SCC Stomping on Sexual Assault Myths.

• Author: Peerani, Aaida
• Position: Bench Press

Recently, the Supreme Court of Canada ("SCC") dismissed an appeal from the Alberta Court of Appeal ("ABCA"). The ABCA had overturned an Alberta Court of Queen's Bench trial decision in a case of sexual assault.

In this case, a man was acquitted of sexual assault against his stepdaughter. The stepdaughter had complained that when she was 11 to 16 years old, her stepfather touched her sexually about 50 times and simulated a sex act. The Judge at trial, Justice Terry Clackson, found that the man could not be held liable because based on "logic and common sense" the stepdaughter should have avoided him, but she did not do so.

The Crown prosecutor appealed the decision to the ABCA. The ABCA overturned the decision saying that Justice Clackson had used myths and stereotypes about victims. This decision was split 2-1, therefore, the man, had an "as of right" appeal to the SCC.

The SCC dismissed the appeal. In doing so, the SCC stated that Justice Clackson committed an error in judging the stepdaughter's credibility based on the difference between her behaviour and the stereotypical behaviour of a victim of sexual assault.

R. v A.R.D., 2017 ABCA 237

http://canlii.ca/t/h4xms

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/supreme-court-savs-victim-stereotvpe-was-used-in-sexual-assault-case/article37986101 /

Publication Bans and Contempt of Court

In another case at the SCC, Canadian Broadcasting Corp. ("CBC") won a victory against a publication ban. The ban was related to a first degree murder of a person under the age of 18. The Crown Prosecutor was granted a publication ban, meaning that any publication or transmission of the identity of the victim was not permitted. However, CBC had already posted the identity of the victim on its website before the publication ban. CBC refused to take down the information. The Crown took CBC to court to find CBC in contempt of court and to force CBC to take down the information as an interlocutory injunction.

An interlocutory injunction is an order by the Judge that forces a party to do something, in the middle of a trial, even though the trial has not finished. This is often done to protect a party from potential harm while the trial is going on. The chambers judge dismissed the application according to a three part test for an interlocutory injunction which required that:

* The Crown show that there would be a strong likelihood at trial that the CBC would be found in criminal contempt. This means that the Crown...