Daily Archive

Let’s rewind a little to get the background of what has transpired in this rape/unrape situation.

” On the evening of July 29, 2004, then[a female private in the Canadian Armed Forces Reserve] says she was celebrating the end of a military training course with her fellow reservists, including her mom, and instructors at Debney Armoury on Roper Road when her life took a shocking turn.
It was during those celebrations that she says she was raped.”

(Trigger Warning) – This story is fairly repugnant from beginning to end.

The title of this newspaper article, from the SUN, one of my favorite newspaper chains to hate for their artless casuistry is patriarchal gold – “Career dream shattered“.    Not “brutal rape in bathroom stall” or “Female Recruit Assaulted and Raped” …  no no nothing like that.  That might actually place the focus on the victim, and that clearly, is unacceptable (and worth a post all on its own).

“Officers in the course really need to have their training down because no one knew what to do,” she said.

Let me go out on a limb here and speculate that “no one knew what to do” really meant that  is ‘how are we going get out of this situation with Savage’s reputation intact’.  The Armed Forces are not exactly known to be a bastion of liberal ideals and progressive thought.

“I was told to seek medical attention before I went to the police. Then, at the base, the nurses explained they didn’t do rape kits, so I had to wait until they were all done for the day before they would take me to the Royal Alex.

“The site nurses didn’t have a kit and said the police had to bring it.”

Some 17 hours after the alleged attack, Santonne says she was finally assessed by a doctor.

Hmm…raped, shuffled around for 17 hours – we certainly do not live in a patriarchal society here.

Her comments:

Now, [she] claims she suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder and has no intentions of pursuing a career with the military, adding she initially entered the reserves because she was anxious to serve her country and see the world.

“For me, it’s now a lost cause,” she said.

The results of the first trial on January 8th, 2008 (note the time of the rape, was 4 years ago) was a conviction, but watch the defense comments for the set-up…

“An Edmonton soldier was sentenced Monday to three years in prison for raping a young female recruit. Orman Savage, 38, was convicted in August of sexually assaulting the woman during a party following basic training three years ago.

Provincial court Judge Albert Chrumka agreed with Crown prosecutor Avril Herron, who argued that a prison term is the only just sentence for Savage.“

Right on forces of justice!  A sorely won victory…?

“Savage and his supporters have steadfastly maintained his innocence throughout the trial. Defence lawyer Brian Beresh said Monday his client will immediately launch an appeal.

“The appeal will be based on what we consider to be procedural unfairness at the trial,” Beresh said.”

I am curious about what procedural unfairness (you will see this material again) really means in the context of this case.  As the judge says the defense managed to shoot itself in the foot several times during the trial –

“In his ruling last summer,[Judge] Chrumka called Savage’s testimony at trial “ludicrous” and “concocted.”

“You seem to be your own worst witness,” he said, adding the testimony was “so fanciful it is unbelievable.

“Chrumka said he believed the testimony of the woman, who was 21 when she was attacked.”

The case was appealed and brought before a different court.  The previous ruling was overturned and a woman was ‘unraped’.

“A former Edmonton soldier said he feels as if he’s been released from a nightmare after being acquitted Friday on sexual assault charges following an earlier conviction.”

— “All I can say is that I am glad to see that this nightmare is over after five and a half years and to finally see justice actually be done,” Savage said outside court.”

You should not say anything.  You found a judge and jury willing to listen to the archetypal anti-woman, rape culture approved, victim-blaming that is so perversely common in our society.  Watch and weep…

1.  “Savage claimed it was the woman who made sexual advances.”

And therefore got what she deserved because one alleged “yes” cancels out the sobbing, pleading, resisting  “no’s” that come after.   This is bull-cookies of first fracking order, the legal notion of consent needs to be changed NOW.

2.  “The young recruit fell backwards while she was hunched over the toilet, vomiting, Savage told the jury. As he helped her up, she threw her arms around his neck and said, “I’ve been wanting to do this for a long time.” Then she tried to kiss him, Savage said.”

Because it is so obvious that she wants it, oh damn, for sure with all the vomiting retching and other pleasantness that goes along with expunging your stomach contents.  It just screams ‘sexy time’.

3. […] defence lawyer Brian Beresh challenged the credibility of the female recruit.

“I would suggest much of her story is like a Hollywood script,” Beresh told jurors. “But she’s written the scenes to be all in her favour.”

Ah yes, here we have the procedural unfairness rearing its ugly head.  The last time around we did not actually properly attack the female victim and her integrity; instead we  made ourselves look stupid – recall Judge Chrumka’s previous comments: Savage’s testimony at trial [was] “ludicrous” and “concocted.”

How one gets from essentially incriminating oneself to suggesting that the female private’s story is like Hollywood script is really quite beyond me.

The immoral of the story if she’s puking drunk and mumbles something vaguely coherent toward you, its a fracking green light for the frak-fest to begin.  Don’t consider the physical context (vomiting in a bathroom stall), her state (drunk enough to lose consciousness and void her stomach), or her rights (not to be used as a piece of meat for your momentary pleasure).

When do we start treating women as fully sentient, autonomous beings –  ya know, the default setting for men?