“Woman” cleared in child BDSM case (Canada, where else?)

[HelloYouTwo]

This is one hot mess of a case and makes Canada look ridiculous.

torontosun.com/news/provincial/kingston-woman-acquitted-in-bdsm-child-case/amp?__twitter_impression=true

Defendant = not a woman

Use of “child pornography” as a descriptor rather than child sex abuse

Judge’s comments about the victim’s evidence being inconsistent - the example cited is how her mother described the visitors to their house as coming in a different order. The visitors being the parade of men who came to their house to have BDSM sex with the mum and abused the daughter ...

“Her resilience must be commended. She has suffered much trauma in her short life but testified in a mature and poised manner,” said Kelly. “She’s to be admired for her strength"

Trauma that this same judge has denied happening, because she wasn't able to remember the fine details of abuse 18 years ago. Don't pretend to care about her once you've already denied her justice.

This, Yaniv, defunding of Vancouver Rape Crisi Centre .... the list goes on... too many to mention

Why is Canada the seeming epicentre of all of this?

Where are all the grown ups in Canada?

The judge seems extraordinary in her refusal to allow justice whilst sympathising with the victim (whose sister was also abused). None of the facts seem to be in doubt but no case to answer for this vile man. Oh sorry, “woman”.

Jeez Canada, aren't you embarrassed? Sort it out.

Canada.
A country so far down the rabbit hole that even the British can laugh at them.🤔

Canada is a one hell of a fucked up country.

I'm glad that I live in the UK

Did anyone see the Simon Reeve series about The Americas? The episode about Canada was eye opening and jaw dropping.

I think Canada does a good PR job of looking progressive and forward thinking, while the indigenous communities, particularly women and the poor are treated with contempt.

I used to admire Canada many long years ago.

Christ Almighty.

First of all, why wasn't this a jury trial? What's wrong with Canada?

Second - and this absolutely beggars belief - why was the mother's testimony given more weight than the daughter's? The mother, who had a string of BDSM partners, is clearly an unreliable witness who had little regard for her own daughter's safety.

Third - well, all the other shit. Let's face it, if this man had been found guilty he'd have been sent to a women's prison where he could have abused to his heart's content.

I have to say, I don't feel like this article is very clear about why the judgement went the way it did. It sounds like the judge believes the young woman, but wasn't able to convict because of problems with the evidence, and to me that doesn't seem like a matter of people not caring about abuse. It sounds a bit like there might be some question as to whether the men were identified correctly, but it's just so unclear.

FWIW as Canadian I don't think Canadians overall are blasé about sex crimes against minors. The problems here are similar to elsewhere where meeting the kinds of proofs required by courts is very difficult, and it seems increasingly so.

“ But the woman’s mom contradicted her, saying Dickens came first, Laronde next and Galloway last.”

This “mom” is the woman who was already in jail having pleaded guilty to the charges and had previously been jailed for incest with the victim’s sibling.

But her recollection was more valid than the victim’s. Oh and the judge “didn’t believe the accused’s evidence.”

I also take issue with the statement that the defendant “was formerly a man”. A previous article describes them as a person “who now lives as a woman”. You can look at the photo or you can judge the behaviour but neither points to this being a woman.

This is shocking. I wouldn't be surprised if some vigilante action comes out of this.

'Canada, where else?'

^

What's that supposed to mean?

*What’s that supposed to mean?^

It means that wokest-of-woke Canada seems to be leading the way in allowing male sex offenders to declare themselves as women, and seems content to throw women under the bus when it comes to their legal protections. And happy to allow men’s crimes to be recorded in the women’s statistics.

Canada has been extremely enthusiastic about self ID. There have been multiple examples, including a rape crisis centre losing its funding, and a very questionable character taking many women to court because they refused to wax testicles.

I have as much faith in the Toronto Sun as I do in the UK Sun.

Extraordinary. From reading the Toronto Sun story, the mother and daughter disagreed about the order in which three men came to the house on the girl's 13th birthday.

Why did the judge choose to believe the mother, who is already in prison for abusing one of her other children? and who ran BDSM sessions in a house where children as young as eight years old lived?

We know child sex abuse was being committed during the BDSM sessions, because one of the defendants pleaded guilty to making 'child pornography'.

Why does it matter what order the men arrived in, 17 years ago? A traumatised child is going to blank out as much as she can of the abuse she suffered over at least five years.

Justice definitely not done.

I have as much faith in the Toronto Sun as I do in the UK Sun.

Singasonga, if a newspaper misreports a court case it faces very expensive penalties. It's not worth doing, no matter what you think of the newspaper.

It's not a matter of misreporting as such, so much as being terribly unclear. The reason they give for saying the testimony was a problem seems incomplete, or lacking in context. It doesn't make sense. A good journalist would make it clear what the reasoning was, even if it was illogical, but this doesn't read like that.

Even in good papers, it's common for reports about judgements to be lacking, even misleading. It's the same as when they report on other technical subjects, the reporters often don't seem to have the background to understand the judgements themselves, much less explain them to anyone else.

I agree, Goosefoot. The excuse for hoovering up that exceptionally poor article in a paper known for rabble-rousting and using it to beat a nation's entire judicial system isn't good enough.

There's a bit too much of this on MN at the moment, I'm afraid.

What a horrible, horrible situation to grow up in. Nothing to be said about it that isn't a sickening understatement, really.

Here's a different article from a different paper.

www.chathamdailynews.ca/2017/02/02/child-sex-abuse-a-london-man-is-one-of-two-people-charged-in-historic-sexual-abuse-case/wcm/38b87802-1ff4-b37a-9cfc-7daa140497ab

And another

'Laronde is a program co-ordinator for gender and sexually diverse youth for Canadian Mental Health Association, Kingston, and active in the city’s Pride community.'

lfpress.com/2017/02/03/parent-in-kid-sex-case-remains-free/wcm/708c160d-e3f8-2ea1-a420-1bafd3392af6

There may be issues with how the article was written. It looks like it was a long and complicated trial, or series of trials. There are many other articles on it, but I'm going to stop searching for them now as they're quite upsetting.

I reserve my rage for the people convicted.

Laronde is a program co-ordinator for gender and sexually diverse youth for Canadian Mental Health Association, Kingston, and active in the city’s Pride community

Oh god no, no. Someone who takes part in BDSM orgies in a house full of children? At least one only eight years old? And where a co-defendant has admitted filming child abuse?

And the Canadian Mental Health Association appointed this person to work with children?

Shame on the Canadian authorities.

There may be issues with how the article was written. It looks like it was a long and complicated trial, or series of trials. There are many other articles on it, but I'm going to stop searching for them now as they're quite upsetting. I reserve my rage for the people convicted.

I don't see talking about the reporting as having anything to do with rage. People are upset about the judgement, or want to comment on it, but it's very difficult without a good explanation from the journalists. This is a bit of a pattern with these discussions that I see here, there criticism of the courts but it's often very unclear why the decision was made, and so the criticism doesn't necessarily reflect what the real problem is.