User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Intoxication to be allowed as defence in sexual assault cases - Ontario/Canada

  1. #1

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 152,250, Level: 93
    Level completed: 53%, Points required for next Level: 1,800
    Overall activity: 3.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialTagger First ClassCreated Album picturesYour first GroupRecommendation First Class50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Adelaide's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    341327
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    N. Pole and VA
    Posts
    30,766
    Points
    152,250
    Level
    93
    Thanks Given
    4,025
    Thanked 18,451x in 11,740 Posts
    Mentioned
    1723 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Intoxication to be allowed as defence in sexual assault cases - Ontario/Canada

    TORONTO — People accused of sexual assault in Ontario are once again allowed to use excessive intoxication as a defence against criminal charges, a judge has ruled, finding that a federal law preventing such an argument is unconstitutional.
    Superior Court Justice Nancy Spies’ ruling relates to a Supreme Court decision established in the early 90s that drew so much ire that Ottawa introduced a law to limit its perceived impact.

    “Section 33.1’s objective … is not sufficiently pressing and substantial to justify the great damage it does to fair trial interests,” she wrote before affirming that it was “of no force and effect in Ontario.”

    Spies’ decision came in support of Cameron McCaw, a Toronto man due to stand trial for sexual assault next month.

    According to Spies’ ruling, McCaw wishes to argue that he had consumed so much alcohol on the night of the alleged incident that he was unaware of his actions.

    According to allegations contained in her ruling, McCaw allegedly raped the girlfriend of his former roommate after consuming alcohol, marijuana and a “date-rape drug” in July 2015.

    Ontario Court clears way for intoxication to be used as a defence in sexual assault cases - Global News

    Well... a lot of members have brought up this concern when both parties are inebriated or under the influence. My home provinces' Supreme Court just made this ruling; Section 33.1 is in violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

  2. #2
    Points: 85,780, Level: 71
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 1,470
    Overall activity: 36.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    testsubjectalpha's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    9186
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    29,750
    Points
    85,780
    Level
    71
    Thanks Given
    231
    Thanked 9,183x in 6,937 Posts
    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    sounds like a liberal progressive making an excuse to defend individual irresponsibility.
    "The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." - Patrick Henry

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to testsubjectalpha For This Useful Post:

    bulletbob (06-05-2020)

  4. #3
    Points: 14,100, Level: 28
    Level completed: 62%, Points required for next Level: 350
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassVeteran10000 Experience Points
    pragmatic's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    2230
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    West of Pixley
    Posts
    2,923
    Points
    14,100
    Level
    28
    Thanks Given
    2,045
    Thanked 1,755x in 1,200 Posts
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Adelaide View Post
    Ontario Court clears way for intoxication to be used as a defence in sexual assault cases - Global News

    Well... a lot of members have brought up this concern when both parties are inebriated or under the influence. My home provinces' Supreme Court just made this ruling; Section 33.1 is in violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
    Sounds like the judge is simply stating that the constitution allows that defense to be used in the trial.

    Which doesn't translate to meaning the judge approves of the defense attorney using the tactic. Nor that a jury should entertain such an excuse as acceptable/valid during their deliberations.

    Too often people try to label a judge as being too liberal or too strict when they render controversial decisions. Maybe they are just objectively ruling on the letter of the law/constitution as it is written.

    Volvo

    “Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.”

  5. #4
    Points: 29,932, Level: 42
    Level completed: 21%, Points required for next Level: 1,118
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Social25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Retirednsmilin308's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    5833
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    6,568
    Points
    29,932
    Level
    42
    Thanks Given
    7,875
    Thanked 5,826x in 3,490 Posts
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, here in the states, banging some drunk chick is still an eyebrow raiser and if she is a $#@! later, you can wind up in prison. Even if she said yes.

    ...and people wonder why I preferred hookers.

    $40...we both know the game...out the door in an hour or less.
    Extra requests cost a little more.

    Safe, sane, and consensual...as the BDSM people like to say.
    Last edited by Retirednsmilin308; 06-05-2020 at 12:29 AM.
    When it is not allowed to be questioned, it is not science, it is PROPAGANDA

  6. #5
    Points: 85,780, Level: 71
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 1,470
    Overall activity: 36.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    testsubjectalpha's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    9186
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    29,750
    Points
    85,780
    Level
    71
    Thanks Given
    231
    Thanked 9,183x in 6,937 Posts
    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Your an animal.
    "The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." - Patrick Henry

  7. #6
    Points: 56,731, Level: 58
    Level completed: 20%, Points required for next Level: 1,619
    Overall activity: 0.3%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    bulletbob's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    4648
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    florida
    Posts
    12,372
    Points
    56,731
    Level
    58
    Thanks Given
    13,999
    Thanked 4,639x in 3,469 Posts
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Adelaide View Post
    Ontario Court clears way for intoxication to be used as a defence in sexual assault cases - Global News

    Well... a lot of members have brought up this concern when both parties are inebriated or under the influence. My home provinces' Supreme Court just made this ruling; Section 33.1 is in violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
    that's stupid next thing it will be a defense in robbery and murder

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts