and strangers—including twerking on an unwilling assistant and slapping a man’s buttocks during a massage—sparking accusations of sexual assault. The hosts explore the glaring double standard: why a male streamer doing the exact same thing would be instantly canceled, de-platformed, and possibly charged, while Nina received only short bans and mocked the backlash. A raw, unfiltered conversation about consent, weaponized allegations, male victims, puritanical overreach, and whether “just a prank” content has finally crossed the line in 2025’s hyper-sensitive climate.

Nina Lin videos - https://www.youtube.com/shorts/wyUhfIa-6bE
https://www.reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/comments/1oisvvw/disguisedtoast_opens_up_about_his_situation_with/
https://arazu.io/t3_1orhucq/?timeframe=all&category=hot

Website: http://www.NotOnRecordpodcast.com 
Sign up to our email list - http://eepurl.com/hw3g99 Social Media Links 
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/NotonRecord 
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/notonrecordpodcast/ 
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@notonrecordpodcast 
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/notonrecord 
Telegram: https://t.me/NotOnRecord 
Minds: http://www.minds.com/notonrecord 

Audio Platforms Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4F2ssnX7ktfGH8OzH4QsuX Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/not-on-record-podcast/id1565405753 
SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/notonrecord  
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-842207 
For more information on criminal law issues go to Neuberger & Partners LLP http://www.nrlawyers.com. 
Produced by Possibly Correct Media www.PossiblyCorrect.com

EP#193 | Twitch Streamer Caught Groping Assistant - If a Man Did This, Would He Be in Prison?

<description>Sponsored by EasyDNS
https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord

In Episode 192, we dissect the powerful new Ontario acquittal R v J.A., 2025 ONSC 4531: an 18-year-old boy is accused of assaulting his 17-year-old girlfriend after prom, only for him to discover (by guessing her password) that she was cheating; what follows is an explosive, toxic text-message war with hundreds of messages, repeated “you r*ped me” accusations, vague apologies, and almost no explicit denials; the Crown insisted his silence and equivocal replies amounted to adoptive admissions of guilt, but Justice Bordin delivers a masterclass ruling that explains why rapid-fire teenage texting cannot be read in isolation, why overlapping messages and missing context destroy tone, why Snapchat’s auto-delete feature is a nightmare for justice, how phone calls and in-person talks still matter, and why the entire relationship dynamic (including motive to fabricate) must be considered before treating silence as guilt; this is required reading for anyone facing text-heavy sexual assault charges and a stark reminder that disappearing messages and cherry-picked screenshots can turn innocent people into convicted ones.</description>

Sponsored by EasyDNS
https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord

In Episode 192, we dissect the powerful new Ontario acquittal R v J.A., 2025 ONSC 4531: an 18-year-old boy is accused of assaulting his 17-year-old girlfriend after prom, only for him to discover (by guessing her password) that she was cheating; what follows is an explosive, toxic text-message war with hundreds of messages, repeated “you r*ped me” accusations, vague apologies, and almost no explicit denials; the Crown insisted his silence and equivocal replies amounted to adoptive admissions of guilt, but Justice Bordin delivers a masterclass ruling that explains why rapid-fire teenage texting cannot be read in isolation, why overlapping messages and missing context destroy tone, why Snapchat’s auto-delete feature is a nightmare for justice, how phone calls and in-person talks still matter, and why the entire relationship dynamic (including motive to fabricate) must be considered before treating silence as guilt; this is required reading for anyone facing text-heavy sexual assault charges and a stark reminder that disappearing messages and cherry-picked screenshots can turn innocent people into convicted ones.

EP#192 | Never Use Snapchat If You’re Dating; This Case Will Terrify You

<description>Sponsored by EasyDNS
https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord 

In Episode 191 of Not on Record, criminal lawyers Diana Davison and Daniel Brown dive deep into the controversial new Supreme Court of Canada decision R v Rioux, 2025 SCC 34 – a case that has defence lawyers, accused persons, and the public extremely worried.

The Joseph and Diana dissect the Court’s ruling on sexual-assault complaints involving memory blackouts, alleged (but unproven and uncharged) drugging, and how much weight a complainant’s “feelings,” assumptions, and post-event beliefs should carry when she has little or no memory of the incident itself. They highlight the decision’s many “lemons” – troubling language that appears to downgrade the accused’s ability to give direct evidence of consent, over-emphasizes circumstantial evidence from complainants, and risks lowering the bar for proving incapacity. At the same time, they squeeze out a few drops of “lemonade” – paragraphs that actually reinforce that consent remains subjective, credibility is still key, and every case turns on its own specific facts and live issues.

A must-listen episode for anyone following #MeToo-era sexual assault law in Canada, the limits of circumstantial evidence, and the ongoing battle over fairness for the accused.

Website: http://www.NotOnRecordpodcast.com 
Sign up to our email list - http://eepurl.com/hw3g99 Social Media Links 
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/NotonRecord 
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/notonrecordpodcast/ 
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@notonrecordpodcast 
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/notonrecord 
Telegram: https://t.me/NotOnRecord 
Minds: http://www.minds.com/notonrecord 

Audio Platforms Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4F2ssnX7ktfGH8OzH4QsuX Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/not-on-record-podcast/id1565405753 
SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/notonrecord  
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-842207 
For more information on criminal law issues go to Neuberger &amp; Partners LLP http://www.nrlawyers.com. 
Produced by Possibly Correct Media www.PossiblyCorrect.com</description>

Sponsored by EasyDNS
https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord 

In Episode 191 of Not on Record, criminal lawyers Diana Davison and Daniel Brown dive deep into the controversial new Supreme Court of Canada decision R v Rioux, 2025 SCC 34 – a case that has defence lawyers, accused persons, and the public extremely worried.

The Joseph and Diana dissect the Court’s ruling on sexual-assault complaints involving memory blackouts, alleged (but unproven and uncharged) drugging, and how much weight a complainant’s “feelings,” assumptions, and post-event beliefs should carry when she has little or no memory of the incident itself. They highlight the decision’s many “lemons” – troubling language that appears to downgrade the accused’s ability to give direct evidence of consent, over-emphasizes circumstantial evidence from complainants, and risks lowering the bar for proving incapacity. At the same time, they squeeze out a few drops of “lemonade” – paragraphs that actually reinforce that consent remains subjective, credibility is still key, and every case turns on its own specific facts and live issues.

A must-listen episode for anyone following #MeToo-era sexual assault law in Canada, the limits of circumstantial evidence, and the ongoing battle over fairness for the accused.

Website: http://www.NotOnRecordpodcast.com 
Sign up to our email list - http://eepurl.com/hw3g99 Social Media Links 
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/NotonRecord 
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/notonrecordpodcast/ 
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@notonrecordpodcast 
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/notonrecord 
Telegram: https://t.me/NotOnRecord 
Minds: http://www.minds.com/notonrecord 

Audio Platforms Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4F2ssnX7ktfGH8OzH4QsuX Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/not-on-record-podcast/id1565405753 
SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/notonrecord  
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-842207 
For more information on criminal law issues go to Neuberger & Partners LLP http://www.nrlawyers.com. 
Produced by Possibly Correct Media www.PossiblyCorrect.com

EP#191 | “I Only Had Two Drinks” - Canada’s Wild New Sexual Assault Rule

<description>Joseph and Alper dive into one of the most unsettling sexual assault decisions to come out of the Supreme Court of Canada in years: **R. v. Rioux, 2025 SCC 34**, released the very day they hit record. Still hot off the printer, the judgment sends Joseph’s blood pressure through the roof as he and Alper give their **raw, first reaction** to a 5–4 split decision that effectively rewrites how courts treat **consent, capacity, blackouts, and memory loss** in sexual assault trials.

They walk through the core facts, then zero in on the majority’s treatment of **blackout and memory loss as circumstantial evidence of incapacity**, and the idea that a complainant’s *beliefs and assumptions* about how they “would have acted” can stand in for an actual memory of events. Along the way, they unpack the difference between **actus reus and mens rea**, explain why the distinction between **direct and circumstantial evidence** is being stretched to absurdity, and highlight how this reasoning risks turning ordinary adult sexual behaviour especially where alcohol is involved into a legal minefield.

From Vegas blackout marriages to the realities of human behaviour after a few drinks, Joseph and Alper argue this ruling is **“ripe for abuse”** and dangerously divorced from common sense. With plenty of dark humour, legal nuance, and a few F-bombs, they lay the groundwork for a much deeper doctrinal analysis in Part Two of this “Consent Trilogy.” If you care about due process, evidentiary standards, and the future of sexual assault law in Canada, this is a must-listen.
Website: http://www.NotOnRecordpodcast.com 
Sign up to our email list - http://eepurl.com/hw3g99 Social Media Links 
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/NotonRecord 
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/notonrecordpodcast/ 
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@notonrecordpodcast 
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/notonrecord 
Telegram: https://t.me/NotOnRecord 
Minds: http://www.minds.com/notonrecord 

Audio Platforms Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4F2ssnX7ktfGH8OzH4QsuX Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/not-on-record-podcast/id1565405753 
SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/notonrecord  
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-842207 
For more information on criminal law issues go to Neuberger &amp; Partners LLP http://www.nrlawyers.com. 
Produced by Possibly Correct Media www.PossiblyCorrect.com</description>

Joseph and Alper dive into one of the most unsett…

Joseph and Alper dive into one of the most unsettling sexual assault decisions to come out of the Supreme Court of Canada in years: **R. v. Rioux, 2025 SCC 34**, released the very day they hit record. Still hot off the printer, the judgment sends Joseph’s blood pressure through the roof as he and Alper give their **raw, first reaction** to a 5–4 split decision that effectively rewrites how courts treat **consent, capacity, blackouts, and memory loss** in sexual assault trials.

They walk through the core facts, then zero in on the majority’s treatment of **blackout and memory loss as circumstantial evidence of incapacity**, and the idea that a complainant’s *beliefs and assumptions* about how they “would have acted” can stand in for an actual memory of events. Along the way, they unpack the difference between **actus reus and mens rea**, explain why the distinction between **direct and circumstantial evidence** is being stretched to absurdity, and highlight how this reasoning risks turning ordinary adult sexual behaviour especially where alcohol is involved into a legal minefield.

From Vegas blackout marriages to the realities of human behaviour after a few drinks, Joseph and Alper argue this ruling is **“ripe for abuse”** and dangerously divorced from common sense. With plenty of dark humour, legal nuance, and a few F-bombs, they lay the groundwork for a much deeper doctrinal analysis in Part Two of this “Consent Trilogy.” If you care about due process, evidentiary standards, and the future of sexual assault law in Canada, this is a must-listen.
Website: http://www.NotOnRecordpodcast.com 
Sign up to our email list - http://eepurl.com/hw3g99 Social Media Links 
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/NotonRecord 
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/notonrecordpodcast/ 
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@notonrecordpodcast 
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/notonrecord 
Telegram: https://t.me/NotOnRecord 
Minds: http://www.minds.com/notonrecord 

Audio Platforms Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4F2ssnX7ktfGH8OzH4QsuX Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/not-on-record-podcast/id1565405753 
SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/notonrecord  
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-842207 
For more information on criminal law issues go to Neuberger & Partners LLP http://www.nrlawyers.com. 
Produced by Possibly Correct Media www.PossiblyCorrect.com

EP#190 | Redefining Consent: Did the Supreme Court Turn Every Drunk Hookup into Sexual Assault?

Criminal Defence Lawyer Joseph Neuberger and YouTube personality, legal researcher and host of the UnTrue Crime podcast Diana Davison, sit down and discuss the aftermath of their case loads and what really goes on behind the scenes.  A behind the scenes inside look into the real court room drama.

Not On Record Podcast

Details

Recent Episodes