excelsiorlef
Member
Said Judge was then appointed by the Harper government to the Federal court. He's now being reviwed by The Canadian Judicial Council.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...case-comments-reviewed-by-top-legal-body.html Justice Robin Camp asked rape complainant: Why couldnt you just keep your knees together?
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
One more reason to be thankful that the Harper government is no more.
Camp acquitted Alexander Scott Wagar of sexual assault on Sept. 9, 2014.
That decision was overturned by the Alberta Court of Appeal, which questioned Camps 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 judges 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 couldnt 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 didnt you just sink your bottom down into the basin so he couldnt penetrate you? and why couldnt you just keep your knees together? He also indicated that she had not explained why she allowed the sex to happen if she didnt 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 Im happy to have sex with you.
The complaint by the four professors argues that Camp dismissed Canadas rape shield laws as unfair and incursive.
He suggested that the limits to admitting evidence of the complainants sexual history hamstrung the defence and arose from very, very incursive legislation, the complaint states.
He (Camp) stated that I dont 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 couldnt 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 Camps retort: Are children taught this at school? Do they pass tests like drivers licenses? Its not the way of the birds and the bees.
But don't worry he's really sorry and just made a mistakeThe professors said the judges open mockery of the definition of consent in Canadian law harms the justice systems 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.
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
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...es-related-to-sexual-conduct/article27183033/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.
One more reason to be thankful that the Harper government is no more.