*
Misogynist judge desperately seeks to save his job
Fri, 2016-09-09 18:09
#1
Misogynist judge desperately seeks to save his job
Fri, 2016-09-09 18:10
#2
Justice Robin Camp tells inquiry he's learned from 'hurtful' comments he made at sex assault trial
They really should tie his knees together and usher him out into the street.
Fri, 2016-09-09 18:16
#3
Why does he even want the job? And how did he ever get it?
Certainly his misogynist comments grab the headlines, but I'm also pretty puzzled that he would refer to the victim as "the accused". I would assume that the job is ideally one of those "detail oriented" jobs X10.
Fri, 2016-09-09 19:25
#4
The third day of the inquiry into Camp's conduct began with testimony from Brenda Cossman, the director of the University of Toronto's Centre for sexual diversity studies.
After five two- to three-hour sessions with Camp discussing the history of sexual assault law in Canada and assigning reading to him, Cossman believes she has successfully educated the judge who asked an alleged rape victim why she "couldn't just keep [her] knees together."
Oh Jesus Christ, really.
Fri, 2016-09-09 19:30
#5
Lots of shock and dismay in my circles about Brenda's testimony.
Educate him, sure.
Testify on his behalf? Why???
Fri, 2016-09-09 19:35
#6
Good question. Is she also from South Africa?
Fri, 2016-09-09 19:40
#7
Were these sessions ordered by the inquiry, or the Province? Or were they a voluntary attempt on Camp's part to give his image a car-wash?
Because it strikes me as kind of odd that a sitting justice would need a layperson to edumacate them on the law, and assign readings like he's an undergrad.
Fri, 2016-09-09 19:43
#8
The fact that he doesn't simply have the decency to resign proves that he is beyond education, if proof were required. A shithead like this wouldn't survive in my workplace, and trust me, I don't get paid for judging people. I do it pro bono.
Fri, 2016-09-09 20:14
#9
Were these sessions ordered by the inquiry, or the Province? Or were they a voluntary attempt on Camp's part to give his image a car-wash?
Because it strikes me as kind of odd that a sitting justice would need a layperson to edumacate them on the law, and assign readings like he's an undergrad.
When the complaints surfaced, Camp who had already moved to the Fed Ct, issued a statement of apology. The Ct said that he was undertaking a program of education "at his own expense".
Experts were paid by him, and testified to that, and their positive impressions of him.
And, yeah, the idea that he was clueless about criminal law but it's alright cuz he was a commercial litigator is absolutely incredible. Why, then, would you place such a person on a PROVINCIAL COURT where he will be hearing crim trials day in and day out? You think there's lots of cases of securities that would come across his docket? His ignorance/lack of experience is further indictment, not a bloody justification!
Fri, 2016-09-09 20:19
#10
I will say, Magoo, that judicial education is a "thing" but it tends to be more formalized and systemic. Conferences and retreats. As an academic I've participated in several. You get put up in nice places like St. Andrews by the sea, chat, schmooze, lecture, do exercises with them, and get something like $500-1000 honorarium.
Brenda testified that she gave him an exam. Honest to God. I'd pay good coin to see it.
Fri, 2016-09-09 20:26
#11
The fact that he doesn't simply have the decency to resign proves that he is beyond education, if proof were required. A shithead like this wouldn't survive in my workplace, and trust me, I don't get paid for judging people. I do it pro bono.
I agree. If he had any decency he would not be struggling so mightily to save his skin. His testimony today belied the glowing portraits. Very subtle but unmistakeable impression that he is just mouthing stuff.
Oh. And he referred to the complainant as "the accused" AGAIN.
Fri, 2016-09-09 20:29
#12
Brenda testified that she gave him an exam. Honest to God. I'd pay good coin to see it.
Perhaps it was all True/False. In which case your good coin could also pass it.
Fri, 2016-09-09 21:10
#13
Nice one, Magoo. 
Fri, 2016-09-09 21:27
#14
Timebandit
I hope he's removed from the bench and the bar.
Fri, 2016-09-09 22:18
#15
Unlikely in the extreme he'd be disbarred, and that would require a separate proceeding.
But it's not like he'd get lots of offers anyway.
Sat, 2016-09-10 01:39
#16
Sat, 2016-09-10 11:49
#17
https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2016/09/09/under-fire-judge-camp-wrap...
Camp was supported in the hearing by big-league female witnesses — Manitoba Judge Deborah McCawley, who mentored him, sexual diversity expert Brenda Cossman, who guided him, and psychologist Lori Haskell, who questioned him — hired by him to train him in what we thought judges understood: the law and courtroom behaviour. They were enthusiastic about his eagerness to learn. Camp’s remark that “sex and pain sometimes go together” was brushed away, as was every grotesque thing he said in court. They were his voluntary adjacencies.
Cossman defended Camp’s comments, like the one about women keeping their knees together, as genuine though insensitive evidentiary inquiries. It was puzzling, as these rare judicial hearings always are. But to see Judge McCawley metaphorically wrap her legal robes around Camp and exclaim over his enthusiasm? Now that is flattering. Maybe the trio could start their own agency, The Adjacency Agency.
Sat, 2016-09-10 12:56
#18
More from Mallick's excellent article:
I am grateful that feminist groups like LEAF have intervenor status at the hearing, and that the rape case itself will be heard again before an educated and civilized judge. I hope the panel will recommend Camp’s removal and the council will ask the federal justice minister to consult Parliament. I cannot see how a modern nation with a feminist prime minister can have judges like this.
One sees a lonely figure. She is a raped indigenous Canadian woman who has wanted to kill herself since these events. She is a University of Pennsylvania student who committed suicide after her rape case failed. She is a helpless actress, felled by a famous predator’s drug.
These women have no flattering male adjacencies. There is no team of men surrounding them with aid, advice and care. It has always been thus.
Mon, 2016-09-12 22:41
#19
just popped by Babble to see if this inquiry was being discussed. Does anyone (Pookie?) know how long it might take to get a decision? What are the chances of his removal? According to this CBC article, only 2 judges have been recommended for removal since 1971.
I cannot believe that this man has the gall to defend himself. What an incredible display of entitlement. On what basis does he believe he is qualified to remain a judge? He should have quietly resigned and slinked away in shame.
I would love to know what Conservative party leadership hopeful and self-proclaimed defender of Canadian values Kellie Leitch thinks about this guy's immigration to Canada. /rant (for now).
Mon, 2016-09-12 23:23
#20
Hi Summer - nice to see you!
No real rules about how long it will take. I'd say at least a couple months for a decision from the Inquiry Committee which then must be reviewed by the entire CJC. Both of these will be made public. If we're lucky, it will be wrapped up by Christmas but it might take six months or more. If the recommendation is for removal he'll almost certainly resign but if not, then there would be further steps at the federal executive and Parliamentary level.
Based solely on precedent, chances of removal are slim, but given current social sensibilities we may be in an era of setting new precedents. Tough to say.
Tue, 2016-09-13 00:07
#21
Thanks Pookie! I fear you are right about the chances of removal but I am holding out hope that the panel will surprise us. Sigh.
Tue, 2016-09-13 07:13
#22
I am going to do something I never do, and predict they will, in fact, vote to remove. You can all yell at me later.
Tue, 2016-09-13 11:23
#23
Timebandit
I'm hoping you're right!
Tue, 2016-09-13 14:33
#24
alan smithee
Fire him,take away his pension and offer him no severance pay.
He can go become a Mennonite,milk cows,churn butter and surround himself with folks who share that opinion.
Tue, 2016-09-13 15:22
#25
He can go become a Mennonite,milk cows,churn butter and surround himself with folks who share that opinion.
You know, alan, countering his ignorance about women with another kind of ignorance is not the way to go. You obviously have a lot to learn about Mennonites.
[url=http://www.canadianmennonite.org/stories/decision-roundup-assembly-2016]A first look at key decisions made at Assembly 2016[/url]
Assembly 2016 may become known by delegates as a watershed event.
By turns intense and emotional, joyful and worshipful, the gathered delegates made significant decisions that will impact the Mennonite Church Canada body for years to come. They met in Saskatoon, Sask., July 6 to 10, 2016.
On Thursday evening, July 7, delegates voted in favour of repudiating the Doctrine of Discovery—a settler teaching that has marginalized and taken rights away from indigenous people for centuries. While much education on the Doctrine of Discovery has already begun among congregations, much more is required.
On Saturday morning, July 9, 85 percent of the delegates voted in favour of the Being a Faithful Church (BFC) recommendation to create space and test alternative understandings to traditional beliefs on same-sex relationships. Congregations who are asked to bless same sex marriages will now be given space to do so, even as the national family of faith continues testing to see if such discernment is a nudging of the Spirit of God.
[...]
Delegates processed an amended resolution on Palestine and Israel on Saturday evening, in response to a plea from Palestinian Christians that “the global church come alongside the Palestinian people as they suffer under Israel’s 49-year military occupation of their lands.” The amendment included acknowledgment of the suffering of Jewish people in the conflict, and a desire to work with Jewish organizations in Canada as well.
If you want to find religious analogies with his honour the judge, try the Catholic Church.
Tue, 2016-09-13 15:37
#26
If you want to find religious analogies with his honour the judge, try the Catholic Church.
That was my initial reaction and then I came across this. Seems that most Xian sects have the same recurring problems. It is a major side effect to a strict patriarchal system.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/old-order-mennonite-sexual-abuse-...
Tue, 2016-09-13 15:57
#27
alan smithee
If you want to find religious analogies with his honour the judge, try the Catholic Church.
That was my initial reaction and then I came across this. Seems that most Xian sects have the same recurring problems. It is a major side effect to a strict patriarchal system.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/old-order-mennonite-sexual-abuse-...
Thanks, Seems I'm not as ignorant as you think.
Tue, 2016-09-13 16:09
#28
Not sure why we're diverting this thread, but krop posted an article about "Old Order Mennonites" - which are a medieval sect forming approximately TWO PERCENT of Canada's total Mennonite population of 200,000.
So before ridiculing "Mennonites", alan (and you too, krop), inform yourselves, please.
Tue, 2016-09-13 16:15
#29
Your Lurking Conservative here. Not often do I find myself in total agreement with babblers, but I do on this issue. The man is appalling. His defence is appalling--ignorance of the law that he is being paid over $330k a year to deal with. Appalling that he didn't just resign. It is possible that they won't turf him out? That would be mega-appalling....
Tue, 2016-09-13 18:17
#30
Fire him,take away his pension and offer him no severance pay.
Fire him, sure. And if it's with cause, my understanding is that no severance is owed.
But on what grounds would the government take away money he's earned? Even Russell Willams didn't lose his pension, and he MURDERED women.
Tue, 2016-09-13 19:12
#31
alan smithee
Fire him,take away his pension and offer him no severance pay.Fire him, sure. And if it's with cause, my understanding is that no severance is owed.
But on what grounds would the government take away money he's earned? Even Russell Willams didn't lose his pension, and he MURDERED women.
That's insanity. The best way to stick it to government employees (that includes the Armed Forces and Judges) that make light of rape or actually murder someone is to take away their pension.
Probably not going to happen but I think that's the logical policy. Force them into destitution.
Tue, 2016-09-13 19:28
#32
Why only government employees? Why not just claw back the pension contributions of ANY employee who's fired with cause?
But you do get, right, that pensions are part of your earnings, not some "perk", or a reward for a job well done?
I think that if you're a sitting judge who doesn't understand sexual assault then maybe you shouldn't be a sitting judge anymore. That makes sense. But the goal here isn't to make him "destitute", in the hope that he has some kind of epiphany.
Skdadl used to tell the old Scots story of sinners, banished to neverending agony in the fiery lakes of Hell for some minor sin, shouting out "O Lord, forgive me! I didn't know!", and the (Scots Presbyterian) God replying "Ach, well, ye know now."
Sat, 2016-09-17 13:56
#33
Misfit
I think the real problem here is that this is not an isolated incident. While this Judge's comments were extreme and grotesque and therefore worthy of dismissal, I fear that his misconduct is just the tip of a huge iceberg that the Canadian Judicial system is not prepared to face head on. I believe that there are many judges in Canada who are unqualified to hear sexual assault cases. Therefore, I feel that one motive of this hearing will be for the Judicial Councel to portray this as an isolated, easily remedied incident with education and sensitivity training, and then to simply move on and bury the bigger problem that they do not want to face.
Sat, 2016-09-17 15:09
#34
alan smithee
Sat, 2016-09-17 16:35
#35
I believe that there are many judges in Canada who are unqualified to hear sexual assault cases. Therefore, I feel that one motive of this hearing will be for the Judicial Councel to portray this as an isolated, easily remedied incident with education and sensitivity training, and then to simply move on and bury the bigger problem that they do not want to face.
Do you have any ideas as to how to address the bigger problem?
Sat, 2016-09-17 17:29
#36
Is there a separate and specific law school course about sexual assualt, the way there surely is for tort law or estate law and suchlike.
Wouldn't fix everything, but it could be a start.
"LAW310: First Nations and the Justice System" might be another good one.
Sat, 2016-09-17 18:37
#37
Is there a separate and specific law school course about sexual assualt, the way there surely is for tort law or estate law and suchlike.
Wouldn't fix everything, but it could be a start.
"LAW310: First Nations and the Justice System" might be another good one.
Sexual assault is taught in Criminal law. The rape sheild laws that this asshole did not understand date from 1992. For ten years before that we had a bettter law but it was struck down on a Charter challenge.
Aboriginal law is taught as a separate course. When I went in the early '90's there was both an Aboriginal law course and an upper level seminar course. Both the courses at U of S extensively covered the justice system's discrimination.
Sat, 2016-09-17 19:02
#38
Thanks for the inside scoop. Just curious: were they mandatory? I'm guessing Criminal Law must have been, but what about Aboriginal Law?
If we already have these and they're not working then I'm out of magic bullets, for now.
Sat, 2016-09-17 19:14
#39
Misfit
@Unionist. I don't have concrete ideas or solutions. However, as with other professions like doctors, the police, etc. who are disciplined by self regulating bodies, these boards are insular, antiquated, and out of touch with the general demographic differences and changing societal values. The fact that only two judges have been removed from the bench since the early seventies nationally does not, IMO, speak to the confidence we have with our judiciary, but rather that the review system has been designed to preserve and protect the interests of the judges who have been appointed to their positions. Maybe appoint judges to set terms and have them face elections like they have in the United States to get their jobs back.
Sat, 2016-09-17 19:15
#40
Thanks for the inside scoop. Just curious: were they mandatory? I'm guessing Criminal Law must have been, but what about Aboriginal Law?
If we already have these and they're not working then I'm out of magic bullets, for now.
Criminal law was mandatory and both the aboriginal law courses were electives.
Sat, 2016-09-17 19:17
#41
Misfit
Secondly, get rid of these self-regulating bodies. Outside interests need more power in these decision making processes.
Sat, 2016-09-17 19:31
#42
Misfit
There are now four sexual assault cases under review in Alberta alone right now. If they face no threat to their job or income, they will have no motivation to educate themselves. Perhaps if the disciplinary process was revamped and all four Alberta judges were disbarred, then the other dinosaurs on the judicial benches across Canada will hopefully wake up and take notice that they do not have immunity to do whatever they please, and that they will be held accountable for their actions.
Sun, 2016-09-18 13:48
#43
Secondly, get rid of these self-regulating bodies. Outside interests need more power in these decision making processes.
It appears that the biggest problem is allowing Conservative governments to appoint Judges. Three of these four misogynists were appointed by the Alberta PC's while the fourth was appointed by Harper.
The only good news is that when iot gets to the Court of Appeal stage they unanimously get thrown out and retrials ordered. I think that an outside body appointed by politicians would not do as well as the Court of Appeal.
Sun, 2016-09-18 14:01
#44
Thanks for the inside scoop. Just curious: were they mandatory? I'm guessing Criminal Law must have been, but what about Aboriginal Law?
If we already have these and they're not working then I'm out of magic bullets, for now.
The problem is who gets appointed to the bench. It would appear that even Law Professors from Alberta can be misogynist assholes who misapply the law based on their warped views. The law Professor in this case was not qualified to hear sexual assault cases. Law is a specialized as medicine and frankly I would not want a podiatrist performing neurosurgery on me even though they are both doctors. I doubt if this guy has taken any Criminal Law courses after the mandatory first year course he would have taken in 1978.
Three teens had alleged that as small children, they had been sexually abused on multiple occasions, in one girl’s case for seven years. All of them were about 5 when the alleged abuse began. The two stepdaughters didn’t tell each other until they were just reaching their teen years, according to their testimony. They then went to their biological father, and from there to the RCMP. The biological daughter also went to the RCMP. They were in their late teens when they testified in 2013.
Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Keith Yamauchi, a former University of Calgary law professor who was appointed by Stephen Harper’s government in 2007, said the three complainants’ credibility suffered by their delay in reporting.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/new-sex-assault-trial-order...
Mr. Justice Yamauchi received a Master of Laws from the University of British Columbia in 1994, a Bachelor of Laws from University of Saskatchewan in 1981, and a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Calgary in 1977. He was admitted to the Alberta Bar in 1982. Mr. Justice Yamauchi is presently self employed in his own law practice on a part time basis and a Professor with the Faculty of Law at the University of Calgary. He has developed a practice expertise in domestic and international bankruptcy, insolvency and financial restructuring, banking and corporate commercial transactions.
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=abce3890-2a4c-49fc-8151-6e...
Sun, 2016-09-18 14:13
#45
ikosmos
I think the real problem here is that this is not an isolated incident. While this Judge's comments were extreme and grotesque and therefore worthy of dismissal, I fear that his misconduct is just the tip of a huge iceberg that the Canadian Judicial system is not prepared to face head on. I believe that there are many judges in Canada who are unqualified to hear sexual assault cases. Therefore, I feel that one motive of this hearing will be for the Judicial Councel to portray this as an isolated, easily remedied incident with education and sensitivity training, and then to simply move on and bury the bigger problem that they do not want to face.
Anecdotally, I've had this confirmed by people who work with Court of Appeal judges in a/nother Canadian province. If reporters in Canada actually reported on what was said in many courts in Canada, I think the scope of this problem would be more apparent, and there would be more public support for measures to change this "huge iceberg".
Sun, 2016-09-18 15:34
#46
Misfit
Ikomos, yes, I agree. And Krop, I wasn't meaning politicians when I said outside interests.
Sun, 2016-09-18 15:40
#47
Ikomos, yes, I agree. And Krop, I wasn't meaning politicians when I said outside interests.
Then who do you envision as the appointing body? When I look at the US judicial system one of its main problems with over sentencing and excessive incarceration seems to me to stem from electing Judges. It leads to campaigns where any leniency in sentencing is used against a Judge come the next election and many campaigns run basically on a "tough on criminals" theme.
Sun, 2016-09-18 15:57
#48
Misfit
Ikomos, in my province many decades ago, a woman was brutally assaulted by her pimp. The judge acquitted the pimp of assault claiming that she consented to the violence because she was a prostitute and that violence naturally comes with the career she chose. In another case, the same judge said to the jury that two teenage boys, who brutally raped a prostitute, and then left her face down in a mud puddle unconscious to die and even joked about it the next day at school claiming that she deserved to die because she was just an Indian, he said to the jury to remember that she was a prostitute and that these are good kids. I witnessed the effects of a judge in another province who acquitted three men of gang raping a 15 year old girl because she wore a halter top to a party and was therefore responsible for what happened to her. Yes, I believe that these statements and decisions by judges are very common indeed.
Sun, 2016-09-18 16:12
#49
It leads to campaigns where any leniency in sentencing is used against a Judge come the next election and many campaigns run basically on a "tough on criminals" theme.
I was just about to post pretty much the same thing. As soon as justices have to woo votes, they're pretty much saying that their judgements will be tailored to the wishes of the voters. The judiciary really needs to be at arm's length from popular opinion.
Sun, 2016-09-18 16:16
#50
Misfit
Krop, yes you do have a good point there. I naturally assumed that an anti-Trump vote, any vote other than Trump is a no-brainer. And I honestly don't think that the Canadian electorate is that much more elevated than the American one is. The problem with most of these self-regulating bodies is that they are controlled from within. I think in my province, for instance, the board of the College of Physicians and Surgeons, has one lay person on the decision making board. All the other board members are physicians and surgeons themselves, members of the CMA. The overwhelming decision making control and powers sits with the people within their own profession. It is all controlled from within. I think that the CMA needs to play a major role in the process. They are trained in the high level facts of the case, but I feel that they should be a minority voice in the disciplinary findings. Say if there are seven board members, three of the seven should be physicians and surgeons. The other four should come from outside the profession. Those four outside positions could be elected to four year terms and be voted on as a part of the civic election process.
Sun, 2016-09-18 18:21
#51
The overwhelming decision making control and powers sits with the people within their own profession. It is all controlled from within. I think that the CMA needs to play a major role in the process. They are trained in the high level facts of the case, but I feel that they should be a minority voice in the disciplinary findings. Say if there are seven board members, three of the seven should be physicians and surgeons. The other four should come from outside the profession.
So you're basically saying that the members who are most able to see the "high level facts of the case" should be outvoted by the members who cannot?
I can't demand that you trust the M.D. members of the College board, but I can suggest to you that they aren't there to serve the medical profession, they're there to serve the goverment and the interest of the citizens.