A decision in a sexual assault case implied that the complainant should be properly known as a 'person with a vagina'
First Reading is a daily newsletter keeping you posted on the travails of Canadian politicos, all curated by the National Post’s own Tristin Hopper. To get an early version sent directly to your inbox, sign up here.
The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in a recent sexual assault case that it was “problematic” for a lower court judge to refer to the alleged victim as a “woman,” implying that the more appropriate term should have been “person with a vagina.”
Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.
Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
Don't have an account? Create Account
In a decision published Friday, Justice Sheilah Martin wrote that a trial judge’s use of the word “a woman” may “have been unfortunate and engendered confusion.”
Martin does not specify why the word “woman” is confusing, but the next passage in her decision refers to the complainant as a “person with a vagina.” Notably, not one person in the entire case is identified as transgender, and the complainant is referred to throughout as a “she.”
The case was R. v. Kruk, which involved a 2017 charge of sexual assault against then 34-year-old Maple Ridge, B.C., man Charles Kruk.
“Mr. Kruk found the complainant intoxicated, lost, and distressed one night in downtown Vancouver,” reads the background to the case. “He decided to take her to his house, and connected with the complainant’s parents by phone.”
It’s then that the accounts diverge. The complainant testified that she woke up to find that her pants were off, and Kruk was vaginally penetrating her. Kruk testified that the complainant’s pants were off because she’d removed them herself after spilling water on them earlier in the night – and that what she assumed was a rape was actually just Kruk startling her awake.
This newsletter tackles hot topics with boldness, verve and wit. (Subscriber-exclusive edition on Fridays)
By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.
A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.
The next issue of Platformed will soon be in your inbox.
We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again
At trial in 2020, a B.C. judge rejected Kruk’s defence in part on the grounds that the complainant was not likely to be mistaken about the sensation of vaginal penetration.
“She said she felt his penis inside her and she knew what she was feeling. In short, her tactile sense was engaged. It is extremely unlikely that a woman would be mistaken about that feeling,” read the initial decision.
It was this line that drew Martin’s approbation, and the seeming implication that the passage should more appropriately have been “it is extremely unlikely that a person with a vagina would be mistaken about that feeling.”
R v. Kruk had made its way to the Supreme Court because of a prior Court of Appeal decision that had overturned the initial ruling on the grounds that it was “speculative reasoning” to assume that a woman would immediately know the feeling of being penetrated.
“He (the trial judge) made an assumption on a matter that was not so well known as to be notorious,” reads a Court of Appeals ruling overturning the original conviction (the word “notorious,” in this instance, is a legal term referring to a matter so obvious that it doesn’t need to be proved).
Martin’s decision would reject the Court of Appeals’ ruling and restore the original conviction.
“While the choice of the trial judge to use the words ‘a woman’ may have been unfortunate and engendered confusion … the judge’s conclusion was grounded in his assessment of the complainant’s testimony,” she wrote.
Perhaps ironically, a decision that casually dismissed the word “woman” as being confusing was touted as a test case for the principle of judges employing “common-sense assumptions.”
“It is a necessary part of judicial reasoning to assess evidence in relation to a benchmark of what might be ordinarily expected,” wrote Martin in dismissing the Court of Appeals ruling. “I conclude that it is a reasonable generalized expectation that a woman is unlikely to be mistaken about the feeling of vaginal penetration.”
IN OTHER NEWS
Half of Canadians now say that there are too many immigrants, according to a new Leger survey commissioned by the Association for Canadian Studies. Precisely 50 per cent of respondents agreed with the statement that there are “too many immigrants coming into Canada.” Canadian migration has been at all-time highs for the last two years, leading to measurable implications for housing, the job market and basic infrastructure. In the saltier assessment of one BMO Economist, there is “no version of reality” in which Canadian housing could hope to keep up with “an almost overnight tripling in the run-rate of new bodies.”
The draft provisions of the Liberals’ proposed Online Harms Bill have now had two weeks to percolate, and some prominent voices have emerged to accuse the whole endeavour of being somewhat dystopian. This included author Margaret Atwood, who called the proposed bill Orwellian. Atwood had particularly taken issue with a section of the bill that prescribes house arrest for Canadians who haven’t actually committed a hate crime, but might commit one in the future. The bill authorizes police to impose peace bonds on Canadians if they can convince a judge that there are “reasonable grounds” to suspect the person might do something hateful.
Get all of these insights and more into your inbox by signing up for the First Reading newsletter here.
Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notifications—you will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.
The top athletic green powders that can take your health to new heights
Three buzzed-about beauty products we tried this week.
Nazima Qureshi, registered dietitian and nutritionist shares details on how to calculate daily protein intake
A complete guide to buying a mattress online
A skin care business backed by some strong family credibility, Youth To The People recently expanded its offering to include body care.
365 Bloor Street East, Toronto, Ontario, M4W 3L4
© 2024 National Post, a division of Postmedia Network Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized distribution, transmission or republication strictly prohibited.
This website uses cookies to personalize your content (including ads), and allows us to analyze our traffic. Read more about cookies here. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Rami G Khouri
Mort Laitner
Rachel Marsden
Donald Low
Bradley Blankenship
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
Michael Kwet
visit website
