Another complaint has been filed against Judge Brian Scherman who recently found a former Regina doctor not guilty of sexually assaulting multiple female patients.
Last month, Court of Queen’s Bench Judge Brian Scherman acquitted Sylvester Ukabam of seven counts of sexual assault that allegedly took place between 2010 and 2017.
Two of the women who testified against the former doctor filed complaints this month with the Canadian Judicial Council, a national body that oversees the country’s federal judges, about Scherman’s decision.
The most recent complaint was filed on June 17, 2022 by a woman who cannot be named due to a publication ban.
She is one of five women who have accused Mr. Ukabam of inappropriately touching them during medical examinations.
In her complaint against the judge, the woman noted that the lawyer for the former doctor argued that the victims confused rectal penetration with vaginal penetration, given the proximity and location of the two body parts.
The judge accepted this argumentshe wrote in her complaint.
The judge said in her written decision that the women were wrong about what they thought happened.
The complainant said there could be no mistakes.
I am 100% convinced that Sylvester Ukabam stuck his finger in my vagina. […] and has never performed a rectal examshe wrote. As women, we are not confused. It’s an outdated gender bias.
In a statement to the media, the woman added that the verdict was further victimization and said the most distressing part was that the judge’s decision suggested the women were unaware of the difference between the parties of their own body.
I think it’s outrageous that Judge Scherman assumed that women are unable to tell the difference when their vagina and rectum are touched..
The review is expected to take months
On Tuesday, the Canadian Judicial Council confirmed that it had received more than one complaint in relation to the case.
He said the review was still in its early stages and could take three to six months.
With respect to the court process, the Crown filed a notice of appeal, arguing that the judge erred in denying its request to admit similar fact evidence, failed to consider the full evidence and speculated on matters not in evidence.
Mr. Ukabam’s lawyer indicated that he would file a cross-appeal.
Radio Canada
Source: Radio-Canada
