I am appalled....

[Capital Hunter 18263]

I can't believe this is happening in this land. The animal guy raped a woman on the side of a road and admitted telling the woman "it would only hurt for a little while." and then the idiot judge says that it was the mistaken belief by the guy that "sex was in the air" and a "heightened expectation" that sex would occur. Why, as the judge said " the victim was dressed in tube tops and high heels when they met the guy outside a bar "and made it publicly known that they wanted to party!!!!." What the hell is this? Women around the world are looking up to Canada as a model when they demand for their well-deserved rights and now this .....

 

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/02/26/17418376.html

 

Women can dress the way that they choose and no one or no damn judge or no damn govenment has the right to tell them how to dress and it is no damn indication of invitation to rape. Women can choose how to dress whom to socialize (and whom not to), where to go, what to eat and drink and whom to sleep with (or whom not to). This is ridiculous and appalling and I go further and say the remarks from someone in a judgement position is disgusting in this free land. NO MEANS NO. Anyone who do not hear that IS A RAPIST and belong to jail.

[Miss Scarlett 25073]

I tried to give you rep points for this SA, and I can't since it has been too soon! I fully agree with you on this! I heard it on the radio and FREAKED out yesterday! This is absolutely disgusting! Who the heck does this judge think he is to say that shit!

 

I can't believe this is happening in this land. The animal guy raped a woman on the side of a road and admitted telling the woman "it would only hurt for a little while." and then the idiot judge says that it was the mistaken belief by the guy that "sex was in the air" and a "heightened expectation" that sex would occur. Why, as the judge said " the victim was dressed in tube tops and high heels when they met the guy outside a bar "and made it publicly known that they wanted to party!!!!." What the hell is this?

 

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/02/26/17418376.html

 

Women can dress the way that they choose and no one or no damn judge or no damn govenment has the right to tell them how to dress and it is no damn indication of invitation to rape. Women can choose how to dress whom to socialize (and whom not to), where to go, what to eat and drink and whom to sleep with (or whom not to). This is ridiculous and appalling and I go further and say the remarks from someone in a judgement position is disgusting in this free land. NO MEANS NO. Anyone who do not hear that IS A RAPIST and belong to jail.

[Carrie Moon 68826]

A virtually identical case happened some 20 plus years ago.. I was just deciding to enter this business when I had an argument about this very thing. The judge gave the guy a pass because of what she was wearing (and some sort of drug deal gone wrong I believe)! I wonder if it's the same stupid judge.

[roamingguy 300291]

Can't believe it, just sickening. Judges aren't learned Solomen like individuals.

They are politicians with a law degree, and in spite of the law, they have their own biases which cloud them in decision making. Sad thing, the lady in question, due to this verdict, now has been victimized twice, and a rapist now will go out victimize someone else because he thinks he can get away with it.

RG

[MightyPen 67414]

I'm waiting for the ruling that says if I'm thinking of buying a car and visit a Honda dealership, then decide to leave and check out Toyota, the Honda sales guy has the right to drag me into an office, slap me around, force my account numbers and passwords from me, and use that to "sell" me a crappy car. After all, I shouldn't have walked into the building with my wallet, and clearly a sale was "in the air".

 

I've seen this same incident getting some international press and I'm embarrassed on the country's behalf. The only reassuring thing out of this is that the judge's conduct is under judicial review.

[renegade 11027]

welcome to socialist manitoba - the guy was appointed to the bench less than a year and a half ago - if you read his decision in its entirety its even worse and we pay these guys 200 plus k a year to make these rulings- if he,s not releaved of his judgeship i ,ll be shocked.

[Megan'sTouch 23875]

The judge is basically saying: "Yes this was rape but you're such a whore, I'm going to give your rapist a reduced sentence." How insulting!

[Kubrickfan 12836]

Geez, that sounds like standard attire for a lot of young, club going women these days, so that's really weird. And maybe, or lets assume, the outfit did give an impression of desiring a sexual encounter. But its a far cry from that to having a guy force himself on a girl. Terrible.

[Bea Weston 100]

This is disgusting.

 

:(

 

"He acted at the side of the road without any further inquiry," said Dewar. "He took the lead and expected the complainant to follow. He was insensitive to what the complainant wanted."

 

Raping a woman is "insensitive". ?! Hello understatement of the year.

[Lowdark 5613]

This thinking belongs somewhere about eight centuries ago, used by the cowards who burned women at the stake for witchcraft. The judge is almost as useless a human being as the rapist he managed to convict and excuse at the same time. If Justice is served, he'll be removed from the bench with no severance or buyout and prevented from ever having another judicial job in the entire country for the rest of his small and useless life. And his name will be splashed across every newspaper and news broadcast and website in the free world as a misogynist cretin not worth the skin he's wearing.

[VedaSloan 119179]

I wish I could say this surpised me, but it doesn't. Prior to 1983, "mistaken belief" was a valid defense (that is, if a guy argued that he thought she consented or was willing, he had a mistaken belief in her consent), and you could rape your wife, as marital rape was not a crime under the rape laws at that period in time. Not only that, but to actually prosecute a rape, the complainant had to be female, the accused had to be male, they couldn't be married, and vaginal penetration had to occur. The complaint also had to be made immediately after it happened.

 

These laws have obviously changed, but that doesn't mean the mentality of the judges prosecuting the cases has.

[Nicolette Vaughn 294340]

A case of "misread signals", "mistaken beliefs that sex would occur" and "heightened expectations"?? Are you kidding me?? Since when does the word "no" mean yes? This judge should be tossed from the bench and this rapist in jail. I, for one am ashamed of the Canadian Justice system right now.

[Rounding Third 9567]

Is not complicated. No means No! I say it is not complicated but in reality we have taken decades and generations to get where we are as a society on this. No means no. It is not complicated. The judge is about my age. Tonight I am ashamed. Sex was in the air. So what. No means no. It is not complicated. Be appalled, outraged, email your MP. Do not let this criminal rapist and this incompetent judge dishonour the hundreds or more likely thousands of rape victims that have courageously spoken out at the risk of ridicule and scepticism. We are to be appalled!!

[Souperman 100]

What a sad thing for a judge to say...sex is in the air. I didn't read the whole article on this case, just heard a bit on tv. Personally I do believe that there is such a thing as "love is in the air" but if that is what this judge is trying to imply in this case, well that is just sad at the very least. And how odd for a judge to make a ruling when the laws require a certain amount of physical evidence. I realize how difficult it is for anyone to judge one or more persons state of mind at a given time in the past, but this judge's statements seem rather flippant, extremely biased and totally irresponsible.

 

As for this having anything to do with socialism...all I can say is huh? As for what kind of a life form we are as humans, well is any wonder why all kinds of artisits are mystified by the butterfly.

 

I agree women (& men) can wear whatever they want. However, it can't be denied that clothing, etc. do send out certain messages. It seems that we all live in a civilization that is bombarded with mixed messages and not just in terms of sexuality. I've also seen some people who do an awful lot of acting, flirting, or whatever and then say no. And while no means no, the games that people play before it gets to that point can be very confusing and shit happens. This is in no way meant to justify any act of rape. It's almost as if a lot of people (not everyone) ave no idea what the hell they want anymore and so many people are just out looking for the best deal than get...so very little about love anymore.

 

I've spent a lot of time in the last few years studying history and different cultures. I've tried to find the ones that lived in real peace, and that includes the absence of rape. To me the bigger issue is this horrible thing called rape, and how this is one of a series of ongoing symptons of a civilization that is less and less natural. Someone on here toughts Canada as a great place to live. My televison tells me the same thing. However, when I really look around I see some good people living in a culture that is not so great.

[Capital Hunter 18263]

Thanks for the update WIT. Yes it is step in the right direction but in my view NOT enough. He clearly is a biased and an uninformed individual whose his backward biased personal belief has clouded his judgement and he should NOT be in a judgement position in my view whether of sexual nature or otherwise. I hope that the Canadian Judicial Council take the right decision in this regard and equally important to revisit the outragous conditional sentence given to Rhodes for sexual assault which in my view based on the existing evidence and what he himself has admitted, was a clear case of rape and needs unconditional sentence behind bars.

[Guest s******ecan****]

Dewar was appointed to the bench by the current federal government in 2009.

 

 

All you need to know right there. Guy is probably some right wing christianist if he was appointed by Harper.

 

His decision clearly has a religious puritan overtone to it.

[Isabella Gia (Banned) 53881]

Found this today

 

http://www.brandonsun.com/breaking-news/judge-at-heart-of-firestorm-pulled-off-trial-117393568.html?viewAllComments=y

 

My thoughts? I hope never to be in court with a judge like that. Basically the message he is giving is criminals can get away if they were 'provoked' ... If you dress sexy you can be raped, if you leave bank with money in your hands it can be stolen no consequence to thief as you didn't put it away?? What a shame!

[Souperman 100]

On a related subject, please check out this webiste...a really amazing young artist. I wonder if that judge (or any of them) can understand her message...I think you (we) all will find her makes one almost speechless...enjoy.

 

www.audrey-kawasaki.com

[LuxeMulvari 65764]

Even IF this judge could argue that what she was wearing was provocative and there was something implied, that all goes right out the window as soon as a woman says "no". Jeez kindergarten kids know this, if you don't someone to touch you you yell "no" and tell a grown-up. It's a scary day when my 8 year old nephew can grasp this concept better than someone who is supposed to uphold the the law with a degree.

 

Sadly, biased law enforcement seems to be the case in this country. If you look at incarceration statistics in this country, poor people and minorities seem to get longer and harsher sentences. I think this has to with most judges coming from the higher rungs in society, and therefore cannot relate or do not have sympathy for victims or criminals who have different circumstances than them. This belief reflected in the laws concerning our line of work, there are even women groups protesting the government changing the laws so we are safer. These judges and people from the upper class cannot relate or understand why we choose to do what we do, so they condemn us as immoral and are in favour of laws that put or lives in danger. As far as they are concerned, we are not self respecting people, so we get what we deserve, just as this juges believed this woman (who was wearing a tube top and wanted to party so therefore was a "lewd" woman) got what she had coming as well.

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

Mia Rabson reports for the Winnipeg Free Press, 10 Nov 2011:

 

http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Judge+apologizes+comments+assault+case+allowed+remain+bench/5684954/story.html

 

A Manitoba judge whose comments about a sexual assault victim implied she was partly to blame for her attack has been scolded by the Canadian Judicial Council for conduct unbecoming of someone sitting on the federal bench.

 

But Justice Robert Dewar will keep his job because it was determined to be an isolated incident and he has accepted he was wrong and apologized, said Neil Wittmann, CJC judicial conduct committee vice-chairman.

 

The CJC, which oversees the conduct of all federally appointed judges, asked Wittmann to review the case after numerous complaints were made about Dewar's comments last February. The Manitoba government was one of the complainants.

 

In a sentencing hearing for Kenneth Rhodes, Dewar suggested the victim's attire and flirtatious behaviour were partly to blame for the attack, which involved forced intercourse.

 

Rhodes was convicted of sexual assault. However, in sentencing, Dewar said Rhodes was not as morally culpable as other rapists because of "misunderstood signals and inconsiderate behaviour."

 

Dewar noted the victim was wearing a tube top without a bra, high heels and plenty of makeup, had discussed going swimming in a lake despite not having a bathing suit and had sent signals that "sex was in the air."

 

He called Rhodes a "clumsy Don Juan" and said those factors could not be considered during the trial but could be at sentencing. He issued a conditional sentence rather than the three-year jail term the Crown sought.

 

Dewar's comments set off a firestorm of responses, mainly by people who believed he was reverting to stereotypes that women who dress provocatively are inviting rape. There were numerous protests and rallies calling for Dewar's resignation last winter.

 

In a statement Wednesday, Wittmann said he was of the view Dewar's remarks showed a clear lack of sensitivity toward victims of sexual assault and fell short of the high standard Canadians expect of all judges.

 

In the release from the CJC, Dewar apologized for his comments and said he wished to "express my unequivocal apology to (the victim) for the hurt she must have experienced from my comments."

 

Dewar has also met with an expert on gender equality and is pursuing further professional development in that area.

 

Wittmann said due to Dewar's apology and willingness to undertake training, and given that the remarks were part of an isolated event, no further disciplinary action will be taken. He did, however, formally express his concerns to Dewar about his conduct.

 

While awaiting the CJC review, Manitoba Chief Justice Glenn Joyal had ordered Dewar not to sit on any trials involving sexual assault cases. Joyal lifted that restriction on Wednesday.

 

A spokeswoman for the Manitoba government said the province is pleased Dewar has apologized and that the CJC agreed with the province's concerns about Dewar's remarks.

 

Winnipeg NDP provincial representative Sharon Blady, who has a PhD in women's studies and once taught about these issues before becoming a politician, said it's great Dewar took responsibility and apologized but she said the gender-equality training and understanding should have come before he was on the bench.

 

"Let's hope it's a teaching moment and not just for himself but for others," said Blady.

 

However, University of Winnipeg politics professor Shannon Sampert said the CJC did not go far enough to punish Dewar for the comments and believes they have done irreparable harm.

 

"I'd like to know how many women have made the decision not to come forward since he said that," she said. "What was the damage done?"

 

The CJC does not have authority to review trial decisions or sentences. The province is appealing the sentence and that appeal is still before the courts. At the same time, Rhodes is appealing his conviction.

[CristyCurves 169032]

I can't believe this is happening in this land. The animal guy raped a woman on the side of a road and admitted telling the woman "it would only hurt for a little while." and then the idiot judge says that it was the mistaken belief by the guy that "sex was in the air" and a "heightened expectation" that sex would occur. Why, as the judge said " the victim was dressed in tube tops and high heels when they met the guy outside a bar "and made it publicly known that they wanted to party!!!!." What the hell is this? Women around the world are looking up to Canada as a model when they demand for their well-deserved rights and now this .....

 

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/02/26/17418376.html

 

Women can dress the way that they choose and no one or no damn judge or no damn govenment has the right to tell them how to dress and it is no damn indication of invitation to rape. Women can choose how to dress whom to socialize (and whom not to), where to go, what to eat and drink and whom to sleep with (or whom not to). This is ridiculous and appalling and I go further and say the remarks from someone in a judgement position is disgusting in this free land. NO MEANS NO. Anyone who do not hear that IS A RAPIST and belong to jail.

 

 

I didn't think I could be shocked by what people do or say any longer,I guess I was wrong,incredible !!!

[Guest ***t***iv***]

even though that 'judge' didn't lose his job (which he should have because IMO.. is that any way to judge?)

 

at least there were repercussions.

hopefully the sensitivity training is attended and pays off.

 

thanks for posting the update on the story!

[Andee 220524]

No matter what happens, NO means NO. Period!!!

 

What part of that did the perp an the Judge not get??