https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-supreme-courts-r-v-jj-decision-puts-mistrust-of-defence-over-concern/

It looks like the supreme court has decided you can't necessarily use the texts between you and your accuser in the context of sexual assault cases as evidence of consent. Seems like a guaranteed way to generate false convictions.

Cue longbeachgriffy's consent video

It seems like they will not be happy until there are no relations between men and women....
It is like in US colleges-the male defendant is not allowed to present a defense in sexual assault cases...crazy

This post was edited by bbs12 on Jul 2 2022 10:47am

But make no mistake, the canadian government already violated that 'privacy' and read your text messages and emails. That's the real irony, to deny the introduction of exculpatory evidence they want to cite a privacy they themselves violate as matter of policy. And now to get a gun in NYC you have to submit your private social media for review lmao. Heck in an update to the Anton Lazzaro sex trafficking case we once discussed, last week we found out that the only way he was allowed to talk to his lawyers was via phone because of covid restrictions, and prosecutors listened in on the attorney client conversations every time. In an authoritarian dystopia, "privacy" will only exist when it can be used to crucify you

While I really don't have any knowledge of the Canadian courts... this does sound a bit weird.

The article seems to say that the Supreme Court has ruled that using "other" texts and emails (those not germane to the case), to attack the complainants character is not allowed (which seems sensible).
But dismissing the use of ALL texts and emails, including those that may show the defendant was innocent, would be a really BAD thing.

This post was edited by Ghot on Jul 2 2022 12:15pm

clearly canada has determined there weren't enough wrongful convictions for alleged rape, so they did this to imprison more people without a reason. it's certainly not like they looked at the situation as a whole and determined abuse victims needed more protection against character assassination attempts by lawyers of abusers, no, this is all just about being "woke" while deliberately destroying society as a whole (for reasons)... while conveniently handing incels another excuse why they can't have a normal, healthy relationship...

some people...

Listen and believe am I right?

Back in reality, healthy relationships don't end up in disputes over sexual assaults. No, healthy relationships aren't premeditated on whether you can use private conversations as evidence in court, that's simply absurd. But carry on with your hot takes.. that this is 100% on strengthening protection on alleged victims, like anyone in this forum is swayed by your arguments