Supreme Court backs victims in 34 sex-assault cases in row

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled against accused people in 34 sexual-assault cases in a row, stretching back more than four years, making it more difficult to overturn such convictions on appeal as the cases pour in during the Me Too era.

Even when a trial judge’s explanation of their ruling is ambiguous, which in the past left the door open for a successful appeal, the court has established a presumption that the judge understood the law and applied it correctly. The court has also cast doubt on Women’s groups strongly disagree that the Supreme Court has a blind spot or is moving toward a presumption of belief in complainants’ testimony.

Constance Backhouse, a legal historian and a former chair of sexual-assault law at the University of Ottawa.Prosecuting and Defending Sexual Offence Cases Constance Backhouse, a legal historian and former chair of sexual-assault law at the University of Ottawa, said the numbers may be connected to the Me Too movement, which first caught fire on social media late in 2017.

Most involved the basics of sexual-assault trials – issues of consent, credibility and intoxication – rather than novel legal concerns. Unlike in cases where DNA or an alibi can help clear an accused, Mr. Brown said, “it’s very difficult to establish a person’s innocence. There is no objective marker of innocence in those cases.”

The judge who oversaw the trial found the complainant credible, and convicted the couple. But three Ontario appeal court judges with 78 years of combined experience on the bench ruled unanimously that the judge had not properly explained his ruling, especially around the complainant’s capacity to consent when intoxicated.

The result of G.F. and other cases is that it is becoming increasingly difficult to overturn a judge’s credibility assessments on appeal, criminal-defence lawyers said. “Occasionally, a court of appeal will rule in favour of the defence on one of these issues because of a trial judge’s mistake, but that feels rare,” Ms. Duckett said. “These credibility cases must be won at the trial level.”

Yet, Fed Liberals just introduced Bill C-5, eliminating mandatory jail sentences for gun crimes? They were put in because Liberal judges were too lenient. How does that keep us safe? We already have the toughest gun laws in the world?

Typical Liberal 'Hug-A-thug' soft on crime policies!

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Families of Ontario murder victims outraged at Supreme Court rulingThe latest decision from the country's top court opened an old wound in Linda Babcock's heart. The Friday ruling that declared consecutive parole sentences unconstitutional brought back the sharp pain of her daughter's murder by a serial killer and his friend nearly 10 years ago - and left Babcock in tears. Don’t blame them but not surprised. Canada has become soft. Surprised not out on day parole yet. Everything in favour of the criminals. Crime is on the rise because the courts have gone soft. Commit a Violent crime and you’ll get a slap on the wrist
Source: CP24 - 🏆 30. / 67 Read more »

Supreme Court ruling devalues lives of most of mosque shooter’s victimsMurderers with multiple victims receive a gift from the top court, but Rosie DiManno thinks the justices have overlooked some of the purposes of incarceration. It’s most indubitably time to bring back the death penalty/capital punishment to Canada/Canadian Law! mizzionpozzible Overdo5e5tudiO5 PSSSSCK_Law2022 It’s most indubitably time to bring back the death penalty/capital punishment to Canada/Canadian Law! mizzionpozzible Overdo5e5tudiO5 The Supreme Court's ruling devalued the lives of all Canadians just a little bit more, another small step towards making a person's murder socially acceptable
Source: TorontoStar - 🏆 60. / 55 Read more »

Colby Cosh: Supreme Court gives mass murderers an unwelcome reprieveDoes anyone object to locking them up forever? Pathetic, this just confirms that crime and punishment in Canada is not about the victims. A murder victim does not get a second chance therefore neither should the convicted killer. LIFE in jail should be life, until they die. Or capital punishment.Especially for mass murderers Even unanimous judgments can be f*cking stupid. 'Life' in prison is a term of 25 years. Death Penalty was removed (in practice) by the Federal Liberals in 1963, made law in 1976, by the same party. PMJT in his first ever annual budget bill, included lighting up of the sentences involving gun and gang crimes.
Source: nationalpost - 🏆 10. / 80 Read more »