There is severe disappointment and outrage in some quarters after Ontario Supreme Court Justice Maria Carroccia ruled recently that all five of the young Hockey Canada players are not guilty of sexual assault in an incident in London, Ontario, dating back seven years to 2018.
The high-profile case has engrossed Canadians for months now, partly becuase it involves hockey and partly because it involves some pretty lurid sex. As I have commented previously, the victim, known only as E.M., has been subjected to days and days of stressful cross-examination, and the trial hung on the thorny issue of consent.
The trial saw a series of legal twists and turns, including an early declaration of a mistrial and the dismissal of the entire jury mid-way through. In the end, the trial was heard and decided by judge only - the aforementioned Justice Carroccia - with no jury involved.
And, in the end, the judge decided that, not only did the Crown fail to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the complainant didn't consent to the sexual activity, but that she positively DID consent to it, and even initiated much of the sexual activity. Justice Carroccia also concluded that E.M. was not as drunk as she later claimed.
Furthermore, the judge did not find E.M.'s testimony to be "credible or reliable" and that ahe "cannot rely" on it (and, it's true, there did seem on the face of it to be many memory lapses and discrepancies compared to her previous evidence, all of which the judge had to take into account). She also called out E.M.'s use of the phrase "my truth", rather than "the truth" - pedantic? Maybe, maybe not.
Anyway, it's done, and thise rather slick, smarmy-looking young hockey players have walked scot-free. They are talking about complete "vindication" and "exoneration" (or at least their lawyers are). Frankly, it kind of smarts because the guys are clearly aware that they probably pushed it too far, and I'm sure they regret it. But against the law? Apparently not. The National Hockey League has deemed them personas non gratas anyway - the NHL was at great pains to distance itself from this kind of sleaziness and demeaning behaviour - so they will be forced to ply their trade in other leagues elsewhere.
E.M. herself is traumatized by the whole process and obviously very disappointed that it came to nothing. Surely, she would not have put herself through it all unless she truly believed that she was in the right. But now she needs to put it down to experience and to pick up the threads of her life, which have been put on hold for the last seven years.
As a woman herself, I can't believe that Justice Carroccia found it easy to completely dismiss a fellow female in this way. But, as she says, "Believe the Victim" is all very well as a handy catch-phrase, but it has no place in a court of law, where the evidence in its entirety needs to be considered. I'm sure she would have liked to be able to believe the victim, but found herself unable to do so in this case. A tricky position to find herself in.
Most of the protesters outside the court clearly disagree - "We believe you", "Believe all women" and "Believe the victim" are by far the most commonly-seen placards - and most of the opinion articles I have read since the decision was announced have come down firmly on the miscarriage-of-justics side of things. There is an implicit assumption that the legal system has let E.M., and women in general, down.
Predictably, the more conservative commentators commended Justice Carroccia's "bravery", while those more left-of-centre thought her decision harsh and unfair. There is no evidence I can find that Justice Carroccia is particularly right-wing or anti-women.or otherwise politically motivated.
We are not now deep in the #MeToo movement - if anything, we are in a period of backlash - but Justice Caroccia's decision, and her explanatory words, should probably be considered brave. There is probably quite an implicit pressure to find in favour of the female victim in these cases; she must have been very convinced of her decision to find otherwise.
There is no doubt, though, that the case has put the #MeToo movement back several years. Many victims of sexual assault will not be willing to put themselves through the wringer the way E.M. did. We could almost have been back in pre-#MeToo times, when, in another high profile sexual assault trial, Canadian media personality Jian Ghomeshi was acquitted of all charges.
But was the verdict actually wrong, as the protesters so clearly believe? It's hard to say so in any definitive way. It's true that much of E.M.'s testimony did not hang together, and she did seem to consent to, and even direct to a some extent, the sexual encouter
All in all, it leaves a bad taste in the mouth, and hardly anyone seems completely happy about the outcome, probably including Justice Carroccia, who may have to watch her back as she walks home from the court for a while.
No comments:
Post a Comment