(This
column was published in the North
Shore News on
Jan. 20, 1999)
End easy ride for pedophiles in B.C.
By Leo Knight
LAST
week's decision by Mr. Justice Duncan Shaw in B.C. Supreme Court
striking down the section of the Criminal Code dealing with
child pornography is more than a little troubling.
The
case involved accused pedophile John Robin Sharpe, who has been
the subject of previous discussions in this space.
Now,
I say accused pedophile because he is currently before the
courts on charges relating to a seizure of child pornography at
the Douglas border crossing in April 1995 and a subsequent
search warrant execution on his Kitsilano apartment a year
later.
But
Sharpe is an admitted pedophile, a true believer who describes
his predilection as "inter-generational love."
Last
Feb. I interviewed Sharpe following his preliminary hearing in
Surrey. The 65-year-old divorced father of two is quite open
about his activities. He described to me the "only two real
loves" he has had in his life. Both involved young males
barely into their teens.
Just
so we understand what exactly Sharpe's mindset is, here's a
quote: "God does not make boys horny so they can build up
their will power by abstaining, but so they can learn about sex
by experience."
So,
back to the decision by Shaw.
"The
invasion of freedom of expression and personal privacy is
profound," Mr. Justice Duncan Shaw wrote in his 33-page
judgment. "The intrusion into freedom of expression and the
right of privacy is so profound that it is not outweighed by the
limited beneficial effects of the prohibition."
In
other words, the protection of children from pedophiles is not
as important as the law infringing on the rights of pedophiles
to have personal privacy with what they read, look at and
fantasize over.
Shaw
wrote in his decision on Sharpe's argument, "Books,
diaries, pictures, clothes and other belongings are personal and
private expressions of their owner's beliefs, opinions, thoughts
and conscience."
"The
simple possession prohibition deals with a very intimate and
private aspect of a person's life and, in my view, that fact
should be given considerable weight. I find that the limited
effectiveness of the prohibition is insufficient to warrant its
highly invasive effects," said the B.C. Supreme Court
Justice.
In
so doing, Shaw has now made it legal for pedophiles to possess
any type of vile material their sordid little hearts desire.
The
difficulty with the way the decision is worded was demonstrated
in the Sunday Province. Its lead editorial on the subject
was strong in its condemnation of kiddie porn, but supportive of
the judicial decision because of the ramifications in the
"free speech" debate.
Not
so shy about the decision was the police officer in charge of
the child pornography unit of the Ottawa Police. Sgt. Keith
Daniels was disgusted when he heard of the decision
"If this judgment is upheld in higher courts, I will simply retire," he said.
He
characterized the judgment as belonging in the "Dark
Ages."
"He
(the judge) can't have considered that every image, by its very
existence, implies the sexual exploitation of children who are
totally scarred for life by such experiences."
And
there's the rub.
Shaw
was trying to be true to his belief in the protection of privacy
and to the constitutional provisions for the freedom of speech.
But he seems to have lost whatever perspective he may have had
on the issue of protecting children.
He
said the law was intrusive and unfair to "collectors who
are simply interested in pornography, but who don't harm
anyone."
Shaw
appears to support a theory that pedophiles use pornography to
masturbate and "relieve the pent-up sexual tension"
and are therefore not a threat to children.
"Whether
or not this cathartic effect outweighs the harm caused by the
possession of pornography is not known, but it is nonetheless a
significant factor to take into account," wrote Shaw.
But
clearly he did not consider the obvious fact that by its nature
child pornography objectifies kids. Photographs and videos of
sex with kids is certainly abusive simply because some kid,
somewhere, was abused to take that photo or make that video.
How
then can we allow the possession of that material?
To
render the possession "legal" creates a market for
those who will inevitably supply that market. In order to supply
the market kids must be victimized in the process.
This
follows logically as sure as day follows night. Yet, for some
reason Judge Shaw either failed to see it or failed to consider
it as a significant reason to the prohibition of the material.
Equally,
the judge seems to have ignored a Supreme Court of Canada ruling
in the case of HMTQ vs Butler in which the late Justice John
Sopinka called the law a "reasonable restriction on freedom
of expression."
Sopinka's
decision said, "(child pornography) ... appeals only to the
most base aspect of individual fulfilment" and didn't merit
constitutional protection.
Liberal
MLA Barry Penner called for the attorney general to immediately
appeal the Shaw ruling. It's difficult to see how such an appeal
could not succeed given the Butler decision in the highest court
in the land. But as of this writing, the AG, Ujjal Dosanjh has
yet to announce an appeal.
West
Vancouver MP John Reynolds was outraged at the decision. He
called it "crazy" and "nuts."
"Anyone
involved with child pornography has something wrong with
them," said Reynolds, the Reform Justice critic.
"Any
system that allows it has something wrong with it," he
concluded.
Sharpe
based his case on the traditional arguments of the North
American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). This is the same
organization trying to get the age of consent lowered in all
jurisdictions in order to legitimize their loathsome activities.
In
my view, the only people who can possibly agree with those
arguments are themselves true believers.
The
William Bennest case demonstrated that B.C. is a pedophile's
paradise. This latest case underlines it. But there are many,
many more such cases. It is time for the AG to ignore the
"true believers," including those who may advise
government, and take a stand.
The easy ride for pedophiles has gone far enough.
-30-