VII. Selected Sources and Bibliography

Legislation

An Act to amend the Criminal Code (protection of children and other vulnerable persons) and the Canada Evidence Act, S.C. 2005, c. 32.
Canadian Victims Bill of Rights, S.C. 2015, c. 13, s. 2.
The Constitution Act, 1982,beingSchedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11.
Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46.
Safe Streets and Communities Act, S.C. 2012, c. 1.
Youth Criminal Justice Act, SC. 2002, c 1.

Privacy-related Criminal Code and Youth Criminal Justice Act provisions

Criminal Code
Provision Function

S. 276

Evidence of complainant’s sexual history inadmissible

S. 276.2 (effective since 1992, S.C. 1992, c. 38, s. 2)

S. 276.3 (effective since January 2006, changed by S.C. 2005, c. 32, s. 13.)

At a hearing to determine the admissibility of evidence in sexual assault proceedings, under s.276(2)

S.276.2: (1) the jury and public are excluded; and (2) the complainant is not compellable

S.276.3: ban on publishing the contents or proceedings of a 276 application

S. 278. 1 – 9

(the regime was last amended in 2015 through S.C. 2015, c. 13)

Provisions governing record production to the accused in proceedings for sexual offences.

S.278.9 – prohibition on publishing the contents of an application for third party records made under s.278.3, evidence or submissions made during the hearing, or the judge’s decision

S. 486 (1)

(last amended in July 2015 through S.C 2015, c. 13, s. 14, c. 20, s. 21)

Exclusion of public – an exception to open court principle is that a judge may “order the exclusion of all or any members of the public from the court room for all or part of the proceedings, or order that the witness testify behind a screen or other device that would allow the witness not to be seen by members of the public, if the judge or justice is of the opinion that such an order is in the interest of public morals, the maintenance of order or the proper administration of justice or is necessary to prevent injury to international relations or national defence or national security.”

S. 486.1(1)
S.486.1 (2)

Support person — witnesses under 18 or who have a disability
Support person – other witnesses

S. 486.2 (1)

S. 486.2 (2)

(added in 2005, last modified in 2015 through S.C. 2015, c. 13, s. 15; S.C. 2015, c. 20, s. 38.)

Testimony outside the courtroom for witnesses under 18 who have a mental or physical disability
Testimony outside the courtroom for other witnesses

S. 486.3 (1)
S. 486.3 (2)
S. 486.3 (3)
(added in 2005, last modified in July 2015 through S.C. 2015, c. 13, s. 16)

Accused not to cross-examine witness under 18
Accused not to cross-examine complainant in certain cases
Accused not to cross-examine other witnesses
This section allows a judge to make an order, upon application, that the accused not cross-examine a witness under the age of 18 years, or complainants in certain offences or other witnesses where the judge is of the opinion that such an order would allow the giving of a full and candid account from the witness of the acts complained of or would otherwise be in the interest of the proper administration of justice. If such an order is made, the judge or justice shall appoint counsel to conduct the cross-examination.

S. 486.31

(added in July 2015 through S.C. 2015, c. 20, s. 38(3))

Non-disclosure of witness’ identity: “In any proceedings against an accused, the judge or justice may, on application of the prosecutor in respect of a witness, or on application of a witness, make an order directing that any information that could identify the witness not be disclosed in the course of the proceedings if the judge or justice is of the opinion that the order is in the interest of the proper administration of justice”.

S. 486.4(1)

(added in 2005 and last amended in July 2015 through S.C. 2015, c. 13, s. 18)

Order restricting publication with respect to victims/witnesses of sexual offences: “The presiding judge or justice may make an order directing that any information that could identify the victim or a witness shall not be published in any document or broadcast or transmitted in any way, in proceedings in respect of certain specified sexual offences.”

S. 486.5(1)

(added in 2005 and last amended in July 2015 through SC 2015, c.13, s.19)

Order restricting publication (general): “On application of the prosecutor in respect of a victim or a witness, or on application of a victim or a witness, a judge or justice may make an order directing that any information that could identify the victim or witness shall not be published in any document or broadcast or transmitted in any way if the judge or justice is of the opinion that the order is in the interest of the proper administration of justice.”

S. 487.3

(added in 1997 and most recently amended in 2015 through S.C. 2014, c. 31, s. 22(1) and (2) (E))

Denying access to information – A judge or justice may make an order prohibiting access to and disclosure of any information relating to warrants and certain production orders or authorizations on the ground that the ends of justice would be subverted by the disclosure for one of the reasons listed below, and such a reason outweighs in importance the access to the information.

S. 517

Publication ban on interim release proceedings

S. 539

(last updated January 2006 S.C. 2005, c. 32, s. 18)

A judge, if prosecutor applies, may; if accused applies, shall make an order directing that the evidence taken at the inquiry shall not be published in any document or broadcast or transmitted in any way before such time as each of the accused is discharged, or if he is ordered to stand trial, the trial is ended.

S. 542(2)

(last updated in 2006, S.C. 2005, c. 32, s. 19)

Ban on publication of admissions or confessions tendered during the preliminary inquiry.

S. 672.501(1) – (12)

Effective since January 2006 through: S.C. 2005, c. 22, ss. 17 and 64(2))

(1) – Sexual offences - RB shall make an order directing that any information that could identify a victim, or a witness who is under the age of eighteen years, shall not be published.
(2) – Child pornography – RB shall make an order directing that any information that could identify a witness who is under the age of eighteen years, or any person who is the subject of a representation, written material or a recording that constitutes child pornography within the meaning of section 163.1, shall not be published.
(3) – For any offence not specified in (1) or (2), on application of the prosecutor, victim or witness, the RB may make an order prohibiting publication if it is necessary for the proper administration of justice

S. 715.1

(last updated January 2006, SC 2005, c. 32, s. 23 – change from specified proceedings to any proceeding)

Video recording evidence of a young victim or witness in any proceeding is admissible in evidence

S. 715.2

(last updated January 2006 – SC 2005, c. 32, s. 23 - change from specified proceedings to any proceeding)

Video recording evidence of a victim or witness who has difficulty communicating due to a mental or physical disability in any proceeding is admissible
Youth Criminal Justice Act
Provision Function

S. 2(1)

Definition of publication: “the communication of information by making it known or accessible to the general public through any means, including print, radio or television broadcast, telecommunication or electronic means”.

S. 34(9) and s. 34(10)

A court may withhold part of medical/psychological assessment of a young offender from a private prosecutor if the information is not necessary or would cause prejudice.
The “may” excludes some of part of the assessment from the offender, their parents or a private prosecutor if it would “would seriously impair the treatment or recovery of the young person, or would be likely to endanger the life or safety of, or result in serious psychological harm to, another person”.

S. 75

(1) “When the youth justice court imposes a youth sentence on a young person who has been found guilty of a violent offence, the court shall decide whether it is appropriate to make an order lifting the ban on publication of information that would identify the young person”.
(2) The "may” orders the lifting of a publication ban if the young person poses a significant risk of committing another violent offence and lifting the ban is necessary to protect the public.
(3) The onus is on the AG.

S. 110

Identity of a young person dealt with under the Act not to be published
Exceptions: if the young offender has received an adult sentence; under s.75; for the administration of justice
(3) the young person may identify themselves after they reach the age of 18
(6) the young person may apply, and the court may make an order permitting the young person to identify themselves if it is not contrary to the young person’s best interest or the public interest.

S. 111

Ban on publishing victim or witness identity: “no person shall publish the name of a child or young person, or any other information related to a child or a young person, if it would identify the child or young person as having been a victim of, or as having appeared as a witness in connection with, an offence committed or alleged to have been committed by a young person.”
Exceptions:
(2) Identifying information may be published by the victim/witness after they reach the age of 18 or by their parents if they are deceased.
(3) The victim/witness may apply, and the court may make an order permitting the young person to identify themselves if it is not contrary to the victim/witness’ best interest or the public interest.

S. 118(1)

No access to records unless authorized.

S. 132

Exclusion from hearing: “a court or justice before whom proceedings are carried out under this Act may exclude any person from all or part of the proceedings if the court or justice considers that the person’s presence is unnecessary to the conduct of the proceedings and the court or justice is of the opinion that
(a) any evidence or information presented to the court or justice would be seriously injurious or seriously prejudicial to the accused, a witness, or the victim
(b) it is in the interest of public morals or the proper administration of justice.

Victims’ rights legislation: Canadian Victims Bill of Rights

RSC 2015, c.13, s.2 (assented to May 2015) https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-23.7/page-1.html
See, e.g., s.11, stating “Every victim has the right to have their privacy considered by the appropriate authorities in the criminal justice system.”

Selected jurisprudence

Scott v. Scott, [1913] AC 417
Nova Scotia v. MacIntyre, [1982] 1 SCR 175
Edmonton Journal v. Alberta (AG), [1989] 2 SCR 1326
Nova Scotia Supreme Court (Prothonotary) v. Vickery, [1991] 1 SCR 671
R. v. L.(D.), [1993] 4 SCR 419
R. v. Levogiannis, [1993] 4 SCR 475
Dagenais v. C.B.C., [1994] 3 SCR 835
C.B.C. v. New Brunswick, [1996] 3 SCR 480
Re Vancouver Sun, 2004 SCC 43, [2004] 2 SCR 332
Toronto Star Newspapers Ltd. v. Ontario, 2005 SCC 41, [2005] 2 SCR 188
Named Person v. Vancouver Sun, 2007 SCC 43, [2007] 3 SCR 253
R. v. D.B., 2008 SCC 25, [2008] 2 SCR 3
Toronto Star Newspapers Ltd. v. Canada, 2010 SCC 21, [2010] 1 SCR 721
Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. Canada (AG), 2011 SCC 2, [2011] 1 SCR 19
Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. Canada (AG), 2011 SCC 3, [2011] 1 SCR 65
A.B. v. Bragg Communications Inc., 2012 SCC 46,[2012] 2 SCR 567
R. v. N.S., 2012 SCC 72, [2012] 3 SCR 726
R. v. R.D.F., 2016 SKPC 89
R. v. C.B.C., 2018 SCC 5, [2018] 1 SCR 196
R. v. C.B.C., 2018 ABCA 391
Galloway v. A.B., 2019 BCSC 395
R. v. Dhami, 2019 ONCJ 10
R. v. Sipes et al., 2019 BCSC 929

See also

R. v. C.B.C., 2010 ONCA 726
M.E.H. v. Williams, 2012 ONCA 35

Related: privacy and access to information

Ontario (Public Safety and Security) v. Criminal Lawyers’ Association, 2010 SCC 23, [2010] 1 SCR 815
Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v. UFCW, Local 401, 2013 SCC 62, [2013] 3 SCR 733
Toronto Star Newspaper v. A-G Ontario, 2018 ONSC 2586

Secondary literature - Academic

Adams, Dana. “Access Denied? Inconsistent Jurisprudence on the Open Court Principle and Media Access to Exhibits in Canadian Criminal Cases”, (2011) 49:1 Alta. L. Rev. 177

Arvanitidis, Tania. “Publication Bans in a Facebook Age: How Internet Vigilantes Have Challenged the Youth Criminal Justice Act’s ‘Secrecy Laws’ Following the 2011 Stanley Cup Riot” (2016) 5:1 Canadian Grad. J. of Sociology and Criminology 18

Bailey, Jane, and Jacquelyn Burkell. “Revisiting the Open Court Principle in an Era of Online Publication: Questioning Presumptive Public Access to Parties' and Witnesses' Personal Information” (2017) 48:1 Ottawa L. Rev. 143

Benedict, Helen. “The Privacy Rights of Rape Victims in the Media and the Law, Panel Discussion” 61 Fordham L. Rev. 1141 (1991)

Birdsell, Bonnie Gail. “Reevaluating Gag Orders and Rape Shield Laws: In the Internet Age, How Can We Better Protect Victims?” 38 Seton Hall Legislative Journal (2014)

Boyle, Helen. “Rape and the Media: Victim’s Rights to Anonymity and Effects of Technology on the Standard of Rape Coverage” (2012), 3 European J. of Law and Technology

Conroy, Amy, and Teresa Scassa. “Balancing Transparency and Accountability with Privacy in Improving the Police Handling of Sexual Assaults” (2016) 28:2 C.J.W.L. 342

Cossman, Brenda. “#MeToo, Sex Wars 2.0 and the Power of Law” (forthcoming) Asian Yearbook of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law. Online: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3257862

Des Rosiers, Nathalie, Bruce Feldthusen and Oelana Hankivsky, “Legal Compensation for Sexual Violence: Therapeutic Consequences and Consequences for the Judicial System”, (1998), 4 Psychology, Public Policy and Law 433

Enderle, Taylor. “A Rhetorical Analysis of the Public Sphere through the #MeToo Movement” (2018) 6:1 Quest: A Journal of Undergraduate Student Research (Creighton University) 52. Online: https://dspace2.creighton.edu/xmlui/handle/10504/119598

Eltis, Karen. “The Judicial System in the Digital Age: Revisiting the Relationship between Privacy and Accessibility in the Cyber Context” (2011) 56:2 McGill L.J. 289

Fairstein, Linda. “The Privacy Rights of Rape Victims in the Media and the Law, Panel Discussion” 61 Fordham L. Rev. 1137 (1991)

Fialkow, David. “The Media’s First Amendment Rights and the Rape Victim’s Right to Privacy: Where Does One Right End and the Other Begin?” 39 Suffolk U. L. Rev. 745 (2006)

Giampetruzzi, Gary. “Raped Once, but Violated Twice: Constitutional Protection of a Rape Victim’s Privacy” 66 St. John’s law Rev. 151 (2012)

Hall-Coates, Shauna. “Following Digital Media into the Courtroom: Publicity and the Open Court Principle in the Information Age” (2015) 24 Dal. J. Legal. Stud. 101

Hulse, Rebecca, “Privacy and Domestic Violence in Court”, 16 Wm. and Mary J. Women and L. 237 (2010)

Jones, Lisa, David Finkelhor and Jessica Beckwith, “Protecting Victims’ Identities in Press Coverage of Child Victimization” (2010) 11:3 Journalism 347

Keller, Jessalynn. Kaitynn Mendes and Jessica Ringrose, “Speaking ‘unspeakable things’: documenting digital feminist responses to rape culture”, 27 J. of Gender Studies 22 (2016)

Lucock, Carole and Michael Yeo, “Naming Names: The Pseudonym in the Name of the Law”, (2006), 3 University of Ottawa Law and Technology J. 53

Mendes, Kaitlynn, Jessica Ringrose and Jessalynn Keller. “#MeToo and the promise and pitfalls of challenging rape culture through digital feminist activism” (2018) 25:2 Eur. J. of Women’s Studies 236

Murdock, Daniel. “A Compelling State Interest: Constructing a Statutory Framework for Protecting the Identity of Rape Victims”, 58 Alabama L. Rev. 1177 (2007)

Orenstein, Aviva. “Special Issues Raised by Rape Trials”, 76 Fordham L. Rev.1585 (2007)

Phillips, Dana. “Let’s Talk About Sexual Assault: Survivor Stories and the Law in the Jian Ghomeshi Media Discourse” (2017) 54:4 Osgoode Hall L.J. 1133

Putnam, Charles and David Finkelhor, “Mitigating the Impact of Publicity on Child Crime Victims and Witnesses” In Dowd NE, Singer DG and Wilson RF (eds) Handbook of children, culture, and violence. (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2006) 113

Resnick, Judith. “The Functions of Publicity and of Privatization in Courts and their Replacements (from Jeremy Bentham to #MeToo and Google Spain)”, in Burkhard Hess and Koprivica, Ana, ed, Open Justice: The Role of Courts in a Democratic Society (Baden-Baden, Germany: Nomos, 2019) 177. Online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3271284

Szurgyi, Melissa. “The Outside Looking in: Examining Reasoning Behind the Choice to Report Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence”, 7 Dissenting Voices (2018)

Tuerkheimer, Deborah. “Unofficial Reporting in the #MeToo Era” (forthcoming, 2019) University of Chicago Legal F. Online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3304717

Wexler, Lesley, Jennifer K. Robbennolt, and Colleen Murphy. “#MeToo, Time’s Up, and Theories of Justice” (2019) 2019:1 U. Ill. L. Rev. 45

Warner, Jody-Clay. “Rape Reporting After Reforms: Have Times Really Changed?” Violence Against Women 150 (2005)

Winn, Peter. “Online Court Records: Balancing Judicial Accountability and Privacy in an Age of Electronic Information”, (2004) 79 Wash. L. Rev. 307

Secondary literature – Government sources and publications

Bala, Nicholas, et al. “Testimonial Support Provisions for Children and Vulnerable Adults (Bill C-2): Case Law Review and Perceptions of the Judiciary”, (2011) Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family. Online: http://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/402296/publication.html

Cameron, Jamie. Victim Privacy and the Open Court Principle (Ottawa: Policy Centre for Victims Issues, Department of Justice Canada, 2004). Online: https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/victim/rr03_vic1/index.html

Department of Justice Canada. “Canadian Statement of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime, 2003” (modified January 7, 2015). Online: https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/victim/03/princ.html

Hurley, Pamela M. “Vulnerable Adult Witnesses: The perceptions and experiences of Crown Prosecutors and Victim Services Providers in the use of testimonial support provisions”, (Ottawa: Research and Statistics Division, Department of Justice Canada, 2013). Online: https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/victim/rr13_15a/p1.html

Judges Technology Advisory Committee. “Model Policy for Access to Court Records in Canada” (2005) Canadian Judicial Council. Online: https://www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca/cmslib/general/news_pub_techissues_AccessPolicy_2005_en.pdf

Mackay, Wayne. “Respectful and Responsible Relationships: There’s No App for That (The Report of the Nova Scotia Task Force on Bullying and Cyberbullying)” (2012) Nova Scotia Task Force on Bullying and Cyberbullying. Online: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2123494

McDonald, Susan. “Helping Victims Find their Voice: Testimonial Aids in Criminal Proceedings”, (Ottawa: Department of Justice Canada, 2018). Online: https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/victim/rd11-rr11/p2.html

Public Safety Canada. “Making a Complaint under the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights” (modified July 31, 2019). Online: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/cntrng-crm/crrctns/ntnl-ffc-vctms-mk-cmplnt-en.aspx

Rotenberg, Cristine and Adam Cotter, “Police-reported sexual assaults in Canada before and after #MeToo, 2016 and 2017” (Juristat, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, 2018). Online: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2018001/article/54979-eng.htm?HPA=1

Secondary literature – Journalistic and other

Boesveld, Sarah. “Linda Christina Redgrave: Witness 1 in Ghomeshi trial reveals identity”, Chatelaine (updated July 22, 2016). Online: https://www.chatelaine.com/news/linda-christina-redgrave-witness-1-in-ghomeshi-trial-reveals-identity/

Canadian Women’s Foundation. “The Facts: The #MeToo Movement and its Impact in Canada”. Online: https://www.canadianwomen.org/the-facts/the-metoo-movement-in-canada/

CBC News, “In the wake of #MeToo, a Toronto legal clinic sees ‘astronomical’ jump in sexual assault help requests”, CBC News (January 29, 2018). Online: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/in-the-wake-of-metoo-a-toronto-legal-clinic-sees-astronomical-jump-in-sexual-assault-help-requests-1.4508393

Coubrough, Jill. “More survivors coming forward to report sex assaults after #MeToo movement”, CBC News (March 9, 2018). Online: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/winnipeg-police-sexual-assault-reports-up-metoo-1.4568787

Doolittle, Robyn. “The Unfounded Effect”, The Globe and Mail (December 8, 2017). Online: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/investigations/unfounded-37272-sexual-assault-cases-being-reviewed-402-unfounded-cases-reopened-so-far/article37245525/

Doolittle, Robyn. “Unfounded case ends with conviction 19 years after police dismissed sexual-assault complaint”, The Globe and Mail (September 20, 2018). Online: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-unfounded-case-ends-with-conviction-19-years-after-police-dismissed/

Doolittle, Robyn. “Unfounded: Mishandling of sex-assault cases violates right to equality, lawsuit alleges”, The Globe and Mail (April 2, 2017). Online: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/lawsuit-alleges-gender-discrimination-in-unfounded-sexual-assault-case/article34558691/

Doolittle, Robyn. “Unfounded rates start to fall in cities across Canada”, The Globe and Mail (August 2, 2018). Online: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-unfounded-rates-start-to-fall-in-cities-across-canada/

Doolittle, Robyn. “Unfounded: Why Police Dismiss 1 in 5 Sexual Assault Claims as Baseless”, The Globe and Mail (February 2, 2017). Online: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/investigations/unfounded-sexual-assault-canada-main/article33891309/

Duffy, Andrew. “Google is linking secret court-protected names – including victim IDs – to online coverage”, Ottawa Citizen (updated September 9, 2018). Online: https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/google-is-linking-secret-court-protected-names-including-victim-ids-to-online-coverage

Duffy, Andrew. “Searching for news on Google can return victim and offender names under strict publication bans”, Ottawa Citizen (updated January 18, 2019). Online: https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/scope-of-potential-ban-breaches-of-secret-identities-through-google-search-broadens

Giese, Rachel. “There’s value in live-tweeting Jian Ghomeshi’s trial”, Chatelaine (July 22, 2016). Online: https://www.chatelaine.com/news/theres-value-in-live-tweeting-jian-ghomeshis-trial/

Johnson, Jessica. “The Ghomeshi Effect: Finally we’re talking about sexual assault. Where does the pain stop?” The Walrus (August 17, 2016). Online: https://thewalrus.ca/the-ghomeshi-effect/

Kalinina, Julia. “Only ‘Counsel” and ‘Media’ Can Tweet Inside Court: A CharterInfringement?” theCourt.ca (February 8, 2019). Online: http://www.thecourt.ca/electronic-devices-in-court/

Kingston, Anne. “What Jian Ghomeshi did: How a trial that was supposed to flip the script only made things worse”, Maclean’s (March 30, 2016). Online: https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/what-jian-ghomeshi-did/

Kingston, Anne. “What really went wrong in Jian Ghomeshi’s trial?” Maclean’s (February 18, 2016). Online: https://www.macleans.ca/society/what-really-went-wrong-in-jian-ghomeshis-trial/

Laucius, Joanne. “Ottawa lawyers file class-action against Google over publication bans”, Ottawa Citizen (updated September 10, 2018). Online: https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/ottawa-lawyers-file-class-action-suit-claiming-google-search-reveals-names-protected-publication-bans

North, Anna. “The #MeToo movement and its evolution, explained”, Vox (updated October 11, 2018). Online: https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/10/9/17933746/me-too-movement-metoo-brett-kavanaugh-weinstein

Press, Jordan. “In wake of #MeToo, number of sex assault cases deemed ‘unfounded’ has declined, Statistics Canada says”, National Post (updated July 24, 2018). Online: https://nationalpost.com/news/one-in-seven-sexual-assault-cases-in-2017-deemed-unfounded-statcan

Prochuk, Alana. “We Are Here: Women’s Experiences of the Barriers to Reporting Sexual Assault” (Vancouver: West Coast LEAF, 2018). Online: http://www.westcoastleaf.org/our-publications/we-are-here-womens-experiences-of-the-barriers-to-reporting-sexual-assault/

Sachdeva, Sonny. “‘Unfounded’ reshaping policing methods around Canada”, Ryerson Review of Journalism (November 16, 2017). Online: https://rrj.ca/unfounded-reshaping-policing-methods-around-canada/

Sealy-Harrington, Joshua. “Mastery or Misogyny? The Ghomeshi Judgment and Sexual Assault Reform”, ABlawg.ca (April 1, 2016). Online: https://ablawg.ca/2016/04/01/mastery-or-misogyny-the-ghomeshi-judgment-and-sexual-assault-reform/

Watson, H.G. “Live-Tweeting the Ghomeshi Trial Demystifies Court Process”, J Source (February 11, 2016). Online: https://j-source.ca/article/live-tweeting-the-ghomeshi-trial-demystifies-court-process/

Further web sources

Overview Articles on #MeToo

The #MeToo movement and its evolution, explained (October 11, 2018; Vox) https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/10/9/17933746/me-too-movement-metoo-brett-kavanaugh-weinstein

The Facts: The #MeToo Movement and its Impact in Canada (Canadian Women’s Foundation) https://www.canadianwomen.org/the-facts/the-metoo-movement-in-canada/

Surveys on Behaviour Impacts of #MeToo

Plan International Canada Report (March 7, 2018; Canada)155 https://plancanada.ca/media-centre/this-international-womens-day-plan-international-canada-releases-new-data-highlighting-the-behavioural-impact-of-the-metoo-movement

What a Difference a Year Makes: Polling Update on Sexism, Harassment, Culture and Equality (Perry Undem 2017 Report; US context) https://www.scribd.com/document/366406592/PerryUndem-Report-on-Sexism-Harassment-Culture-And-Equality-compressed

Related to: Canadian national and regional increases in sexual assault reporting since #MeToo

Mary Allen, Police-reported crime statistics in Canada, 2017, Statistics Canada (July 23, 2018) https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/pub/85-002-x/2018001/article/54974-eng.pdf?st=Ua6Xtna9

Sex assaults in spotlight as Montreal police present annual report (May 22, 2018; Montreal Gazette) https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/montreal-police-present-annual-report

Calgary Police Sex Crimes Unit investigating more cases than ever before amid #MeToo movement (January 31, 2018, Global News) https://globalnews.ca/news/3999169/calgary-sex-abuse-cases-me-too-movement/

In wake of #MeToo, number of sex assault cases deemed 'unfounded' has declined, Statistics Canada says (July 23, 2018; National Post) https://nationalpost.com/news/one-in-seven-sexual-assault-cases-in-2017-deemed-unfounded-statcan

More survivors coming forward to report sex assaults after #MeToo movement (March 9, 2018; CBC) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/winnipeg-police-sexual-assault-reports-up-metoo-1.4568787

Related to: Increased use of sexual assault centres since #MeToo

#MeToo, 1 year later: Canadian sexual assault crisis centres report record number of calls (October 5, 2018; Global News) https://globalnews.ca/news/4519574/metoo-1-year-later-canada/

In the wake of #MeToo, a Toronto legal clinic sees 'astronomical' jump in sexual assault help requests (January 29, 2018; CBC) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/in-the-wake-of-metoo-a-toronto-legal-clinic-sees-astronomical-jump-in-sexual-assault-help-requests-1.4508393

#MeToo effect: Calls flood U.S. sexual assault hotlines (January 17, 2018; Reuters) https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-harassment-helplines/metoo-effect-calls-flood-u-s-sexual-assault-hotlines-idUSKBN1F6194

Sexual assault helpline saw 147% spike during Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony (September 28, 2018; Global News) https://globalnews.ca/news/4495985/christine-blasey-ford-hearing-sexual-assault-helpline/

Callers flood C-SPAN with sexual assault stories during Ford hearing (September 27, 2018; Politico) https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/27/c-span-calls-sexual-assault-stories-849230

Related to: #MeToo and Non-disclosure Agreements

Nondisclosure agreements revisited in the wake of #MeToo (May 4, 2018; The Lawyers Daily) https://www.thelawyersdaily.ca/articles/6444

Regaining my voice: How non-disclosure agreements are used to silence (March 23, 2018; The Globe and Mail) https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-regaining-my-voice-how-non-disclosure-agreements-are-used-to-silence/

#MeToo: States Move to Limit Use of Non-Disclosure Agreements (October 16, 2018; Praxis Legal Solutions) https://praxislegalsolutions.com/metoo-states-move-to-limit-use-of-non-disclosure-agreement

Related to: Ghomeshi Case

Dana Philips, “Let’s Talk About Sexual Assault: Survivor Stories and the Law in the Jian Ghomeshi Media Discourse.” Osgoode Hall Law Journal 54.4 (2017): 1133-1180 https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol54/iss4/9

Why the Jian Ghomeshi story has changed everything (November 28, 2014; Macleans)156 https://www.macleans.ca/culture/this-changes-everything-2/

Related to: Publication Bans, the Internet, and Sexual Assault Cases

Google is linking secret, court-protected names - including victim IDs - to online coverage (September 9, 2018; Ottawa Citizen) https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/google-is-linking-secret-court-protected-names-including-victim-ids-to-online-coverage

Publication Bans are Hurting the National Conversation (February 26, 2018; Opinion, Canadian Journalists for Free Expression) https://www.cjfe.org/publication_bans_are_hurting_the_national_conversation

Further resources on the Ghomeshi Case and Aftermath

What really went wrong in Jian Ghomeshi’s trial (Macleans; February 18, 2016) https://www.macleans.ca/society/what-really-went-wrong-in-jian-ghomeshis-trial/

What Jian Ghomeshi did (Macleans; March 30, 2016) https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/what-jian-ghomeshi-did/

The troubling message of the Jian Ghomeshi trial (Toronto Star; March 25, 2016) https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2016/03/25/the-troubling-message-of-the-jian-ghomeshi-trial.html

The Ghomeshi Effect (The Walrus; August 17, 2016) https://thewalrus.ca/the-ghomeshi-effect/

‘This changed me.’ The lasting impact of the Ghomeshi scandal (Chatelaine; July 22, 2016) https://www.chatelaine.com/living/project97-living/the-lasting-impact-of-the-jian-ghomeshi-scandal/

What I wish I’d known before testifying in the Ghomeshi trial (Chatelaine; July 22, 2016) https://www.chatelaine.com/news/what-i-wish-id-known-before-testifying-in-the-ghomeshi-trial/

Linda Christina Redgrave: Witness 1 in Ghomeshi trial reveals identity (Chatelaine; July 22, 2016) https://www.chatelaine.com/news/linda-christina-redgrave-witness-1-in-ghomeshi-trial-reveals-identity/

Mastery or Misogyny? The Ghomeshi Judgment and Sexual Assault Reform (ABlawg) https://ablawg.ca/2016/04/01/mastery-or-misogyny-the-ghomeshi-judgment-and-sexual-assault-reform/

The trouble with sex assault trials (Canadian Lawyer; May 2, 2016) https://www.canadianlawyermag.com/author/shannon-kari/the-trouble-with-sex-assault-trials-3261/

Live-Tweeting the Ghomeshi Trial Demystifies Court Process (JSource) http://j-source.ca/article/live-tweeting-the-ghomeshi-trial-demystifies-court-process/

There’s value in live-tweeting Jian Ghomeshi’s trial (Chatelaine; July 22, 2016) https://www.chatelaine.com/news/theres-value-in-live-tweeting-jian-ghomeshis-trial/

Twitter doesn’t do the Ghomeshi trial justice. There’s a better alternative (The Globe and Mail; February 2, 2016) https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/twitter-doesnt-do-ghomeshi-trial-justice-theres-a-better-alternative/article28515246/

Public Editor: Ghomeshi coverage was warranted, necessary (The Globe and Mail; February 12, 2016) https://www.theglobeandmail.com/community/inside-the-globe/public-editor-ghomeshi-coverage-was-warranted-necessary/article28744459/

Footnotes

155 The original Plan International Canada Survey has not been found yet, but its major findings are here.

156 “Victims of sexual assault are also increasingly willing to identify themselves, to reject the notion that being a victim of sexual assault is in any way shameful, says Toronto criminal lawyer Jonathan Rosenthal: ‘You’re seeing a lot more people refuse to hide behind the publication ban.’ ” Notice that #BeenRapedNeverReported started as a tweet in support of the complainants in Ghomeshi.