Legal decision raising concerns

A legal decision is raising new concerns about whether victims of sexual abuse will be afraid to report the crime. They come after a Superior Court Judge ruled in the case of two sisters from Ancaster who came forward as adults to accuse an uncle of abusing them when they were little girls.

Al Sweeney has been following the story and has the details.

The judge said the testimony from the sisters did not show the uncle committed the abuse. Instead, he found the sisters libelled him and ordered them to pay $125,000 for damaging the uncle’s reputation.

Justice Andrew Goodman dismissed the claims of sexual abuse, saying testimony indicates it couldn’t have happened the way the sisters said. But he said the sisters tried to portray the uncle as a child molester. Lawyer Elizabeth Grace, who deals with sexual abuse cases, says this a rare case. She says it’s a warning that victims of sexual abuse have to be careful who they talk to.

“It’s going to have a chilling effect or it could potentially have a chilling effect for those who believe they’e been abused. And there are many reasons why they don’t already come forward; the shame, the self blame, the fear that they’re not going to be believed and so a decision like this really makes, or should make these people kind of take stock and think about whether if they come forward they may be faced with defamation allegations.”

There’s another aspect to this ruling. The judge awarded $125,000 for libel damage to the uncle’s reputation. But he said, if he had believed the women, he would have awarded them $35,000 each in damages for sexual abuse. Grace says that’s saying the man’s reputation is worth more than three times the sexual abuse of a little girl. Nick.

Al, as you said, this a rare case. Any other reactions today?

Nick, there is another take on this story. A comment on a blog called “Community of the Wrongly Accused” says the uncle was victimized and deserves justice like anybody else. The court ruling came from a Superior Court, which means other judges won’t be required to follow it, but it could influence their opinions. There’s no word on any appeal.


Commenting Guidelines

  • Comments are open for 2 days only after publication of article
  • All comments subject to approval
    • Comments must be constructive and a minimum of 5 words
    • Please do not submit multiple identical comments
    • Personal attacks will not be posted
    • We reserve the right to edit submissions for spelling, grammar, and language
  • CH-CHing! points will be awarded upon submission, however comments will not appear live until they have been approved
  • During the approval process, we reserve the right to withdraw CH-CHing! points awarded to you for comments that do not meet the above guidelines


Protect Kids Advocacy says:

Well, Theo Fleury recently referred to this country’s justice system as “Disneyland for Pedophiles”. Child sexual abuse effectively devalues victims into second-class citizens or second-class lives, affecting how they feel about themselves and how they relate to others – in other words, their own reputations too. The Canadian justice system has taken little or no action on reforms firmly seen through in the United Kingdom, in the United States and in Australia to improve public confidence in judicial recourse for child sexual abuse.

Nobody is arguing that accused persons should not have rights, or that libel laws should not exist, or even that our criminal system should not be based on the high burden of proof that is guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It is the reckless and one-sided viciousness of Mr. Goodman’s actions and comments which refused to recognise the sisters’ perfectly justified low confidence in the Canadian justice system, in a highly-charged case obviously calling for tact and moderation, which makes it a shoo-in for keeping “Disneyland” alive and well.