OUR "JUST US" (JUSTICE) SYSTEM SCREWS UP AGAIN

Yesterday's Waterloo Region Record carries an Opinion piece by Luisa D'Amato titled "The law was twisted and turned around and ended up harming a survivor". Generally over the years (decades) I have tended to agree with at least 90% of Luisa's positions on various issues that she writes about. This one is no exception. A woman went to the police over an alleged sexual assault. The "assailant" was charged and convicted in a court of law in Kitchener. I do not know what sentence he was given by the judge although I would assume it included some significant jail time. The victim of the crime shared part of the court transcript with her family and friends. The part she shared included the reasons why the judge found the man guilty. Lo and behold the now convicted assailant called the police on her for violating the routine publication ban on identifying the victim of a sexual assault. Honest to God she was charged and convicted for identifying herself as the victime of a sexual assault. She was fined $2,000 plus a "victim surcharge" of $600. Has the world gone mad? ................................................................................................................. On the face of it, our judicial system have not just revictimized the woman involved but they have also shot themselves in the foot. That an innocent victim of a physical attack then should endure more court time with herself as the accused and indeed be convicted and fined a total of $2,600 is outrageous. Are our courts so full of themselves that they think that they must "defend" either stupid laws, lest we forget made by even stupider individuals known as politicians, or that they must "defend" their own inherent superiority and divinity from any minor transgression? This at best was a minor transgression or even a simple misunderstanding. Who among us thinks that the victim of a crime does not have the right to identify themselves if they so wish? I do believe that many of our judges and judicial personnel consider themselves above the rest of us, almost pope-like in their infallibility and that they must at all costs protect that idiotic notion. There are costs to that kind of stupidity but unfortunately they are usually borne by others. .............................................................................................................. Is there something else going on? Are there facts brought up in court that have not been shared with the public? Without diminishing my disgust with the facts as we know them, I am going to speculate here. I am in fact going to go out on a limb and ask if it is possible that the courts actually screwed up twice? I do not know anything about the judge in this case. I do however know too much about a certain a..hole judge in Kitchener by the name of Robert Reilly. He is beyond the pale regarding bias and disrespectful behaviour. He is a coward hiding behind his judicial robes while imposing his perverted and ignorant opinions on others. Besides my case of decades ago I have been advised of his pro female bias in another case for which he was reprimanded (knuckles wrapped only). With this background I am compelled to ask if the initial conviction of sexual assault was the correct decision or not. If our courts are still capable of such stupidity in revictimizing a complainant after her allegation was upheld, is it possible that said conviction was a weak one? If our courts and judicial system permit such a..holes as I've mentioned to keep on victimizing citizens then why on earth do we assume that they always make the right decisions or that one bad apple (known by victimized citizens and probably some lawyers) is the only one? I repeat that I have no special or private knowledge of the particular case that Luisa D'Amato is writing about. I am simply speculating as to whether the judiciary involved actually have messed up this case even more than is already obvious.