14 ms·

Video of Valley Mogul Kicking His Girlfriend 117 Times Could Send Him to Jail

94 points by nreece 10y ago

xupybd 10y ago
"And it seemed certain that 31-year-old Chahal was one Silicon Valley start-up star for whom IPO would now stand for Initial Prison Offering." Really? A pun when the topic is that serious. I'm all for dark humour, but domestic violence and puns shouldn't mix.
- mbreedlove 10y ago
  Yeah, I thought it seemed a little out of place .
  - tempestn 10y ago
    And it was repeated numerous times throughout. Really detracted from the overall article.
- SmellyGeekBoy 10y ago
  Not only is it in incredibly poor taste, but it's not actually funny anyway. What an odd thing to include.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
camillomiller 10y ago
Rich man does illegal things that involve damaging another person and gets away with it because he's rich and has connections and could pay the victim a hefty sum. Nothing to see here, people, move on.
- the_other 10y ago
  Did his estate pay you to say that?
girvo 10y ago
> In a brilliant move, the district attorney’s office asked the judge if the video from the first case could be admitted to establish that the second assault was essentially a repeat offense. The judge ruled that it could. My initial reaction is that this is an interesting ruling, but then my knowledge of these sorts of rulings is decidedly spotty? I'm going to assume it's not the only thing that has been put forward to the judge: the 911 call definitely helped, and frankly I have little sympathy for the accused, but otherwise I find the idea of a video of past behaviour being used as evidence for current behaviour (on it's own) sort of... odd?
- audeyisaacs 10y ago
  I don't think it's considered evidence for current behaviour, just evidence that the behaviour is repeated.
- k-mcgrady 10y ago
  Is it maybe used to establish character? For example you he could have character witnesses testifying he's a good guy saying this behaviour is out of character and the other side could show the past video to prove it's not?
codeduck 10y ago
'could' should be 'will'
- tremon 10y ago
  'could' will be 'should have'.
- tempestn 10y ago
  As the article explains, that's not yet a certainty: > Then again, the judge could conceivably allow Chahal once more to avoid incarceration, depending on what the probation report recommends.
max38383 10y ago
This is nothing new. You can't actually even find much information about the whole thing online because he's paid off and sued to ensure that nothing damaging was online and tried to replace it with positive PR. This article will be gone soon too. Buying off another girlfriend, judge, and a few media sites is still chump change... and it seem VCs seem to jive with that kind of skill set that he has. He may have a career in politics come to think of it.
- JKSingh12 10y ago
  I've known the guy, his entire career is based on lies and deception. Some years ago he started a restaurant called Planet Bollywood in Milpitas (ripoff of Planet Hollywood). It obviously failed and he faced lawsuits for trademark infringement. He burned the entire place down and collected the insurance money. Very old story, but nothing about the guy has changed.
smcl 10y ago
OK sorry for going off-topic on a topic as serious as this, but I've got a question about something that's been bugging me for ages. There's 8 sentences in a row that start with "Never mind that..." - is there a name for this style of writing (repeating yourself, presumably for dramatic effect)? It really irritates me, but I can never describe it to anyone and I don't know how to google for it.
- taneq 10y ago
  Are you looking for the term "elegant variation" (or, in this case, the lack thereof)?
- chatmasta 10y ago
  When used with care, it's called an "anaphora." At least, that's what we called it in my Latin classes.
  - smcl 10y ago
    Excellent, thanks!
  - coldtea 10y ago
    It might have been called that way in the latin classes, but the term is Ancient Greek for "reference" (as in: "in reference of" i.e. "speaking about", etc). In rhetoric, it is about what you said -- beginning several statements with the same sentence/opening, addressing the same issue with different arguments for rhetorical effect.
JKSingh12 10y ago
I've known the guy, his entire career is based on lies and deception. Some years ago he started a restaurant called Planet Bollywood in Milpitas (ripoff of Planet Hollywood). It obviously failed and he faced lawsuits for trademark infringement. He burned the entire place down and collected the insurance money. Very old story, but nothing about the guy has changed.
- puranjay 10y ago
  AdTech in its early years was filled with scumbags
auggierose 10y ago
What's really frightening is how major bribes are done quite casually and as if there is nothing much to it. That's something you would not want to occur in your democracy. How do you effectively fight this sort of behaviour? I think what would be necessary is a system where all money is handled electronically and transparently, such that bribes would be immediately visible to everyone.
- anentropic 10y ago
  I guess then they wouldn't use money
  - auggierose 10y ago
    Good point, I was thinking about that too. What kind of system would be mostly immune to bribery and corruption?
th894983 10y ago
This was already discussed on HN. I found really troubling how the whole thing just evaporated. Shit-storm around Brendan Eich who did much less, started around the same time, and lasted for months.
- angrow 10y ago
  Another commenter claims Chahal has secured the services of a PR firm which specializes in taking down stories like this, to keep then from spreading. Maybe it works sometimes.
- ZeroGravitas 10y ago
  That controversy had two sides, both of which were happy to bring it up in the comments of only vaguely related articles (which your comment might be counted as part of). Whereas in this case everyone agrees which side is behaving like a scumbag so there's less inherent drama.
thinkcomp 10y ago
His civil litigation history is here, including some of the lawsuits mentioned in the article. http://www.plainsite.org/profiles/chahal-gurbaksh/ http://www.plainsite.org/profiles/chahal-gurbaksh/
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
jakobegger 10y ago
I don't get why US judges often throw out evidence because it was not acquired according to correct procedure. I understand that confessions made under pressure are worthless, since people confess anything when threatened or tortured. But factual evidence like a video recording? What difference does it make how it was acquired? The correct action in a case like this should be to use the evidence, and discipline the officer who violated regulations. When a court disregards obvious evidence, and pretends that it doesn't know things it really does; and when that happens to help a well situated criminal with expensive attorneys; then the obvious result is that the public loses trust in the government. The abstract ideal of "justice" must guide how the law is applied. If courts rule only according to the law as it is written, rather than on the spirit behind it, when courts fail to bring justice to criminals; then we will end up with lynch mobs and vigilantes. Who can blame a redneck in the woods stocking up on guns when you read an article like that? You can't trust a government that lets a wife beater run free because of a formality. When the system doesn't protect you, you need to protect yourself. Right?
- airza 10y ago
  because it gives the capital-S State a motive for constant countrywide warrantless surveillance?
- tempestn 10y ago
  While I agree that it's painful seeing evidence thrown out for procedural reasons, there is certainly logic behind it, as it provides a check on the power of the police. It may well be the lesser evil (as intended). Simply disciplining an officer who doesn't follow procedure may not be sufficient incentive to prevent people's rights from being ignored. That's especially true if officers cover for one another so it's not even possible to determine who is responsible. Unless the punishment is extremely harsh (which would unfairly penalize legitimate mistakes), it may often not be effective anyway, as many well-meaning officers could accept punishment in order to put (who they believe is) the bad guy away. The problem is, when you start going in that direction, innocent people's rights will be infringed as well. You already see cases all the time where innocent people go to jail due to police bending or breaking the rules. I have to think that allowing all factual evidence regardless of source would make that worse. That said, it's obviously not a just result in an individual case like this. It would be nice to be able to have justice in these situations without losing the overall disincentive. I'm not sure that it's possible, but would love to be wrong.
scotty79 10y ago
Does the legal process in USA have discovering the truth as one of its stated goals?
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > Does the legal process in USA have discovering the truth as one of its stated goals? It doesn't have "stated goals" at all, but its probably most accurate to view its goals as determining appropriate consequences under the law, with "discovering truth" as not a goal, but of some value instrumentally to the actual goal.
ttam 10y ago
Heh, it seems like he published a book back in 2009 https://www.amazon.com/Dream-Learned-Rewards-Entrepreneurship-Millions/dp/0230618952 https://www.amazon.com/Dream-Learned-Rewards-Entrepreneurshi...

94 points by nreece 10y ago

"And it seemed certain that 31-year-old Chahal was one Silicon Valley start-up star for whom IPO would now stand for Initial Prison Offering." Really? A pun when the topic is that serious. I'm all for dark humour, but domestic violence and puns shouldn't mix.

mbreedlove 10y ago
Yeah, I thought it seemed a little out of place .
- tempestn 10y ago
  And it was repeated numerous times throughout. Really detracted from the overall article.
SmellyGeekBoy 10y ago
Not only is it in incredibly poor taste, but it's not actually funny anyway. What an odd thing to include.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

camillomiller 10y ago

Rich man does illegal things that involve damaging another person and gets away with it because he's rich and has connections and could pay the victim a hefty sum. Nothing to see here, people, move on.

the_other 10y ago
Did his estate pay you to say that?

girvo 10y ago

> In a brilliant move, the district attorney’s office asked the judge if the video from the first case could be admitted to establish that the second assault was essentially a repeat offense. The judge ruled that it could. My initial reaction is that this is an interesting ruling, but then my knowledge of these sorts of rulings is decidedly spotty? I'm going to assume it's not the only thing that has been put forward to the judge: the 911 call definitely helped, and frankly I have little sympathy for the accused, but otherwise I find the idea of a video of past behaviour being used as evidence for current behaviour (on it's own) sort of... odd?

audeyisaacs 10y ago
I don't think it's considered evidence for current behaviour, just evidence that the behaviour is repeated.
k-mcgrady 10y ago
Is it maybe used to establish character? For example you he could have character witnesses testifying he's a good guy saying this behaviour is out of character and the other side could show the past video to prove it's not?

codeduck 10y ago

'could' should be 'will'

tremon 10y ago
'could' will be 'should have'.
tempestn 10y ago
As the article explains, that's not yet a certainty: > Then again, the judge could conceivably allow Chahal once more to avoid incarceration, depending on what the probation report recommends.

max38383 10y ago

This is nothing new. You can't actually even find much information about the whole thing online because he's paid off and sued to ensure that nothing damaging was online and tried to replace it with positive PR. This article will be gone soon too. Buying off another girlfriend, judge, and a few media sites is still chump change... and it seem VCs seem to jive with that kind of skill set that he has. He may have a career in politics come to think of it.

JKSingh12 10y ago
I've known the guy, his entire career is based on lies and deception. Some years ago he started a restaurant called Planet Bollywood in Milpitas (ripoff of Planet Hollywood). It obviously failed and he faced lawsuits for trademark infringement. He burned the entire place down and collected the insurance money. Very old story, but nothing about the guy has changed.

smcl 10y ago

OK sorry for going off-topic on a topic as serious as this, but I've got a question about something that's been bugging me for ages. There's 8 sentences in a row that start with "Never mind that..." - is there a name for this style of writing (repeating yourself, presumably for dramatic effect)? It really irritates me, but I can never describe it to anyone and I don't know how to google for it.

taneq 10y ago
Are you looking for the term "elegant variation" (or, in this case, the lack thereof)?
chatmasta 10y ago
When used with care, it's called an "anaphora." At least, that's what we called it in my Latin classes.
- smcl 10y ago
  Excellent, thanks!
- coldtea 10y ago
  It might have been called that way in the latin classes, but the term is Ancient Greek for "reference" (as in: "in reference of" i.e. "speaking about", etc). In rhetoric, it is about what you said -- beginning several statements with the same sentence/opening, addressing the same issue with different arguments for rhetorical effect.

JKSingh12 10y ago

I've known the guy, his entire career is based on lies and deception. Some years ago he started a restaurant called Planet Bollywood in Milpitas (ripoff of Planet Hollywood). It obviously failed and he faced lawsuits for trademark infringement. He burned the entire place down and collected the insurance money. Very old story, but nothing about the guy has changed.

puranjay 10y ago
AdTech in its early years was filled with scumbags

auggierose 10y ago

What's really frightening is how major bribes are done quite casually and as if there is nothing much to it. That's something you would not want to occur in your democracy. How do you effectively fight this sort of behaviour? I think what would be necessary is a system where all money is handled electronically and transparently, such that bribes would be immediately visible to everyone.

anentropic 10y ago
I guess then they wouldn't use money
- auggierose 10y ago
  Good point, I was thinking about that too. What kind of system would be mostly immune to bribery and corruption?

th894983 10y ago

This was already discussed on HN. I found really troubling how the whole thing just evaporated. Shit-storm around Brendan Eich who did much less, started around the same time, and lasted for months.

angrow 10y ago
Another commenter claims Chahal has secured the services of a PR firm which specializes in taking down stories like this, to keep then from spreading. Maybe it works sometimes.
ZeroGravitas 10y ago
That controversy had two sides, both of which were happy to bring it up in the comments of only vaguely related articles (which your comment might be counted as part of). Whereas in this case everyone agrees which side is behaving like a scumbag so there's less inherent drama.

thinkcomp 10y ago

His civil litigation history is here, including some of the lawsuits mentioned in the article. http://www.plainsite.org/profiles/chahal-gurbaksh/ http://www.plainsite.org/profiles/chahal-gurbaksh/

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

jakobegger 10y ago

I don't get why US judges often throw out evidence because it was not acquired according to correct procedure. I understand that confessions made under pressure are worthless, since people confess anything when threatened or tortured. But factual evidence like a video recording? What difference does it make how it was acquired? The correct action in a case like this should be to use the evidence, and discipline the officer who violated regulations. When a court disregards obvious evidence, and pretends that it doesn't know things it really does; and when that happens to help a well situated criminal with expensive attorneys; then the obvious result is that the public loses trust in the government. The abstract ideal of "justice" must guide how the law is applied. If courts rule only according to the law as it is written, rather than on the spirit behind it, when courts fail to bring justice to criminals; then we will end up with lynch mobs and vigilantes. Who can blame a redneck in the woods stocking up on guns when you read an article like that? You can't trust a government that lets a wife beater run free because of a formality. When the system doesn't protect you, you need to protect yourself. Right?

airza 10y ago
because it gives the capital-S State a motive for constant countrywide warrantless surveillance?
tempestn 10y ago
While I agree that it's painful seeing evidence thrown out for procedural reasons, there is certainly logic behind it, as it provides a check on the power of the police. It may well be the lesser evil (as intended). Simply disciplining an officer who doesn't follow procedure may not be sufficient incentive to prevent people's rights from being ignored. That's especially true if officers cover for one another so it's not even possible to determine who is responsible. Unless the punishment is extremely harsh (which would unfairly penalize legitimate mistakes), it may often not be effective anyway, as many well-meaning officers could accept punishment in order to put (who they believe is) the bad guy away. The problem is, when you start going in that direction, innocent people's rights will be infringed as well. You already see cases all the time where innocent people go to jail due to police bending or breaking the rules. I have to think that allowing all factual evidence regardless of source would make that worse. That said, it's obviously not a just result in an individual case like this. It would be nice to be able to have justice in these situations without losing the overall disincentive. I'm not sure that it's possible, but would love to be wrong.

scotty79 10y ago

Does the legal process in USA have discovering the truth as one of its stated goals?

dragonwriter 10y ago
> Does the legal process in USA have discovering the truth as one of its stated goals? It doesn't have "stated goals" at all, but its probably most accurate to view its goals as determining appropriate consequences under the law, with "discovering truth" as not a goal, but of some value instrumentally to the actual goal.

ttam 10y ago

Heh, it seems like he published a book back in 2009 https://www.amazon.com/Dream-Learned-Rewards-Entrepreneurship-Millions/dp/0230618952 https://www.amazon.com/Dream-Learned-Rewards-Entrepreneurshi...