LEAF arguments accepted by majority of Supreme Court of Canada
May 27, 2011, Toronto -- The Supreme Court of Canada rendered its decision today in the case of R. v. J.A., a case in which an accused charged with the sexual assault of his unconscious common-law spouse argued that the complainant had consented to the sex in advance. LEAF intervened in the appeal to argue that there can be no such thing as advance consent to unconscious sex. Consent must always be active, voluntary, ongoing and contemporaneous with the sexual act. In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court of Canada agreed.
A story that pictures of an alleged gang rape were circling Facebook came as a shock to most Canadians. Worse was that the rape was apparently of a drugged 16-year-old girl who had been attending a rave in British Columbia. And more bad news has come to light in the days since, with some young men who weren't involved defending the girl's attackers.
In a widely circulated interview from CTV, two teen boys (Justin and Martin) expressed some raw opinions on the girl who had been raped.
Justin stated: "We are thinking it's being over-exaggerated. I don't think she was as messed up as she's making it out to be. I don't think she was raped...".
Most people will experience some violence in their lives, whether it's emotional, physical or psychological. However women are more likely than any other Canadians to encounter violence. Over half of Canadian women have reportedly experienced sexual or physical violence in their lifetimes since age 16. It is estimated that only six percent of women who have experienced violence report it. Though not extensive, this basic guide will outline:
Kinds of violence
How to listen
What to say
Solidarity
Kinds of violence
The tone of the Supreme Court of Canada on Thursday was tense as Justice Morris Fish asked lawyer David Butt to name one lawyer who'd willingly cross-examine a veiled witness.
Butt replied "some blind lawyers that I know" which was met with an impatient "Well, how about seeing lawyers -- your response quite explicitly and dramatically answers the question." The question before the Court was whether a witness testifying while wearing the niqab -- a veil which covers the face with only the eyes showing -- would undermine the fairness of a trial.
The hearing, in which principles protected equally under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms came in direct conflict with one another, lasted nearly seven hours in the nation's highest courtroom.