"Poor" Lori!
Good Day Readers:
Lori Douglas' recent interview raises some interesting questions:
(1) After all this time why has she finally chosen to go public at this particular time? Did she receive financial compensation for her interview in the Canadian Lawyer Magazine?
(2) Why not the Winnipeg Free Press/Winnipeg Sun/CBC Manitoba?
(3) Will the publicity financially benefit her practice at Petersen-King?
(4) Why Petersen-King? Did she attempt to find part-time employment at any other Winnipeg law firm?
(5) Is the resultant publicity because she has axes to grind with members of Winnipeg's judiciary or members of the Canadian Judicial Council?
(6) Does she have any other motivations?
(7) Given the potentially explosive nature of the act, did she really not know whether the camera with which her late husband took the pictures was loaded with film?
(8) She claimed she never saw the photos. What the first action most people take after having their picture taken?
(9) Did the University of Manitoba's Faculty of Law (Robson Hall) show good judgement in offering her employment?
(10) She is on the record as being dissatisfied with her settlement agreement yet she could have said "no" to her publicly financed legal defence team of three and testified at the Inquiry. So why didn't she?
(11) Will the CJC have the intestinal fortitude (code for balls) to publicly offer its interpretation of events?
(12) Finally, will she write a kiss and tell book?
The faces of rape has torture - financial and otherwise
It's hard to accept Lori Douglas' position that she was a victim without any responsibility/culpability for what happened. Are you to believe it was all her late husband Jack King's fault? Can it not be argued that it was Canadian taxpayers who have been financially raped and tortured. The Inquiry cost at least $3 million plus her salary over multiple years while it was going through its many machinations plus a "reduced" pension plan and benefits that could well cost taxpayers more millions should she live for another 20-years.
How many of you after working 30-years, if you even have a pension plan, will be able to match what she is getting after only 10-years on the bench?
You often hear of woman who've been sexually assaulted or raped refusing to go to court because in a perverse way the process will make them feel as though they're the guilty party. Is what you have in the sordid Lori Douglas file the reverse - a guilty party becomes the victim.
While Ms Douglas may have indeed been a fine Family Court Justice, problem is, she enabled something incredibly stupid to happen so now she must wear it.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Former Manitoba judge compares disciplinary hearing to 'torture'
'Nobody spoke up for me' says Lori Douglas, former judge embroiled in nude photo scandal
Chinta Puxley
Tuesday, January 5, 2016
Former Manitoba Judge Lori Douglas says it was like 'torture' knowing Canadian Judicial Council staff were viewing nude photos of her as part of the hearing.
A Manitoba judge whose nude photos were posted online by her husband without her knowledge says her subsequent disciplinary hearing was like being repeatedly sexually assaulted.
Lori Douglas, who was Associate Chief Justice when the explicit photos of her came to light, spoke to Canadian Lawyer Magazine about the process.Douglas is quoted as saying that knowing staff with the Canadian Judicial Council were viewing the photos as part of the hearing was like "torture that's inflicted in war on women."
"It hurt, hurt, hurt, hurt, hurt like agony when I had to be interviewed by people who had looked at them," she is quoted as saying in the cover story of the magazine.
In the article, Douglas said she feels that had she been a man, the reaction to the photos would have been different. Douglas said she did nothing wrong and the council should have defended her rather than drag her through a messy disciplinary hearing.
"But nobody spoke up for me," Douglas is quoted as saying. "If I had been a man whose wife was taking pictures, the CJC would have said, 'Poor Joe. He's married to a wing nut."'
Douglas could not be reached for comment by The Canadian Press and her lawyer did not return a message.
Johanna Laporte, spokeswoman for the Judicial Council, said the article is still being "read and considered" by staff. She said she wasn't sure whether the Council would respond to the issues raised by Douglas.
The disciplinary hearing revolved around allegations that Douglas failed to disclose the photos when she applied to become a judge in 2004 and that the pictures could undermine public confidence in the justice system.
New judge replaces Lori Douglas after nude photo investigation dropped
Judge Lori Douglas's offer to retire early accepted by judicial panel
Lori Douglas loses bid to end disciplinary hearing in nude photos case
The hearing took years and cost at least $3 million, not including Douglas's salary while she was on leave. She retired last May following a settlement with the Council.
The complaint against Douglas arose after her late husband, Jack King, who died in 2014, took photos of her and posted them on the Internet without her knowledge or permission in 2003.
He showed them to a client, Alexander Chapman, to try to entice him to have sex with her. Chapman later alleged the behaviour was sexual harassment.
He was paid $25,000 to destroy the photos and drop the complaint. But he held on to copies and made them public in 2010.
Douglas is quoted by the magazine as saying her life crumbled when the photos surfaced.
"I lost my job. I lost my life. I lost my reputation. If it hadn't been for my son, there would have been little reason to keep on."
Douglas is quoted by the magazine as saying she never saw the photos and said they might have been King's attempt to "inject some sort of excitement into his life."
"I didn't know if he had film in the camera," she is quoted as saying. "It was his thing."
She was "furious" when she found out the photos existed online, Douglas said. King apologized to her almost every day and Douglas ended up forgiving him.
"All I said was: 'How could you have done that to me?' And he had no answer."
Lori Douglas' recent interview raises some interesting questions:
(1) After all this time why has she finally chosen to go public at this particular time? Did she receive financial compensation for her interview in the Canadian Lawyer Magazine?
(2) Why not the Winnipeg Free Press/Winnipeg Sun/CBC Manitoba?
(3) Will the publicity financially benefit her practice at Petersen-King?
(4) Why Petersen-King? Did she attempt to find part-time employment at any other Winnipeg law firm?
(5) Is the resultant publicity because she has axes to grind with members of Winnipeg's judiciary or members of the Canadian Judicial Council?
(6) Does she have any other motivations?
(7) Given the potentially explosive nature of the act, did she really not know whether the camera with which her late husband took the pictures was loaded with film?
(8) She claimed she never saw the photos. What the first action most people take after having their picture taken?
(9) Did the University of Manitoba's Faculty of Law (Robson Hall) show good judgement in offering her employment?
(10) She is on the record as being dissatisfied with her settlement agreement yet she could have said "no" to her publicly financed legal defence team of three and testified at the Inquiry. So why didn't she?
(11) Will the CJC have the intestinal fortitude (code for balls) to publicly offer its interpretation of events?
(12) Finally, will she write a kiss and tell book?
The faces of rape has torture - financial and otherwise
It's hard to accept Lori Douglas' position that she was a victim without any responsibility/culpability for what happened. Are you to believe it was all her late husband Jack King's fault? Can it not be argued that it was Canadian taxpayers who have been financially raped and tortured. The Inquiry cost at least $3 million plus her salary over multiple years while it was going through its many machinations plus a "reduced" pension plan and benefits that could well cost taxpayers more millions should she live for another 20-years.
How many of you after working 30-years, if you even have a pension plan, will be able to match what she is getting after only 10-years on the bench?
You often hear of woman who've been sexually assaulted or raped refusing to go to court because in a perverse way the process will make them feel as though they're the guilty party. Is what you have in the sordid Lori Douglas file the reverse - a guilty party becomes the victim.
While Ms Douglas may have indeed been a fine Family Court Justice, problem is, she enabled something incredibly stupid to happen so now she must wear it.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
'Nobody spoke up for me' says Lori Douglas, former judge embroiled in nude photo scandal
Chinta Puxley
Tuesday, January 5, 2016
A Manitoba judge whose nude photos were posted online by her husband without her knowledge says her subsequent disciplinary hearing was like being repeatedly sexually assaulted.
Lori Douglas, who was Associate Chief Justice when the explicit photos of her came to light, spoke to Canadian Lawyer Magazine about the process.Douglas is quoted as saying that knowing staff with the Canadian Judicial Council were viewing the photos as part of the hearing was like "torture that's inflicted in war on women."
"It hurt, hurt, hurt, hurt, hurt like agony when I had to be interviewed by people who had looked at them," she is quoted as saying in the cover story of the magazine.
In the article, Douglas said she feels that had she been a man, the reaction to the photos would have been different. Douglas said she did nothing wrong and the council should have defended her rather than drag her through a messy disciplinary hearing.
"But nobody spoke up for me," Douglas is quoted as saying. "If I had been a man whose wife was taking pictures, the CJC would have said, 'Poor Joe. He's married to a wing nut."'
Douglas could not be reached for comment by The Canadian Press and her lawyer did not return a message.
Johanna Laporte, spokeswoman for the Judicial Council, said the article is still being "read and considered" by staff. She said she wasn't sure whether the Council would respond to the issues raised by Douglas.
The disciplinary hearing revolved around allegations that Douglas failed to disclose the photos when she applied to become a judge in 2004 and that the pictures could undermine public confidence in the justice system.
New judge replaces Lori Douglas after nude photo investigation dropped
Judge Lori Douglas's offer to retire early accepted by judicial panel
Lori Douglas loses bid to end disciplinary hearing in nude photos case
The hearing took years and cost at least $3 million, not including Douglas's salary while she was on leave. She retired last May following a settlement with the Council.
The complaint against Douglas arose after her late husband, Jack King, who died in 2014, took photos of her and posted them on the Internet without her knowledge or permission in 2003.
He showed them to a client, Alexander Chapman, to try to entice him to have sex with her. Chapman later alleged the behaviour was sexual harassment.
He was paid $25,000 to destroy the photos and drop the complaint. But he held on to copies and made them public in 2010.
Douglas is quoted by the magazine as saying her life crumbled when the photos surfaced.
"I lost my job. I lost my life. I lost my reputation. If it hadn't been for my son, there would have been little reason to keep on."
Douglas is quoted by the magazine as saying she never saw the photos and said they might have been King's attempt to "inject some sort of excitement into his life."
"I didn't know if he had film in the camera," she is quoted as saying. "It was his thing."
She was "furious" when she found out the photos existed online, Douglas said. King apologized to her almost every day and Douglas ended up forgiving him.
"All I said was: 'How could you have done that to me?' And he had no answer."
posted by Clare L. Pieuk at 6:35 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home