Hockey Canada sex assault scandal

[CaptRenault]

...I expect that questions regarding her past sexual history will likely come up such as was this the first time she left with a guy she had literally just met? Was this the only time that she screwed around on a boyfriend? Was this the first time that she had sex with more partners at once? By the way yesterday she did admit that had she told her boyfriend that she had willingly participated in a gangbang with a bunch of hockey players her boyfriend more than likely would have dumped her & not have been sympathetic with her. But by playing the victim (whether or not she was) it was easier to get her boyfriend to be sympathetic to her & her cause. Since they are currently engaged to be married it appears that whatever this was her strategy or not it seems to have worked...

In general, in Canada (and the U.S.), lawyers can't question a complainant in a sexual assault or rape case about her sexual history unless the complainant and the accused have been in a relationship. That's not true in this case.

Can You Use Sexual History to Defend Sexual Assault Case?

Yes and no. If you are accused of sexual assault in Canada, you may share the sexual history between you and the complainant – but not always

www.criminallawyervancouver.com

What is a rape shield law in Canada?​

Often in sexual assault cases, the complainant and the accused have some sort of history. They may have been in a relationship or been ‘friends with benefits’ before the alleged assault took place. If so, the accused may want to bring this to the court’s attention.

However, there are very strict rules on this type of evidence. This is because Canada has what is commonly known as a ‘rape shield’ law, introduced in the late 20th century, which limits the ability of the defendant’s counsel to introduce the accuser’s sexual history as evidence during a rape trial

The law exists to ensure the complainant’s sexual history cannot be used to their detriment during the judicial process. This was allowed in the past, but it was deemed to be unfair as the evidence could be manipulated to suggest that the complainant was promiscuous and/or had previously consented to sex with the accused. The inference was that the complainant was an unreliable witness and was more likely to have consented to the sexual activity than not.

 

[Cap'tain Fantastic]

I expect that questions regarding her past sexual history will likely come up such as was this the first time she left with a guy she had literally just met? Was this the only time that she screwed around on a boyfriend? Was this the first time that she had sex with more partners at once?

Nowadays, all these are irrelevant to the case, it is not admissible, in court, to bring a victim’s sexual history anymore for sexual crime. Her lawyer will object and the judge has no choice to oblige.