The Canadian Judicial Council says a judge who asked a sex assault complainant why she couldn’t keep her knees together has been given more time to respond to a recommendation he be removed from the bench.
Justice Robin Camp made comment while a Calgary provincial court judge in a 2014 sexual assault trial, during which he also referred to the woman as ” the accused” and told her “pain and sex sometimes go together.”
READ MORE: A look at the legal career and trial that led to judge Robin Camp controversy
Last month, a judicial council panel recommended the comments should cost Camp his job.
Council spokesperson Johanna Laporte says Camp’s lawyer had 30 days — until Dec. 30 — to file a response, but asked for more time.
She says he has been given until Jan. 6 to make his submission.
Watch below: Global’s past coverage of the controversy surrounding Robin Camp
Judicial committee says ‘knees together’ judge Robin Camp should lose his job
Travis Vader verdict, Robin Camp controversy: why don’t Alberta judges know the law?
READ MORE: Judicial committee says ‘knees together’ judge Robin Camp should lose his job
Council is then to make a recommendation on Camp’s future to federal Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould.
Camp apologized at his disciplinary hearing in September for what he called his rude and insulting attitude toward the woman. He testified that he made mistakes but was willing to learn from them and wanted to remain on the bench.
“I was not the good judge I thought I was,” Camp said. “Canadians deserve more from their judges.''
READ MORE: Judge in ‘knees together’ retrial says a woman can change her mind on consent
Camp’s lawyer, Frank Addario, argued that removing Camp would send the wrong message to other judges who want to improve themselves.
But the committee said Camp’s apology and other efforts, such as counselling and training, didn’t make up for the damage he caused.
“We conclude that Justice Camp’s conduct is so manifestly and profoundly destructive of the concept of the impartiality, integrity and independence of the judicial role that public confidence is sufficiently undermined to render the judge incapable of executing the judicial office,” wrote the five-member panel.
No description. Please update your profile.