Call for mistrial rejected after lawyer invokes rape myths

After criticizing her for invoking rape myths during her questioning of an alleged incest victim, a Calgary judge on Tuesday rejected a defence lawyer’s bid for a mistrial.

Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Gillian Marriott said a reasonable observer would not have an apprehension of bias from the judge for stopping Krysia Pzerpiorka’s line of questioning.

Pzerpiorka had sought a mistrial based on an apprehension of bias, after Marriott criticized her crossexamination of the complainant when Crown prosecutor Gianna Argento objected to a question.

On Monday, Pzerpiorka said to the witness: “You would agree with me that if you were laying on your side in your pants, all you had to do was clench your legs together and your pants would have been unable to move.”

Pzerpiorka argued the question would assist in determining the woman’s credibility and reliability as a witness.

Marriott said she was entitled to intervene on what she deemed was verging on “impermissible questioning founded on rape myths.”

“A trial judge may intervene in certain instances,” the judge said.

“The only inference that could be drawn from the complainant’s answer to the question as it was posed to her by defence counsel was that it would not have taken much effort for her to resist the accused’s advances.

“This inference would be inappropriate, as it is founded in rape myths,” Marriott said.

“Defence counsel has failed to adequately articulate the relevance of this question,” the judge said.

“A reasonably informed person understands the problem with rape myths and impermissible reasoning.”

The alleged victim said she moved to Canada from her homeland at the age of 19 to live with her estranged father, who had moved

Defence counsel has failed to adequately articulate the relevance of this question.

here when she was very young.

She said he groped her on multiple occasions and forced her to have sexual intercourse three times.

The witness acknowledged under further questioning by Pzerpiorka that she didn’t like her father’s rules, which included a 7 p.m. curfew.

“I hated it, yeah, but I always followed it because I was scared of him.”

The trial continues Wednesday.