Yes! You seem to be operating under the assumption your friend, a foreign national, has some legal right to enter Canada. She doesn't. Only Canadian citizens have an absolute right to enter, everybody else can be refused without reason.
Judge acts very ignorant
- Thread starter JLM
- Start date
Yes! You seem to be operating under the assumption your friend, a foreign national, has some legal right to enter Canada. She doesn't. Only Canadian citizens have an absolute right to enter, everybody else can be refused without reason.
Justice Robin Camp's excuse comes at the cost of public trust
By Michael Platt, Calgary Sun
First posted: Friday, September 09, 2016 12:51 PM EDT | Updated: Friday, September 09, 2016 05:25 PM EDT
His greatest sin, as it turns out, wasn’t callous disrespect for an alleged victim of sexual assault, or boorish language that made an entire country cringe.
As it turns out, Robin Camp’s greatest sin as a Canadian judge was having little understanding of the legal system he was supposed to uphold, and almost no grasp of the criminal act he allegedly measured with wisdom and insight.
At least, that’s how Camp wants this story told — because then, he’ll probably keep his job.
On Friday, after four days before a Canadian Judicial Council inquiry where Camp’s ignorance was the constant centrepiece, the judge himself finally took the stand.
“As a general matter I regret almost all of (the comments I made), almost all of it was inappropriate and reflects prejudice, some of them were hurtful,” Camp told the hearing.
“I wish I hadn’t said them.”
It’s the same script the Calgary judge has followed since his mishandling of a sexual assault trial blew up in his face, leading to an overturn of the acquittal Camp ordered and calls for his dismissal.
Related: Comments weren't rooted in rape myths: Prof
Related: 'He made me hate myself': Victim
That’s what happens when you ignore the modern laws of Canada, which doesn’t allow sexual assault to be judged on a victim’s sexual past or failure to put up enough of a fight.
And that’s certainly what happens when you ask an alleged victim why she didn’t just keep her knees together, and “Why didn’t you just sink your bottom down into the basin so he couldn’t penetrate you?”
But ignorance may be forgivable, when it comes to keeping a lucrative job.
As Camp’s own legal team pointed out in its written submission to the inquiry, a judge “ who was wilfully biased or refused to follow the law” should be fired, but one that was “merely insensitive, rude, or ignorant” might yet be rehabilitated.
Hence, this is the Justice Robin Camp we’ve heard about all week: remorseful, ignorant, and oh so ready to learn.
The judge himself says as much.
“In the beginning I thought that what I’d done wrong was to use abusive and inappropriate language — that was the extent of my knowledge of what I’d done wrong,” said Camp.
The judge says he gradually came to learn that his words were legally wrong, in laying blame on the alleged victim for not fighting back.
“They carry with them the implication the complaint should have done something, that it was her fault,” Camp told the inquiry.
He said that while he grasped the basics of the law, his own prejudices also tainted the trial.
“The way that I asked the questions, the words that I used, could have only come from deep-rooted prejudice,” he said.
“At an intellectual level I understood, at a deeper level I did not.”
Remorseful, apologetic, and ready to change.
The only problem is, Camp’s excuse comes at the cost of public trust in the justice system.
For an exercise that was meant to restore faith in those supposedly sage and learned few who sit on those highest benches in our land, this inquiry has backfired badly.
What we’ve learned this week in Calgary is that a judge can rule on criminal matters without having deep understanding of the law, and almost no grasp on how crime impacts victims.
Camp at 64-years-old had almost no background in Canadian criminal law when he was appointed to the provincial bench in 2012, and as the inquiry heard, there’s little in the way of training for provincial judges.
“I self learned but I had no outside training, there was none available to provincial court judges,” said Camp.
He didn’t put it quite in these words, but Camp was occasionally winging it at that sexual assault trial in 2004.
How that restores faith in the justice system isn’t clear — and if this same inquiry was dealing with a doctor who botched a surgery due to lack of medical knowledge, there would be hell to pay.
Instead, we’re left with an uneducated judge who has a good chance of keeping his job, at the cost of public faith in all the others who share his job title.
“I was not the good judge I thought I was,” Camp told the inquiry.
Justice isn’t just blind, we’ve learned, it’s occasionally unqualified too.
mplatt@postmedia.com
Justice Robin Camp's excuse comes at the cost of public trust | PLATT | Canada |
Justice Robin Camp: My knowledge of Canadian law was minimal, 'non-existent'
BILL GRAVELAND, THE CANADIAN PRESS
First posted: Saturday, September 10, 2016 11:06 AM EDT | Updated: Saturday, September 10, 2016 05:24 PM EDT
CALGARY — A Federal Court judge facing possible removal from the bench for inappropriate remarks he made to a sex assault complainant admits his knowledge of Canadian criminal law at the time was “non-existent.”
The Canadian Judicial Council is determining the fate of Justice Robin Camp, who has apologized for his attitude toward and questioning of the 19-year-old woman in 2014.
Camp, who was then a provincial court judge, acquitted the man accused in the case after deciding that his version of events was more credible.
Court transcripts show that Camp questioned the woman — “Why couldn’t you just keep your knees together?” — and told her that “pain and sex sometimes go together.”
The transcripts also show he called the woman “the accused” throughout the trial. The verdict was overturned on appeal and a new trial was ordered.
Platt: Camp's excuses come at a cost of public trust
The legal experience of Camp, who was born in South Africa but moved to Calgary in 1998, has been under the microscope at the hearing.
He originally had a legal-aid practice which included some criminal law but as he became more senior, he focused mainly on contractual, bankruptcy and trust law, as well as on oil and gas litigation.
Camp was named an Alberta provincial court judge in 2012, but did not receive training or judicial education on sexual assault law or how to conduct sex assault trials.
“My colleagues knew my knowledge of Canadian law was very minimal. It was non-existent,” Camp admitted under questioning from members of the judicial panel Friday.
“I think it’s become apparent that I didn’t know what I didn’t know.”
A Manitoba judge who mentored Camp after his comments became public said he didn’t know the history of sexual assault law in Canada and why it historically discriminated against women.
“Please remember I wasn’t in this country through the 1960s, ’70s and ’80s,” Camp told the hearing. “I was in South Africa, where we had other issues.”
When asked what he had done to prepare for his job as a provincial court judge, he said he had spoken to other judges on the bench and done a lot of reading.
“When I started on the bench I was given the 50 most important cases used by provincial criminal judges,” he said. “I read the sections on the commentary. I read the leading cases.”
Camp was asked if his experience in Canadian criminal law was “quite restricted,” and he replied: “It was.”
One of the panel members, Nova Scotia’s Associate Chief Justice Deborah Smith, asked Camp if he had attended a school for new judges offered by the National Judicial Institute or if the Calgary courthouse had a law library.
“There are judges there that are available and if you have questions or concerns or gaps in your education you can ask the teaching judges these questions,” Smith said.
“If you felt there was a gap in your background, in the area of criminal law, you could go to the judicial library and borrow some textbooks in the areas you thought you weren’t sufficiently educated.”
Camp apologized Friday for his comments to the young woman, calling them “rude and insulting,” though he also made reference to her again as “the accused” before quickly correcting himself.
“At some level that I wasn’t aware of, I was subject to prejudice ... the prejudice that all women behave the same way and they should resist,” he told the hearing.
He said if allowed to stay on the bench, he will make every effort to avoid past mistakes.
“I can’t guarantee that I’m not prejudiced in other areas, but what I have learned is to be constantly vigilant ... and to ask for help when I need it,” he said. “I was and will always be vigilant ... perfect I will never be.”
Closing arguments are to take place Monday. The panel will forward a recommendation to the full Canadian Judicial Council, which will then forward its final recommendation to the federal justice minister.
Justice Robin Camp: My knowledge of Canadian law was minimal, 'non-existent' | C
By Michael Platt, Calgary Sun
First posted: Friday, September 09, 2016 12:51 PM EDT | Updated: Friday, September 09, 2016 05:25 PM EDT
His greatest sin, as it turns out, wasn’t callous disrespect for an alleged victim of sexual assault, or boorish language that made an entire country cringe.
As it turns out, Robin Camp’s greatest sin as a Canadian judge was having little understanding of the legal system he was supposed to uphold, and almost no grasp of the criminal act he allegedly measured with wisdom and insight.
At least, that’s how Camp wants this story told — because then, he’ll probably keep his job.
On Friday, after four days before a Canadian Judicial Council inquiry where Camp’s ignorance was the constant centrepiece, the judge himself finally took the stand.
“As a general matter I regret almost all of (the comments I made), almost all of it was inappropriate and reflects prejudice, some of them were hurtful,” Camp told the hearing.
“I wish I hadn’t said them.”
It’s the same script the Calgary judge has followed since his mishandling of a sexual assault trial blew up in his face, leading to an overturn of the acquittal Camp ordered and calls for his dismissal.
Related: Comments weren't rooted in rape myths: Prof
Related: 'He made me hate myself': Victim
That’s what happens when you ignore the modern laws of Canada, which doesn’t allow sexual assault to be judged on a victim’s sexual past or failure to put up enough of a fight.
And that’s certainly what happens when you ask an alleged victim why she didn’t just keep her knees together, and “Why didn’t you just sink your bottom down into the basin so he couldn’t penetrate you?”
But ignorance may be forgivable, when it comes to keeping a lucrative job.
As Camp’s own legal team pointed out in its written submission to the inquiry, a judge “ who was wilfully biased or refused to follow the law” should be fired, but one that was “merely insensitive, rude, or ignorant” might yet be rehabilitated.
Hence, this is the Justice Robin Camp we’ve heard about all week: remorseful, ignorant, and oh so ready to learn.
The judge himself says as much.
“In the beginning I thought that what I’d done wrong was to use abusive and inappropriate language — that was the extent of my knowledge of what I’d done wrong,” said Camp.
The judge says he gradually came to learn that his words were legally wrong, in laying blame on the alleged victim for not fighting back.
“They carry with them the implication the complaint should have done something, that it was her fault,” Camp told the inquiry.
He said that while he grasped the basics of the law, his own prejudices also tainted the trial.
“The way that I asked the questions, the words that I used, could have only come from deep-rooted prejudice,” he said.
“At an intellectual level I understood, at a deeper level I did not.”
Remorseful, apologetic, and ready to change.
The only problem is, Camp’s excuse comes at the cost of public trust in the justice system.
For an exercise that was meant to restore faith in those supposedly sage and learned few who sit on those highest benches in our land, this inquiry has backfired badly.
What we’ve learned this week in Calgary is that a judge can rule on criminal matters without having deep understanding of the law, and almost no grasp on how crime impacts victims.
Camp at 64-years-old had almost no background in Canadian criminal law when he was appointed to the provincial bench in 2012, and as the inquiry heard, there’s little in the way of training for provincial judges.
“I self learned but I had no outside training, there was none available to provincial court judges,” said Camp.
He didn’t put it quite in these words, but Camp was occasionally winging it at that sexual assault trial in 2004.
How that restores faith in the justice system isn’t clear — and if this same inquiry was dealing with a doctor who botched a surgery due to lack of medical knowledge, there would be hell to pay.
Instead, we’re left with an uneducated judge who has a good chance of keeping his job, at the cost of public faith in all the others who share his job title.
“I was not the good judge I thought I was,” Camp told the inquiry.
Justice isn’t just blind, we’ve learned, it’s occasionally unqualified too.
mplatt@postmedia.com
Justice Robin Camp's excuse comes at the cost of public trust | PLATT | Canada |
Justice Robin Camp: My knowledge of Canadian law was minimal, 'non-existent'
BILL GRAVELAND, THE CANADIAN PRESS
First posted: Saturday, September 10, 2016 11:06 AM EDT | Updated: Saturday, September 10, 2016 05:24 PM EDT
CALGARY — A Federal Court judge facing possible removal from the bench for inappropriate remarks he made to a sex assault complainant admits his knowledge of Canadian criminal law at the time was “non-existent.”
The Canadian Judicial Council is determining the fate of Justice Robin Camp, who has apologized for his attitude toward and questioning of the 19-year-old woman in 2014.
Camp, who was then a provincial court judge, acquitted the man accused in the case after deciding that his version of events was more credible.
Court transcripts show that Camp questioned the woman — “Why couldn’t you just keep your knees together?” — and told her that “pain and sex sometimes go together.”
The transcripts also show he called the woman “the accused” throughout the trial. The verdict was overturned on appeal and a new trial was ordered.
Platt: Camp's excuses come at a cost of public trust
The legal experience of Camp, who was born in South Africa but moved to Calgary in 1998, has been under the microscope at the hearing.
He originally had a legal-aid practice which included some criminal law but as he became more senior, he focused mainly on contractual, bankruptcy and trust law, as well as on oil and gas litigation.
Camp was named an Alberta provincial court judge in 2012, but did not receive training or judicial education on sexual assault law or how to conduct sex assault trials.
“My colleagues knew my knowledge of Canadian law was very minimal. It was non-existent,” Camp admitted under questioning from members of the judicial panel Friday.
“I think it’s become apparent that I didn’t know what I didn’t know.”
A Manitoba judge who mentored Camp after his comments became public said he didn’t know the history of sexual assault law in Canada and why it historically discriminated against women.
“Please remember I wasn’t in this country through the 1960s, ’70s and ’80s,” Camp told the hearing. “I was in South Africa, where we had other issues.”
When asked what he had done to prepare for his job as a provincial court judge, he said he had spoken to other judges on the bench and done a lot of reading.
“When I started on the bench I was given the 50 most important cases used by provincial criminal judges,” he said. “I read the sections on the commentary. I read the leading cases.”
Camp was asked if his experience in Canadian criminal law was “quite restricted,” and he replied: “It was.”
One of the panel members, Nova Scotia’s Associate Chief Justice Deborah Smith, asked Camp if he had attended a school for new judges offered by the National Judicial Institute or if the Calgary courthouse had a law library.
“There are judges there that are available and if you have questions or concerns or gaps in your education you can ask the teaching judges these questions,” Smith said.
“If you felt there was a gap in your background, in the area of criminal law, you could go to the judicial library and borrow some textbooks in the areas you thought you weren’t sufficiently educated.”
Camp apologized Friday for his comments to the young woman, calling them “rude and insulting,” though he also made reference to her again as “the accused” before quickly correcting himself.
“At some level that I wasn’t aware of, I was subject to prejudice ... the prejudice that all women behave the same way and they should resist,” he told the hearing.
He said if allowed to stay on the bench, he will make every effort to avoid past mistakes.
“I can’t guarantee that I’m not prejudiced in other areas, but what I have learned is to be constantly vigilant ... and to ask for help when I need it,” he said. “I was and will always be vigilant ... perfect I will never be.”
Closing arguments are to take place Monday. The panel will forward a recommendation to the full Canadian Judicial Council, which will then forward its final recommendation to the federal justice minister.
Justice Robin Camp: My knowledge of Canadian law was minimal, 'non-existent' | C
It's sort of like closing the gate after the horse has left! Perhaps a wiser solution would be to bar him from any cases where sexual assault is involved and limit him to all the other cases like fraud, theft and homicide. When one half of an apple is rotten you can still eat the other half!
That sexual assault cases are so prominent speaks poorly of our society.
How do boys grow up thinking it's okay to sexually assault women?
How do girls grow up thinking indiscriminate sex is okay; not knowing how to avoid sexual predators?
Who the hell is raising these boys and girls and why aren't they taught respect, self-discipline and healthy attitudes toward sex?
How do boys grow up thinking it's okay to sexually assault women?
How do girls grow up thinking indiscriminate sex is okay; not knowing how to avoid sexual predators?
Who the hell is raising these boys and girls and why aren't they taught respect, self-discipline and healthy attitudes toward sex?
Just part of a problem that has evolved since the 60s. It doesn't matter what it is or at what cost- people have to have it NOW! AND if it's at someone else's grief or inconvenience.....................who cares? It's a "ME, ME, ME society!
When they invented the word ignorant, they thought of you but someone said no, stupid would be more appropriate.
All politicians would be in jail.
Probably true. You work for a living and the commie collects welfare and spends his days making fun of the system that supports his worthless azz.
Well I'm retired now but I did work all my adult life as a carpenter so thanks for the compliment I admire the workers of the world.
Can't beat that....................Christ was a carpenter!
I was thinking in terms of what best serves society. It was a stupid, unfeeling, off the cuff comment, but does it warrant destroying a man's career? If it had been fraud, corruption or perjury, I would say "bounce him".
Being in court defending yourself or being accused of a crime has to be scary has he#l, so the one thing that you should expect is a fair, impartial judge. This one should loose his job, why? not for being a creep, but for being in the wrong job. He has a role to play that is far too important to have no common sense.