Post: #1

There has been a lot of outrage over this on CNN and social media/FB.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/12/world/robi...d=28650057

I am sure someone here can blow this case apart as well.

Canadian judge is now himself under inquiry for saying these remarks.

Apparently the man in this case was acquitted and the judge warned the man "I want you to tell your friends, your male friends, that they have to be far more gentle with women. They have to be far more patient. And they have to be very careful. To protect themselves, they have to be very careful."

People are going crazy. It has been hard for me to find out what really happened here without the media spin. A lot of the quotes are taken out of context.

This seems to be the Inquiry into the Judge: https://www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca/cmslib/general...ended).pdf

However this also does not have the full quotes, just convenient out of context half quotes.

Post: #2

This guy is really saying it as it is. I think these quotes are more important to the story:

Quote:On the subject of sex in general, and sex with young women in particular, he said, "Young wom[e]n want to have sex, particularly if they're drunk."

In a different part of the trial, he said "Some sex and pain sometimes go together...that's not necessarily a bad thing."

Post: #3

This judge needs all the help from Manosphere he can get. This has to be made a topic of countless video's and articles, so that it gets attention of many people. We need to unite behind this judge and demand that this is the way we want judges to work. If Trump wins presidency he needs to have heard about this and have a chance to weigh in on this.

This is extremely important, the court scene is where men are the weakest and most abused and we need to fight to change that.

Post: #4

(09-15-2016 01:04 AM)Mage Wrote:  This judge needs all the help from Manosphere he can get. This has to be made a topic of countless video's and articles, so that it gets attention of many people. We need to unite behind this judge and demand that this is the way we want judges to work. If Trump wins presidency he needs to have heard about this and have a chance to weigh in on this.

This is extremely important, the court scene is where men are the weakest and most abused and we need to fight to change that.

This. I'd be happy to offer my support to that judge. Falsifying a rape charge is extremely dangerous and can lead to serious consequences.

The problem is that you can be judged several times for the same crime. It often happens when the outcome isn't the one the prosecutors were looking for. Most rape cases go to appeal.

Post: #5

Can someone with the legal know how North of the Border find a copy of the decision? Docket number is 130288731P1 according to the document below. Provincial Court of Alberta at Calgary.

Only thing I found so far is the Notice to Judge Camp that he'll be undergoing this Inquiry, which is what the media is pushing right now, as it's happening. The original case is from 2014.

https://www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca/cmslib/general...ended).pdf

Quote:In the course of the Trial and in giving his reasons for judgment, the Judge made
comments tending to belittle women, and expressing stereotypical or biased thinking in
relation to a sexual assault complainant:
a) By asking the Crown whether there are “any particular words you must use like
the marriage ceremony” to obtain consent to engage in sexual relations (page
384, lines 27 and 28).
b) By stating to the accused, “The law and the way that people approach sexual
activity has changed in the last 30 years. I want you to tell your friends, your
male friends, that they have to be far more gentle with women. They have to
be far more patient. And they have to be very careful. To protect themselves,
they have to be very careful” (page 427 lines 21 to 24).
c) By stating to the accused, “You’ve got to be very sure that the girl wants you to
do it. Please tell your friends so that they don’t upset women and so that they
don’t get into trouble. We’re far more protective of women – young women and
older women – than we used to be and that’s the way it should be” (page 427
lines 28 to 33)

Just found the transcript, don't have time at the moment to go through it

https://www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca/cmslib/general...0Facts.pdf

Post: #6

How the fuck does a foreigner become a federal judge if he admits to having: "a non-existent" knowledge of Canadian criminal law? What a silly country I live in.

Post: #7

The Canadian legal system is a perfect example of a nation's laws being captured by the Marxist Social Justice mob and being used as a weapon against the populace. Anyone in public life who dares to break their Narrative will be publicly attacked and a serious attempt will be made to destroy the thoughtcriminal's life. Established laws and customs will be overturned if it contradicts "the right and enlightened thing to do."

Teachers can be fired, hounded, and jailed for not teaching the "correct" subject matter.
A man writing letters to his local newspaper mildly disagreeing with gay marriage can be jailed for "hatespeech."
A rich old man died and left a few million dollars to one alt-right and one semi-white nationalist organization and lawyers managed to overturn the will on the basis of "anti-left + pro-white = Nazi!! = scary = evil = we can't let this happen."


Even socially prominent figures like this judge and socially prominent goodthinkers like Jian Ghomeshi can be targets should they break the Narrative. I'll say it again: The law has been captured and is now a weapon against the population at large. We see Marxist totalitarianism creeping forward in all western countries but the leading edge of this trend has to be Canada. The iron fist waits patiently in a very soft velvet glove.

Post: #8

(09-15-2016 08:48 AM)scotian Wrote:  How the fuck does a foreigner become a federal judge if he admits to having: "a non-existent" knowledge of Canadian criminal law? What a silly country I live in.

The guy was a dumbass. Running his mouth like that, any judge would get in trouble. I've seen hundreds of judges in action, this guy would be on the lower end of professionalism.

And as I said in the context of the Brock Turner case, women get drunk for most if not all the same reasons men get drunk - escaping reality, stress relief, self-medication for various mental illnesses and minor neuroses.

It does not always mean they are lessening inhibitions to have sex. This judge is a fool, should stick to bankruptcy cases and never see a criminal case again.

Post: #9

(09-15-2016 08:48 AM)scotian Wrote:  How the fuck does a foreigner become a federal judge if he admits to having: "a non-existent" knowledge of Canadian criminal law? What a silly country I live in.

This is the biggest issue I come away with from the story. It's like a real life example from the commercials. "Well my knowledge of canadian criminal law is non-existent, but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn last night." For everyone applauding the judge for his quotes, it's pretty fucked up to think that if god forbid you ever end up in criminal court, this guy could be presiding over your case.

Post: #10

(09-15-2016 08:58 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

(09-15-2016 08:48 AM)scotian Wrote:  How the fuck does a foreigner become a federal judge if he admits to having: "a non-existent" knowledge of Canadian criminal law? What a silly country I live in.

The guy was a dumbass. Running his mouth like that, any judge would get in trouble. I've seen hundreds of judges in action, this guy would be on the lower end of professionalism.

And as I said in the context of the Brock Turner case, women get drunk for most if not all the same reasons men get drunk - escaping reality, stress relief, self-medication for various mental illnesses and minor neuroses.

It does not always mean they are lessening inhibitions to have sex. This judge is a fool, should stick to bankruptcy cases and never see a criminal case again.

Women may not intend to lower their inhibitions for sex, but it does happen regardless. Alcohol lowers all your inhibitions.

Post: #11

Why so much hate on the judge? He treated a rape case, with no knowledge of Canadian law, the sane way it should be treated. South Africa is the rape and murder capital of the world and where he is from, what they consider rape is actually rape: forcible non-consensual penetration of the man's penis inside the woman's vagina. So when a girl said she was "raped" on a bathroom sink he naturally questions why she didn't just drop into it to avoid the non-consensual penetration, or why she didn't try to wiggle herself free. He found no signs of protest from the woman during this drunken sexual encounter so naturally it didn't fall under the true definition of rape, unlike the broad-encompassing definition of rape under Canadian law, i.e. regret rape. In my view, we need more common-sense judges like him to set reasonable precedents because the current status quo of the system is heavily rigged against one particular gender.

Post: #12

I can't believe this - a judge rules in favor of a man and and with sanity and gets called unprofessional in a manosphere forum?

We are in deep shit because some among us seems to be used and attached to the current plight of masculinity and are actually adverse to a change. What's this male Stockholm syndrome?

Post: #13

(09-17-2016 06:25 AM)Mage Wrote:  I can't believe this - a judge rules in favor of a man and and with sanity and gets called unprofessional in a manosphere forum?

We are in deep shit because some among us seems to be used and attached to the current plight of masculinity and are actually adverse to a change. What's this male Stockholm syndrome?

Just because he ruled in favor of a man, doesn't mean he becomes immune from deserved criticism. Mostly my criticism is for the system that allows someone with from the judge's own words "non-existent" knowledge of Canadian law. And as far as using the manosphere angle, a big part of it is self improvement. The dude could have done some work to make himself qualified for his position. Instead he looks incompetent when his qualifications, by his own admission aren't what someone would expect of a judge in a criminal case. He even makes excuses saying basically my colleagues all know I wasn't qualified and it's not my fault since I didn't even live in this country for decades.

And to the previous poster (I don't know how to do multiple quotes). The judge brings his South African prospective of rape to his Canadian court room. While we can agree on the vagueness of said laws in our countries, the fact is, he is supposed to be an impartial party in the proceedings according to Canadian law. Would we feel the same way if say the judge had Saudi Arabia roots? Say some crackhead bops some chick on the head drags her in alley and rapes her. With his Saudi roots he says to her in court "and your family still hasn't stoned your ass?" I haven't read about the details of the case which generated his comments, not interested in it. I'm only disturbed by the fact that someone so unqualified by their own admission could hold such an important position that holds people's fate in his hands.

Post: #14

(09-17-2016 10:13 AM)Crisp Wrote:  I'm only disturbed by the fact that someone so unqualified by their own admission could hold such an important position that holds people's fate in his hands.

It's a country that elected Justin Trudeau as PM. So... seems par for the course.

Not that the US is any better. We regularly have fucktards in very important defense positions. Hey, come be SecDef even though you know absolutely nothing about the military!

Post: #15

I don't really see why one should care about "professionalism" of a judge, what one should care is about judges being just.

Justice is universal and if by professionalism you mean knowing the laws of a particular country then if the laws of the particular country differ from the universally true justice then professionalism just becomes code word for injustice.

Post: #16

There aren't enough details published to know whether the judge's acquittal of the defendant was just or unjust.

What we do know is that the judge's foolish comments at the trial provided grounds to overturn the acquittal on appeal (can't do that in the USA, double jeopardy).

If he had not blathered unprofessionally, the verdict of not guilty could have stood. Usually prosecutors improve their case on a retrial in the USA when juries are deadlocked the first time.

A good judge does not give a running commentary on his or her inner thoughts. The appearance of impartiality, with no excess blabbering.