Couple found guilty of sexually assaulting young girl go free because case took too long
Justice Sandra Zinchuk found the couple's case took
45 months from start to finish
By Riley Laychuk, CBC News 
A Manitoba judge has ruled that a couple's case taking nearly 46 months from the first court date to conviction was too long, and stayed their convictions. (Bert Savard/CBC)
A Manitoba couple convicted of sexually assaulting a young girl over a five-year period have had their convictions thrown out in a Portage la Prairie courtroom after a judge ruled their case was unreasonably delayed.
The two were charged with sexual assault and two counts of sexual interference each in July 2013. They were convicted in May 2017, nearly four years later, but their convictions were tossed after filing a motion with the court, saying it took too long.
"I find that the delay in this case was unreasonable," Justice Sandra Zinchuk said in her decision last week.
CBC News is not naming the couple to protect the identity of the victim, who was a minor at the time of the offences.
The ruling follows the Jordan decision, as it has come to be known — a July 8, 2016, ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada that set aside drug convictions in a British Columbia case due to unreasonable delay.
In a 5-4 ruling, the court said the old means of determining whether proceedings had taken too long were inadequate. Under the new framework, unreasonable delay was to be presumed if proceedings topped 18 months in provincial court or 30 months in superior court.
Not meant to send a message to victims
Scott Newman is a Winnipeg defence lawyer and spokesperson for the Criminal Defence Lawyers Association of Manitoba. He said that while he couldn't speak to this specific case, as a whole, it's important for the criminal justice system to function in a timely manner.
"It's never meant to send a message to anyone involved in a particular case," said Newman. "It's meant to send a future message, to say 'get your house in order.'"
"This will happen again unless you have the criminal justice system running efficiently and running appropriately and delivering timely justice for everyone."
Newman said timely justice is important because "people's memories fade, it gets harder to defend yourself from allegations particularly when you don't know about them until you're arrested later."
He also said moving cases through the courts in a reasonable time is good for society as a whole.
"It's important for everyone to know that justice is delivered in a timely fashion … not just for the accused persons, for victims of crime, for the public at large to know that the criminal justice system is functioning efficiently."
Case adjourned several times
Court heard the couple's case was adjourned several times to allow them to file for legal aid, before they eventually decided to represent themselves — a delay that Zinchuk deemed to be acceptable.
"There would generally be some acceptable delay in retaining acceptable counsel. An accused is entitled to take legitimate steps to respond to charges," said Zinchuk . "There is no evidence that either accused delayed or hindered their legal aid application."
That was followed by delays in setting pretrial dates after a motion by the Crown asked that defence counsel be appointed in order to cross-examine the complainant in the case. Zinchuk also said the 10-month span between the date both the defence and Crown were ready to set trial dates and the actual trial was longer than it should have been.
'This was not a complex case … There was one Crown witness and both accused testified.'
- Justice Sandra Zinchuk
The couple's case finally went to trial in May 2017. On the first day of the trial, the couple filed a motion to have the case thrown out due to the length of time it took.
Zinchuk ruled to proceed with the trial and the two were ultimately found guilty, nearly 46 months after they were charged. They were due to be sentenced Dec. 12, but Zinchuk instead ruled the length of time was longer than the acceptable length of 30 months set out in the Supreme Court of Canada's Jordan ruling.
And for some reason she didn't know that in May?
"The delays noted above are not the result of action or inaction of either accused," Zinchuk told court. "There was delay in the range of 14 months which was not caused by the defence.
"This was not a complex case," she said. "There was one Crown witness and both accused testified … there were no pretrial motions or charter issues."
Zinchuk also said the case also didn't involve a large number of charges, other significant requirements or expert evidence that may have also caused delays.
The justice compared the couple's case to another, in which the Supreme Court ruled was unreasonably delayed.
Kenneth Gavin Williamson waited nearly three years to be tried on charges related to sex offences against a minor decades ago. The Supreme Court agreed the Ontario man's delay was unreasonable and endorsed a lower court's stay of proceedings.
65 motions filed in Manitoba
According to Manitoba Justice, 65 delay motions on Criminal Code matters in Manitoba have been filed, as of last week. Of these, nine remain outstanding.
Twenty-five have been dismissed by the court, 10 were stayed, 18 were resolved or withdrawn by counsel and three were successful, which led to the court staying the charge, a spokesperson said.
It is not clear if these most recent dismissals are reflected in these numbers.
So, in these cases of child sex abuse, how is the child protected from further abuse? While the Jordan decision is not meant to send a message to victims, it does. It tells them the rights of the criminal are more important than the rights of the victim in Canada. It's a sorry state when a criminal feels more protected by society than an innocent child.
CBC's decision against airing Transgender Kids doc should leave everyone unsettled
Political correctness takes precedence over science at CBC
By Debra W. Soh, for CBC News
To be clear, Zucker wasn't against transitioning for transgender people. He simply challenged the notion that every single child who says he or she is of the wrong gender is actually transgender.
(Jim Ross/New York Times)
Last week, CBC was scheduled to air the controversial BBC documentary Transgender Kids: Who Knows Best? but scrapped the plan the day of, citing audience feedback and its own "further review of the doc." Activists had argued that the film was "harmful" and poised to "feed transphobia."
In actuality, the documentary offers a rare and factual perspective on the politicization of gender therapy by featuring interviews with Dr. Kenneth Zucker, a psychologist and international research expert on gender dysphoria in children. (Zucker also happens to be a former colleague of mine.)
Although his research and approach to therapy are scientifically sound, they counter transgender orthodoxy in ways on which I will elaborate below.
Zucker's approach
But first, some background: in December of 2015, Zucker was fired from his position at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), where he had served as head of the Child, Youth, and Family Gender Identity Clinic. Many activists who had petitioned for his removal claimed victory.
The majority of gender dysphoric children desist by puberty
What was so controversial about Zucker's approach? In short, he did not blindly follow the current popular dogma of affirming young children who say they want to transition to the opposite sex. Instead, Zucker's therapy was informed by research that shows that the majority of gender dysphoric children desist by puberty.
Indeed, across all 11 studies conducted on this topic, including research published in the last five years, about 60 to 90 per cent of gender dysphoric children grow up to be gay in adulthood, not transgender.
Zucker's approach was not about "curing" transgender kids or conducting "reparative" or "conversion therapy," as some of his critics contend. Rather, it was about recognizing that it simply doesn't make sense for a child to undergo the challenges of a social or physical transition if they are likely to grow comfortable in the body they already have, on their own. That is the so-called "harmful" view the documentary explores.
To be clear, Zucker wasn't against transitioning for transgender people; he published academic studies supporting the use of hormonal blockers and cross-sex hormones for patients upon reaching puberty. He simply challenged the notion that every single child who says he or she is of the wrong gender is actually transgender.
The film also discusses the subject of detransitioning: a process whereby people who have transitioned end up regretting it and transition back to their birth sex. It also shed light on the theory that underlying conditions can be mistaken for gender dysphoria, including autism and borderline personality disorder.
Detransitioning sounds like a nightmare. I expect there are physical limits to it, but the psychological horror of realizing you have mutilated your body and mind, and it was all a big mistake must be extraordinary.
And how many of those people commit suicide rather than transitioning back? We know more than 40% of trans attempt suicide. The politically correct would like to blame bullying by straight people for those suicide attempts, but I think they are deflecting the blame from where it belongs - on those who encourage children to transition before puberty.
When Transgender Kids was released earlier this year, I sensed a feeling of relief among my colleagues in sexology that someone was finally willing to challenge the "gender affirmative" approach, especially in a way that was made for public consumption.
Nowadays, clinicians face extreme pressure to endorse the early transitioning model for their young patients, even when it may not be the best way forward for them. That's certainly the message that Zucker's firing sent, and it speaks all the more to why the film needed to be aired.
Controversy in the U.K.
This is not the first time Transgender Kids has encountered controversy. Upon first airing in the U.K., the film was widely protested and has since been removed from the BBC's website. That's not altogether surprising: in extreme cases, transgender activists have harassed and intimidated sex researchers who produce work that counters their political agenda. That's a big reason why you'll be hard-pressed to find many new studies countering the early transitioning approach.
Ontario's extreme liberal laws
More recently, this activism has influenced Canadian policy by way of Ontario's Bill 77 — the Affirming Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Act of 2015 —which incorrectly conflates therapeutic approaches like Zucker's with unethical attempts to change a person's sexual orientation. And Bill 89 earlier this year, which writes gender ideology into child welfare laws and justifies intervention on the part of the government if a parent does not affirm a child's gender identity or expression.
Now the activism has made its way to Canada's publicly funded national broadcaster, which has opted against airing dissenting views on this issue. This should have individuals on both sides of the debate feeling unsettled.
Supporting transgender people, including their right to dignity, support and medical intervention, isn't at odds with taking a scientifically guided approach to determining the best outcomes for children. But as is commonly the case with political movements, these nuances only complicate the narrative and cede opportunities for activists to gain further ground.
Those complicit in the silencing of legitimate science have lost sight of the forest for the trees. The issue is no longer about what's in the best interest of these children, but about winning, at any cost, the ideological war.
I have seen CBC reporters mock people who don't take science as their god. And yet, here they have science bow down to the god of political correctness because some people started screaming. The consequence is that the erroneous and horrific practice of transitioning children before puberty will continue unabated and even undiscussed as the sexual abuse of children that it is.
This is another example where children have no voice, especially those children who are abused.
CBC is supporting this practice of child sexual abuse, and they ought to be ashamed of themselves; I certainly am ashamed of them.
Swedish police retract safety advice to women despite
3rd gang rape in 1 month
The New Normal - Sweden
© Jonathan NACKSTRAND / AFP
Police in the Swedish city of Malmo have retracted advice given to women in the city following the brutal gang-rape of a 17-year-old girl. The force advised women not to go out alone after dark following the vicious attack.
Officers issued the warning over the weekend following the assault, which occurred on Saturday, and marked the third such vicious rape committed by unknown perpetrators in the city in less than a month.
The original warning, reported by various Swedish media outlets, said that women should avoid venturing out after dark without someone for company. Considering it gets dark quite early in Sweden at this time of year, that would mean women should avoid being in the streets alone after approximately 3pm local time.
However, following criticism, Malmo police issued a formal statement on Monday retracting those remarks, describing them as “unfortunate and unclear.”
“My advice is to behave as usual and not act on fear,” said police spokesperson Mats Karlsson, as cited by SVT.
In other words, We're OK with you getting gang-raped as long as we are not criticized.
So far, police have not linked this most recent incident to the previous two but are also not ruling out a connection. In this latest case, there is no CCTV footage to analyze but police are attempting to recover footage from surrounding areas in a bid to catch the attackers.
Sexual abuse at observation home in India:
minister says action taken
PTI
Nagpur, Maharashtra Women and Child Welfare Minister Pankaja Munde today told the Legislative Council here that administrative officers have been charged under the POCSO Act in connection with an incident of sexual abuse of minors at an observation home in Pune.
MLC Jaidev Gaikwad, during the question hour, sought a status report on the case.
The minister informed that concerned officers were charged under the relevant sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (for negligence), and disciplinary action has been initiated against them.
The minister also informed that action has also been taken against ten juveniles involved in the incident.
Leader of Opposition Dhananjay Munde asked what steps the government had taken so that such incidents do not happen again in observation homes and orphanages.
Pankaja Munde said children who have the background of `being in conflict with law (who are held for commission of offences) and other children should be kept seriously.
"Many children in observation homes have a background of being in conflict with law. Children from such background and those with normal background should not be kept under one roof," she said.
Her department will prepare a proposal in this regard, she said.
Security at these institutions would be tightened, the minister assured.
Northern Ireland MLA breaks silence on brother's child sexual assault conviction
SDLP assembly member Pat Catney. Picture by Mal McCann
AN SDLP MLA has spoken publicly for the first time about his adopted brother's recent conviction on sex charges.
Pat Catney (63) said his brother Jim's sexual assualt of a young girl as indefensible.
The Lagan Valley representative, who previously owned the Kitchen Bar in Belfast city centre, said he was shocked by his brother's actions and that his thoughts were with the victim.
In May this year, James Catney (67) received a three-year sentence, suspended for three years, after pleading guilty to three counts of gross indecency and three of indecent assault.
Wow! No jail time! Northern Ireland is obviously the place to be if you're a paedophile.
He was placed on the sex offenders register for life and made the subject of a sexual offences prevention order.
His younger brother, Pat, who was elected to the assembly in March, told the Belfast Telegraph, the episode was a "dark time" for everyone concerned, but added that his sibling has not been disowned by the family.
"I try to be protective of him but we have to think of the victim," said Mr Catney.
He said the family felt a "sense of shame" over the case.
"We didn't know anything about it. It came as a complete shock. Jim was out of our lives for a long time, maybe 30 years."
That's curious. Why was he out of your lives for 30 years, which would have begun not long before his offending? Was it because you knew he was a pervert even then?
The offences took place on dates between December 31 1990 and January 1 1994 when James Catney was aged between 41 and 44 and the victim aged between eight and 11.
The court heard that Catney had developed behavioural problems from the age of 16 when he discovered he had been adopted and started to abuse alcohol.
"I spoke to Jim about what he did and how wrong that was; he understood that," said Mr Catney.
No comments:
Post a Comment