Decision feeds rape victim stereotyping: critics

Deputy judge ruled woman who alleged sexual assault must pay ex-boyfriend $24,000

A deputy judge who ordered a woman to pay nearly $24,000 to the man she accused of sexual assault is being criticized for perpetuating victim stereotypes in his ruling that experts warn could have a chilling effect on reporting.

In the Welland small claims court ruling, Deputy Judge David Black ordered the woman to pay her ex-boyfriend $23,842 after finding she lied to police, that she wasn’t credible and was motivated by jealousy because she believed he was seeing another woman.

“I am satisfied that the evidence indicates that (the woman) lied to police knowing that a criminal prosecution against (the ex-boyfriend) would likely follow,” Black wrote in the Sept. 27, 2016, decision. “In acting as she did, (she) engaged in an improper purpose which was ... retribution against (him).”

Advocates for victims of sexual assault say they’ve have been battling the false stereotypes of a scorned woman trying to ruin a man’s life by accusing him of sexual assault and victims not being “believable” because of their behaviour after an attack.

The ex-boyfriend was originally charged with sexual assault in the March 27, 2011, incident, but sued for malicious prosecution and defamation after the criminal case against him was dismissed.

The woman was self-represented at that

hearing but has since hired Ottawaarea lawyer Jonathan Collings, who is appealing the case claiming “inappropriate judicial stereotyping” and errors in law.

In addition to ruling that she lied for revenge, the deputy judge also found she wasn’t credible because of small inconsistencies in her story about what she was wearing at the doctor’s the next day and because of texts and emails she sent to the man following the incident.

“Any reliance on gender-linked stereotypes which hold that alleged victims of rape should react in an emotional manner in assessing the credibility of such witnesses is wrong,” Collings wrote in a factum for the appeal.

“Furthermore, the passivity of a victim of sexual assault does not necessarily constitute proof that the contact was consensual.”

Collings and the woman declined to comment before the appeal hearing.

The Spectator has decided to not name the parties involved in the case.

In his ruling, Black relied in part on emails exchanged between the woman and the ex-boyfriend after the incident that he said appear to indicate she “felt positively about the encounter.”

“It’s really worrying because we know the low number of survivors who report to police,” said Erin Crickett, public education co-ordinator at Sexual Assault Centre of Hamilton (SACHA).

Only about 10 per cent of sexual assaults are reported to police. This ruling, she said, means fewer sexual assault victims will come forward.

Crickett noted survivors often do not report out of fear they will not be believed.

“That it’s 2017 and we still have a judge who thinks there are women reporting sexual assault for revenge is wrong,” she said.

Diana Tikasz, co-ordinator of the Sexual Assault/Domestic Violence Care Centre at McMaster, said it’s frustrating to see “mythology” around how victims are expected to act in the courtroom.

“It is not unusual for sexual assault victims to have ongoing contact with their assailant, especially because most assailants are not strangers,” Tikasz said, adding that trying to smooth things over is a common coping mechanism.

It’s common for women to freeze during sexual assault and have difficulty remembering details afterward, said Tizasz, who does training for police and Crown attorneys to better understand the impact of trauma on the brain for victims of sexual assault.

According to court documents, the pair had dated for eight months when in 2011 the man broke up with the woman.

They decided to meet up for dinner a few weeks later on March 27, and after dinner, the woman alleges he sexually assaulted her at his home.

The ex-boyfriend claimed the woman “ruined his life.”

The man said the charge continues to show up on police databases limiting his ability to apply for work that would require a vulnerable sector search and his ability to travel to the United States.

“The anxiety, stress, sadness and depression has been unbearable,” he said in his claim. “I was humiliated and degraded.” He told court the sex was consensual.

When reached Wednesday, the ex-boyfriend would not discuss details of the civil suit with The Spectator.

In the ruling, the deputy judge said he believed the man and also based his decision on testimony from the woman’s family doctor, Dr. Ibtisam Kelada-Sedra, whom she visited for a pre-arranged checkup the day after the incident. KeladaSedra said she did not get the sense the woman had been raped.

Kelada-Sedra testified that the woman did not appear bruised, but was red in her vaginal area. She did not initially tell the doctor she had been sexually assaulted, but once dressed said she had been forced into “un-consented sex.”

However, Collings said the doctor never requested a rape kit, did not send the woman to hospital and did not offer a referral for counselling.

Kelada-Sedra did not return a call to her office for comment.

The appeal is being heard in Welland court Sept. 8.

I am satisfied the evidence indicates that (the woman) lied to police knowing that a criminal prosecution … would likely follow. DEPUTY JUDGE DAVID BLACK