Following along with Amy Hamm and her tribunal, I was, at times, wondering how far Canada is prepared to go in some areas. And if it's consistently the case that women are treated more harshly than men for failing to live up to expectations of self-sacrifice and not speaking up about harm whereas the egregious behaviour of some men seems to be wholly acceptable.
Ian Runkle explores this with an interesting case. Enjoy the mental gymnastics the tribunal goes through to find the man to be of good character yet in need of some restrictions in re: his ability to be around women and children.
I wonder why the tribunal doesn't consider this to be something that will bring the profession into disrepute? The revelation that he's already been working at his father's firm and supported thousands of cases isn't sufficient to grandfather him in as acceptable. However, I'm not Canadian and perhaps this feels like straining at a gnat with everything else that is accepted there.
The appeal the Law Society of Ontario just lost.
https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/law-society-of-ontario-appeals-tribunal-ruling-which-allows-man-who-sexually-abused-children-to-practice-law-1.6533634
Different tribunal systems but the arc feels similar.