Editorial: Let’s be clear on the law about drinking and assault


From a Toronto Star editorial: Right here we go once more.

Simply as the #MeToo and Time’s Up actions are starting to carry males accountable for undesirable sexual advances and violence towards ladies, an Ontario court docket has stated these accused of sexual assault have the proper to assert they have been too intoxicated to know what they have been doing.

How is it that when ladies are drunk they will be deemed able to consenting to sexual exercise, however when males drink an excessive amount of they will be absolved of their actions?

Ontario’s lawyer common, Caroline Mulroney, ought to order an enchantment of this ruling.

Ladies thought that they had gained this battle virtually a technology in the past when the federal authorities in 1995 amended the Legal Code to outlaw the defence of self-induced, excessive intoxication in instances of assault.

This was in response to an odious ruling upheld by the Supreme Courtroom the earlier yr, when a power alcoholic was acquitted of sexual assault as a result of he was too drunk to know what he was doing when he pulled a 65-year-old girl from her wheelchair, dragged her to her mattress and raped her.

The court docket agreed with the trial decide that somebody incapable of forming felony intent can’t be discovered responsible and that the man’s excessive intoxication — to the level of automatism or madness — should be acknowledged as a defence. An comprehensible public outcry ensued, prompting Parliament to alter the law.

However since then, provincial courts throughout the nation, together with not less than 5 in Ontario, have dominated the federal law unconstitutional and have allowed males to assert excessive intoxication as a defence for sexual assault. The ultimate determinations of the instances have been blended. However none has been appealed.

Learn extra: Let’s be clear on the law about drinking and assault




Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

3 × 3 =