Support NeoGAF

[excelsiorlef]

Said Judge was then appointed by the Harper government to the Federal court. He's now being reviwed by The Canadian Judicial Council.

Camp acquitted Alexander Scott Wagar of sexual assault on Sept. 9, 2014.
That decision was overturned by the Alberta Court of Appeal, which questioned Camp’s understanding of the law regarding sexual assault and consent. There will be a re-trial.
“We are also persuaded that sexual stereotypes and stereotypical myths, which have long since been discredited, may have found their way into the trial judge’s judgment,” the Alberta Court of Appeal ruled stated.

A top legal governing body is probing comments by an Alberta judge who asked a complainant in a sexual assault trial, “Why couldn’t you just keep your knees together?”
A complaint was filed to the Canadian Judicial Council by four law professors against the conduct of Justice Robin Camp, who is now a federal court judge.
Camp was an Alberta Provincial Court judge in 2014 at the time of the comments.
The case involved a 19-year-old woman who said she was sexually assaulted over a bathroom sink by a Calgary man at a house party.

The professors’ complaint includes the passage: “He asked the complainant questions such as ‘why didn’t you just sink your bottom down into the basin so he couldn’t penetrate you?’ and ‘why couldn’t you just keep your knees together?’ He also indicated that she had not explained ‘why she allowed the sex to happen if she didn’t want it’ and noted that when she asked the accused if he had a condom that was ‘an inescapable conclusion [that] if you have one I’m happy to have sex with you.’”

The complaint by the four professors argues that Camp dismissed Canada’s rape shield laws “as unfair and incursive.”
“He suggested that the limits to admitting evidence of the complainant’s sexual history ‘hamstrung the defence’ and arose from ‘very, very incursive legislation,’” the complaint states.
“He (Camp) stated that ‘I don’t think anybody, least of all Ms. Mograbee [Crown counsel], would – would – would argue that the rape shield law always worked fair – fairly. But it exists.”
The professors also argue that Camp “demonstrated absolute disregard and disdain for the affirmative definition of consent to sexual touching established by the Supreme Court of Canada.”

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...case-comments-reviewed-by-top-legal-body.html Justice Robin Camp asked rape complainant: ‘Why couldn’t you just keep your knees together?’

This was not a case of a judge making a mistake, the four law professors said. Judge Camp understood the law of consent, but went out of his way to disparage it.

For instance, when the prosecutor said the accused was required to take steps to ascertain the consent of the victim, who was drunk, Judge Camp asked: “Are there any particular words you must use like the marriage ceremony?” The prosecutor replied that case law has shown that Mr. Wagar needed to ask if he could go that far. Judge Camp’s retort: “Are children taught this at school? Do they pass tests like driver’s licenses? … It’s not the way of the birds and the bees.”

The professors said the judge’s “open mockery” of the definition of consent in Canadian law harms the justice system’s reputation. A case known as R vs. Ewanchuk, also from Alberta, established that there is no defence of implied consent to sexual assault in Canada.

But don't worry he's really sorry and just made a mistake

“I also apologize to the women who experience feelings of anger, frustration and despair at hearing of these events. I am deeply troubled that things that I said would hurt the innocent. In this regard, I am speaking particularly to those who hesitate to come forward to report abuse of any kind and who are reluctant to give evidence about abuse, sexual or otherwise. To the extent that what I have said discourages any person from reporting abuse, or from testifying about it, I am truly sorry. I will do all in my power to learn from this and to never repeat these mistakes.”

It's not a terrible apology as far thise things usually go but it's still pretty meaningless.

Fortunately the Federal Court is taking this seriously

The Federal Court of Canada is not allowing one of its judges to hear any cases involving sexual conduct, a rare step, pending the outcome of a review by a judges’ disciplinary body of his handling of a rape case in 2014. The review comes after an appeal court said Justice Robin Camp had fallen prey to myths and stereotypes about sex-assault victims in acquitting a man of rape.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...es-related-to-sexual-conduct/article27183033/

One more reason to be thankful that the Harper government is no more.

 

[Slayven]

He needs to get the fuck out of there

 

[diaspora]

So... he apologised that people were offended but not for absolutely dogshit comments? What a jackass.

 

[KevinCow]

What the fuck? Hopefully he gets fired.

 

[Savitar]

Been reading about this over the past few days.

He should not be a judge.

Simple as that.

Absolutely disgusted by what he said.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

For context, there is no protection against double jeopardy in Canadian law? Or is this considered a mistrial?

That judge is a disgusting piece of shit and should lose his license.

 

[excelsiorlef]

For context, there is no protection against double jeopardy in Canadian law?

That judge is a disgusting piece of shit and should lose his license.

Yes and no. You can't retry again and again but you can appeal an acquittal in Canada.

 

[danm999]

Imagine that line of reasoning for almost any other crime.

Why didn't you attack the armed gunman whilst your store was being robbed? I think you wanted it to happen.

 

[aeolist]

this is rape culture

 

[Aselith]

Imagine that line of reasoning for almost any other crime.

Why didn't you attack the armed gunman whilst your store was being robbed? I think you wanted it to happen.

When you said, "Good afternoon, sir" it was a clear sign that you were consenting to any sort of activity he wanted to do within your store.

 

[excelsiorlef]

this is rape culture

Yep 100%.

Makes me glad that there are avenues here where such reasoning can be undone through appeal.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Holy shit. I saw this Beaverton (the Canadian equivalent of the Onion) satire piece in my RSS today and I wasn't sure what it was referring to:

http://www.thebeaverton.com/national/item/2225-judge-cites-bro-code-as-precedent-in-rape-trail

Now I know... and the satirical piece is barely more exaggerated than the real event. Christ.

 

[theignoramus]

"Why couldnt you keep your knees together?"
Fucking yikes!
Cant believe a judge said that out loud in a courtoom!

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Garbage. Just garbage. Glad this is getting readdressed.

 

[Shaanyboi]

What an absolute fuckwit. Seriously, get this piece of shit out of the legal system.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Holy shit. I saw this Beaverton (the Canadian equivalent of the Onion) satire piece in my RSS today and I wasn't sure what it was referring to:

http://www.thebeaverton.com/national/item/2225-judge-cites-bro-code-as-precedent-in-rape-trail

Now I know... and the satirical piece is barely more exaggerated than the real event. Christ.

That is brilliantly written.

I love the Beaverton.

 

[Deleted member 80556]

I'm very glad they aren't allowing him to work on sex offenses and are reviewing the case. It's the most fair thing to do. I can't believe nor imagine what that woman had to go through, specially when a judge says those things.

 

[GhaleonEB]

“Why couldn’t you just keep your knees together?”

It's been a while since I read a sentence that filled me with so much rage. This is from a judge. Glad action is being taken, but it's an indication of how far we have to go. Fucking incredible.

 

[excelsiorlef]

It's been a while since I read a sentence that filled me with so much rage. This is from a judge. Glad action is being taken, but it's an indication of how far we have to go. Fucking incredible.

And I'd like to highlight that this dipshit got promoted after this case.

 

[Hycran]

And I'd like to highlight that this dipshit got promoted after this case.

Moving from the Provincial Courts to the Federal Courts isn't exactly a promotion, more like a change of scenary, but it seems odd nonetheless.

For those who are interested, Canada (and many other countries) have very specific evidentiary rules in place to protect against the normal ways that people might think that a woman's character could be assailed (such as the prosecutor using her past sexual history as an indication that she is more likely to have consented). Nowadays it is extremely rare for it to be brought up successfully, which is why the judges comments are that much worse than they otherwise might be. If we've gone to such lengths to protect people from unfair inferences but the judges still have them, the women will never stand a chance.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Moving from the Provincial Courts to the Federal Courts isn't exactly a promotion, more like a change of scenary, but it seems odd nonetheless.

For those who are interested, Canada (and many other countries) have very specific evidentiary rules in place to protect against the normal ways that people might think that a woman's character could be assailed (such as the prosecutor using her past sexual history as an indication that she is more likely to have consented). Nowadays it is extremely rare for it to be brought up successfully, which is why the judges comments are that much worse than they otherwise might be. If we've gone to such lengths to protect people from unfair inferences but the judges still have them, the women will never stand a chance.

In June, Conservative justice minister Peter MacKay promoted him to the Federal Court of Canada, which pays $308,600 annually. The provincial court job pays $263,731.

A nearly 35 thousand dollar raise, I'd call that being promoted.

 

[Red]

Imagine that line of reasoning for almost any other crime.

Why didn't you attack the armed gunman whilst your store was being robbed? I think you wanted it to happen.

Worse than that. It's more like asking someone who was shot, "why didn't you flex really hard and prevent the bullets from going through your skin??"

 

[Shaanyboi]

.

 

[Syriel]

Horrible Judge who deserves to be prosecuted for abuse of power, but (without commenting on the original allegations) it a bit disturbing that someone who was acquitted now faces a second trial.

From an American perspective, the double jeopardy prohibition is as important as the right to free speech. The government shouldn't get multiple bites at the apple, just because it's too inept to keep its own house in order.