Ethical Defence in Sexual Assault Cases: The Tension Between Competing Ethical Obligations
Women Lawyers Forum and Criminal Justice Section | Original Program Date: November 6, 2013
Criminal Code amendments and Supreme Court authority have changed the law of evidence in sexual assault cases, particularly in the rejection of the following three assumptions:
- Prior sexual experience alone makes a complainant more likely to have consented to the incident at issue
- A complainant’s delay in reporting the incident suggests fabrication
- Consent can be inferred from the passivity of the complainant
An outstanding panel of speakers discuss the impact of these changes on defence counsel’s ethical obligations in sexual assault cases, including:
- What is the scope of your duty to advocate zealously for your client and other professional obligations?
- How do your professional duties intersect with the law of evidence?
- Have the changes to the law of evidence altered your ethical obligations?
PROGRAM CHAIRS
Christi Hunter, Heller, Rubel Barristers
Amelia Rose Martin, Barrister & Solicitor
Maryellen Symons, Barrister & Solicitor
Luba Szkambara, Heller, Rubel Barristers
SPEAKERS
Professor Elaine Craig, Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University
Susan Chapman, Ursel Phillips Fellows Hopkinson LLP
