Heal the RCMP or replace it.

Necrotic festering is bubbling up within the RCMP.  Its foul stench wafts from every part of the force. The infection is spreading: surgery and excision will be required.

The affliction known as flesh-eating disease "..is a misnomer, as in truth, the bacteria do not 'eat' the tissue. They destroy the tissue that makes up the skin and muscle by releasing toxins.."

RCMP Commissioner Paulson has to be removed, as soon as possible. The man is worse than gangrene; he spouts insincere platitudes and clichés in lieu of genuine commitment to change the toxic culture and behaviours that contaminate every aspect of the organization.

Recently Paulson attended an event where he was invited 

"to discuss national security in the wake of the Brussels bombing, and also what progress he was making on curtailing harassment and weeding out members who have sullied the force's reputation. [..] he was asked by a member of the audience, when was the last time he had written a traffic ticket to anyone. Instead of answering the question, the commissioner went on a "bon mot" diversion. He talked about speeding down B.C.'s Coquihalla Highway with some family members last year and being pulled over by an RCMP officer. Paulson got some laughs when he mimicked the horrified reaction of the member who suddenly realized he had just pulled over the big boss; an officer who faced the unenviable decision of whether or not to lay a fine on him. The tell though, came when the moderator said he wouldn't ask about the dollar value of the ticket. Paulson's expression went from a broad grin to 'oh-oh' in a flash as he seemed to realize he had stepped in it. [..] Later, talking to reporters, he was clearly not pleased when the speeding incident came up. At first, he said, "Aw, it was just a story I made up." Pressed further he changed course, saying, "No, I don't want to talk about that. I do not want to talk about that."

Paulson's casual Catskills routine is offensive, in light of the most recent developments and disclosures in the matter of interminable sexual harassment within RCMP ranks.

The harassment, [Linda Davidson] alleges in court papers, took many forms: unwanted grabbing and kissing; crude jokes, including the placement of ketchup-stained tampons in her locker; and constant questioning about her sexual orientation and abilities. “I experienced this treatment irrespective of my detachment, posting, rank or seniority,” she wrote in an affidavit. “I never felt that I could rely on senior officers to protect me.“ The Bracebridge, Ont., mother, who now runs a security firm, is the lead plaintiff in a proposed class-action lawsuit alleging systemic gender-based harassment and discrimination in the RCMP — the second such lawsuit to hit the force in recent years.

Last, but not least, is the ongoing RCMP mindset of collusion with rape culture and racism, which enables abusive practices such as this one.

Last month, Cody Durocher was convicted of sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl in Hay River, N.W.T. It was his third sexual assault conviction. RELATED | RCMP botched N.W.T. sex assault investigation, documents say At that trial N.W.T. Supreme Court Justice Louise Charbonneau had some harsh words for the way that girl was treated after disclosing the incident to police, noting that instead of being taken to hospital, she was put in a jail cell for violating her probation, where she remained until the following evening. Durocher, 31, was convicted of raping two women in different towns in northern Alberta in 2010. He pleaded guilty to the first after DNA evidence linked him to the attack. He was sentenced to two and a half years in prison. Durocher was sentenced to three years for the second attack. In court, the 13-year-old Hay River victim said Durocher sexually assaulted her on January 11, 2014.

Here's an idea: appoint a royal commission to investigate the institutional roots of whatever pathology it is that maintains a "..nature of policing makes it ripe for behaviour that is _less than professional_" 

Name Marie Henein to chair that commission. She doesn't suffer fools gladly. Here's how she handled Peter Mansbridge's ham-handed attempt at interviewing her.

Buy popcorn.  Lots and lots of popcorn.

What is Marie Henein's end game?

The trial of the former Q host on CBC is well underway. Five days so far of mediocre prosecutorial presentations while on the adversarial side, the best Grand Guignol cross-examination that defence lawyer Marie Henein is capable of executing.

What if Henein's agenda were to expose how the Canadian (in)justice system, with regard to crimes of sexual assault and trials, is fundamentally patriarchal?

Here's one account of the grim proceedings.  As well, _Chatelaine_ has produced formidable coverage of many aspects of the trial.

This insight into the first days of the trial came from a surprising source.

Though she was roasted and toasted in cross-examination by the former broadcaster’s lead lawyer, Marie Henein, it’s important to note that for all the inconsistencies in the woman’s evidence — some significant — a constant in her police statement, many media interviews and testimony this week is her claim that Ghomeshi struck her hard, with a closed fist she thought, on the side of the head.
[..] Her difficulties arose, in my view, in part because it appears her allegations weren’t as thoroughly investigated by the police as perhaps they should have been and because prosecutors didn’t thoroughly examine her or re-examine her at all.
The blow of those terribly damaging emails and the bikini photo she sent Ghomeshi, for instance, a year after the second alleged assault where he purportedly smacked her in the head, would have been mitigated had she been asked follow-up questions when she mentioned, voluntarily in examination-in-chief, that she had “a vague memory” of writing a note to him, in anger, but wasn’t sure she’d sent it.
“You aren’t trying to hide the fact that you might have written Mr. Ghomeshi?” prosecutors could have asked.
The question alone would have diffused the impact of Henein’s revelation.

I'm not the only one who is wondering, WTF game is the prosecution playing?  Why are the Crown lawyers throwing the complainants under the bus?  This from Jane Doe, provides illumination.

On the other side, my daughter - a decade younger than Ghomeshi or Henein - loathes what the former did as well as his lawyer's antics.

She has nothing but contempt for the high-stakes histrionical performance the latter is currently offering.  She thinks the lawyer is an opportunist who will leverage a spectacular win to catapult herself onto a larger and more lucrative stage.

The Ghomeshi trial could indeed do for Henein's reputation what OJ Simpson's did for the Kardashians: transform her into a minor US celebrity.

This is the Toronto Life article about Henein that gave my daughter pause, with regard to Henein's professional choices.

Perhaps her perspective is lopsided.  After all, she's a mere physician in a demanding specialty.  In her line of work, individuals who apply such rigour and dedication to the pursuit of excellence _only_ save lives.  They don't destroy them.

When men are "silenced"...

by women, no less!!! HOW DARE THEY?!?!?!

TORONTO - Councillor Janet Davis told Councillor Doug Ford to shut his “f---ing mouth” Wednesday.
Davis walked over and whispered the comment directly to Mayor Rob Ford’s brother during a budget committee meeting.
She dropped the f-bomb shortly after the committee rejected a motion to spend $409,000 for an eight-site expansion of the After-school Recreation and Care (ARC) Program. Ford had argued against the spending and accused councillors of wanting to “waste taxpayers’ money.”
The private R-rated remark prompted Ford to jump to his feet and announce Davis had told him to “keep my f---ing mouth shut” and called the comment “disgusting.”
“I don’t need that talk up here. Why don’t you just leave? You call yourself a lady, give me a break,” Ford shouted at Davis.

From here.

Some years ago, when I volunteered at the Ottawa Rape Crisis Centre and then, at the Ottawa Sexual Assault Support Centre, I fielded requests to staff an information table or represent the organization at an educational event.

This occasion sticks in my memory.  It was held at a public high school. One of the teachers had determined it was a good idea for the students to learn more about acquaintance and date rape.

The impetus for this activity was the experience of one young woman who was "allegedly" assaulted by young men that she knew. The circumstances were very similar to what was inflicted upon Rehtaeh Parsons. When she reported the incident to the local police and tried to have charges filed, she and her mother were treated with derision and contempt.

After the noon-time information fair, where CHEO, the Ottawa police, Planned Parenthood, SASC and other community groups were present, students in grades 11, 12 and 13 filed into the assembly hall.

There was a panel of speakers, assembled to speak on the topic. Two participants stand out in my mind: the young woman whose experience was germane to the event, and a cop from the division where she tried to report her assault.

Yes. Both these individuals were on the panel, separated by other folks whose "expertise" on the matter I forget.  There was nobody from ORCC or SASC sitting there.

Clearly someone, probably a vice-principal, thought it was a good idea to give the police an opportunity to respond to the young woman's damning story.

Which she recounted haltingly, with no tears but with a quiet assurance.

Unfortunately, the next person on the panel to speak was .... yes, you guessed it ... the cop.

Rather than explaining in neutral terms the legal procedure for reporting crimes of sexual assault and providing legal definitions, he started justifying why the cops at his station determined that the complainant's report was "unfounded" — by recounting his version of the story, intently and intentionally attacking her credibility.

The sight and sound of a fifty-something cop re-assaulting this young woman without any challenges from the teachers or other people on the panel infuriated me.

You know how these days, people post TW - trigger warning - in front of links to articles or testimonies about traumatic events, usually child abuse, intimate violence, sexual assault, and so on?

Well.  That cop's malicious and unimpeded verbal aggression upon this young woman triggered something in me.

I was standing at the back of the hall; I had followed the students in and there were no seats left. 

I felt it before it actually exploded out of me.  A rumble, starting at the bottom of my torso moved upwards and was propelled out of my mouth.

SHUT UP!  JUST SHUT UP!

It was very, very loud.

The audience members, whose sympathies clearly lay with their peer, and who had been rustling uncomfortably during the cop's screed, broke into applause.  Some teachers craned their necks, trying to establish where the explosion had originated.

The cop's mouth was open. He closed it, he looked at the person who had made a mess of moderating this so-called panel. She looked away. He sat down.

Someone else hastily rose to address the assembly, a guidance teacher I think.  I was stunned, actually, by the force of what had just happened.  It had occurred reflexively, like an arm raised to ward off a blow.

Here's the thing.  Bullies like Doug Ford and the cop at this event are not used to being told to shut up.  Doug, a crafty political strategist, nimbly reacted to his colleague's quiet remonstrance by cranking up the volume and histrionically exploiting the incident to his advantage, playing to his Ford Nation following. He claimed victimhood.

That happens a lot.  In the House of Commons' Question Period and elsewhere.  Many have documented how bellowing men effectively silence their female critics with ad hominem tactics 

Research about the verbal space occupied by women and men is also revealing.

Paul Simon sang, years ago:

These are the days of miracle and wonder This is the long distance call The way the camera follows us in slo-mo The way we look to us all...

It behooves us to find a way to disarm this "live grenade" tactic, to move on to more compassionate and (dare I use this word, especially as I suggested to impolitical that Rob Ford has made it radioactive, in Ontario at least) authentic  forms of communication.

CONtempt™: it's the Harper CONservative party brand.

Another day, another cpc Senator in the news.

This particularly repulsive Con — Jean-Guy Dagenais — has also been a useful idiot for the Harper regime. As a former cop and past president of the police officers' association of Québec, Dagenais was a keen supporter of the federal long-gun registry.  Once tactically appointed to the Senate by PMSHithead, he CONveniently started spewing the anti-registry propaganda and speaking points supplied by the PMO.

Il a changé son fusil d'épaule.  And now, this:

In a letter sent to all parliamentarians, Dagenais referred to Charmaine Borg’s flyer as “a rag” and suggested she’s a whiny, ignorant, powerless Quebec MP who was elected by fluke and stands little chance of being re-elected.

NDP House leader Nathan Cullen said sending such a “offensive” missive to a 23-year-old female rookie MP is “paternalistic, childish, condescending and frankly misogynistic.” He served notice that he will ask the Speaker of the House of Commons next week to condemn Dagenais.

“The letter in question attacks the very legitimacy of a sitting member of Parliament,” Cullen told the Commons.

Stephen Taylor, the weathervane director of some astroturf Reformatory organization, and a self-selected arbiter on misogyny, equivocated and perorated about Cullen's observations.

What's Dagenais' next volley against the NDP elected member of Parliament?  To demand that Borg's home address and phone number be publicized, the better to incite his fellow bullies who share his views to hunt her down and sexually assault her, and finish the job that his impotent, CONvoluted p0rn-infused fantasies would want to see executed?

The collective recoil expressed by the female MPs in the NDP caucus should be noted, and respected.  Each of them knows how violence against women manifests itself in numerous and insidious ways; it is present in the truculent bellowing and lip-smacking self-indulgence of reactionary old white men who suffer from delusional entitlement syndrome.

Jean-Guy Dagenais is a prime specimen of the Reformatory plutocrats who are degrading Parliament.

Afterword: A point I raised, with regard to Dagenais' accusation that riding residents allegedly complained to him that Borg could do nothing for them: how can an individual MP redress or fix all the services and programs destroyed by the Harper governement: Employment Insurance, Veterans Affairs, Health, Environment, etc. etc.?

Update: More media pundits, all male so far, pooh-pooh the characterization of Dagenais' attack upon Borg as misogynistic.  It means women-hating, not the same as sexist.  I wonder who will be the first to label the reaction of female MPs as "hysterical".  Might be one of the anti-feminists: Wente, Lakritz or Kay-mère, perhaps Blatchford?

More update: I went looking for a useful and helpful perspective on systemic misogyny that included the vile tactics that the Harper dirty tricks handbook promote, when directed at women and launched by an Attack Parrot™ like Dagenais.

Misogyny is also – because of the very nature of its deep-seated, psychological hatred – a linking factor among the various [...] hate groups and militias. That means that people who hate women may also exhibit authoritarian, violent and bigoted behavior towards minorities.

From here.

A continuum of cop violence against women: systemic and authoritarian, sexualized and fetishized. (updated)

From Ayesha, we learn about yet another woman's death, as a the tragic outcome of a desultory police investigation.

In an extensive post on a Facebook memorial page, her mother Leah Parsons described how the straight-A high school student became depressed and suicidal after the incident.

“The person Rehtaeh once was all changed one dreaded night in November 2011. She went with a friend to another’s home. In that home she was raped by four young boys . . . one of those boys took a photo of her being raped and decided it would be fun to distribute the photo to everyone in Rehtaeh’s school and community where it quickly went viral,” Leah Parsons wrote. “Because the boys already had a ‘slut’ story, the victim of the rape Rehtaeh was considered a slut.

“This day changed the lives of our family forever.”

Rehtaeh, who was a 15-year-old high school student in Cole Harbour at the time, was repeatedly bullied at school and “suddenly shunned by almost everyone she knew.”

“She was never left alone. She had to leave the community. Her friends turned against her. People harassed her. Boys she didn’t know started texting her and Facebooking her asking her to have sex with them. It just never stopped,” her mother told CBC.

Racialized women in Canada experience this daily.  First Nations, Metis, Inuit, Black, all brown-skinned women of mixed ancestries rarely if ever trust the police to take reports of sexual violence directed at them seriously, and to investigate properly. In reality, reporting such violence makes them vulnerable to the cops' own abusive practices, as case after case demonstrates. Operation Thunder Bird attempted to expose this reality.

In Ottawa, a judge recently exonerated the sexualized brutality that a police officer used against a woman detained for alleged public intoxication - a "charge" which was never actually shown to be founded.

Violent cops like Steve Desjourdy can sexually humiliate, degrade and punish jailed women with impunity. His actions which were challenged in criminal court, have been excused and thus can become the official standard that police taking women into custody can apply.

According to the judge who presided over the trial, Desjourdy "used reasonable force".

Many who viewed the internal video that captured Desjourdy and his colleagues' actions, observed that he seemed to be enjoying his job, exerting force in order to break the detained woman's will and her instinct to defend herself from the cops' deliberate, sexualized violations.

Familiar patterns of cops' fetishized brutality against women keep surfacing.  It would appear a measure of implicit identification with the perpetrators of sexual assault impinges upon some police officers' professional capacity to effectively investigate violent crimes against women.

In my opinion, the RCMP has become irreversibly corrupted and poisoned by misogyny; this latest outrage is more evidence of the toxicity of its systemic sexist culture.

UPDATE: Two excellent blogposts that MUST be read. Both cut to the core of the way rape culture enables violence against women and girls.

Child porn isn’t a “community issue,” RCMP from Steph Guthrie really nails the misogynist sub-text of the shoddy excuse the RCMP provided for its MASSIVE lack of due diligence, with regard to the taking and distribution of the photo of Rehtaeh Parsons.  A crime was committed; it's the RCMP's job to deal with it.  Unless its officers' sloppy lack of professional dedication is a recognition that the institution is de facto complicit with child pornographers and sexual assailants in that community.

This is heart-wrenching:

[...] where the fuck were the school officials, the members of the law enforcement, the people who should have made sure that she had adequate follow-up mental health care after her hospitalization? Where were they, and why didn’t they do anything? Or if they did do something, why didn’t they do enough?

Rehtaeh’s rapists are still out there. They are still in high school, they are still going to parties and they are, quite likely, still raping. Why wouldn’t they? They got away with it once, didn’t they? Rehtaeh’s rapists are still living normal, untroubled lives, and she is dead. [...]

Saying that we need to educate boys and girls about appropriate behaviour is victim-blaming. Saying that this wouldn’t have been a problem if the pictures hadn’t ended up online is like saying that rape is fine, but publicly broadcasting it isn’t. Calling Rehtaeh’s death a tragedy because we’ve lost a beautiful young woman is a joke – seriously, what bearing does her appearance have on how sad her death is? And since Landry is refusing to open an official review into how the RCMP handled this, isn’t he basically saying, “I think she was lying about the rape, but gosh, she sure was hot”?

All of this, every single word of this statement, all of the things that Rehtaeh endured, every single detail presented here is rape culture.

Read the comments too.


So, with regard to the way it deals with sexual violence against women and girls, should Canada feel *superior* to India?

Maintiens le droit ...

It appears that we've written quite a lot about the RCMP, at DJ!

And most of it covers the police violence within and outside its ranks - not the regrettable armed display of force required to fulfill its mandate of law enforcement - but a corrupt and despicable exploitation of its resources and its mandate that has repeatedly, unjustly harmed, damaged and killed people.

There's no end in sight, as it emerges that the Mounties do a truly negligent, incompetent job of keeping records with regard to officers that have been brought up on cases of professional misconduct, and possibly, of criminal activity.

[...]no one within the RCMP had a comprehensive list of Mounties who’d been disciplined, became obvious after CBC News asked for basic data between 2005 and 2008 that included offences and findings by internal adjudications boards.

CBC News submitted the request in November 2008. It was delivered four years later in November 2012. An officer who handled the file offered an embarrassed apology, and explained the delay was due to the list having to be created from scratch.

[...]Many of the allegations are also criminal offences, including two cases of possession of child pornography. The CBC asked for details on which cases went on to criminal prosecution, but the RCMP did not make that information available.

And while about 50 of the cases were withdrawn, in some cases due to the expiry of the statutory time limit for a hearing, more than a third were deemed so egregious the officers involved either quit, were forced to resign or had to forfeit 10 days pay — the harshest punishment under the RCMP Act short of dismissal.

Meanwhile, the RCMP old boys' club is calling the shots on the manner in which it will defend the institution from several sexual abuse and harassment lawsuits against the force and specific officers.

Moving from outright denial to counter attack, it appears that the legal strategy rests upon a campaign of discrediting the claims that have been brought forward by female officers.




A vulnerable female complainant has been singled out, likely to demonstrate to the others what awaits them - to intimidate them and ultimately, to silence them.

The RCMP’s statement of defence, filed earlier this week, details the results of the police investigation and the review board’s findings, and says whatever happened between Gastaldo and Pearson occurred outside of their work and has nothing to do with the force.

“If any of the Crown defendant’s employees, servants or agents engaged in the conduct alleged ... then all such conduct was outside the course and scope of the employee, servant or agent’s duties,” says the statement of defence, filed in B.C. Supreme Court.

Even if Gastaldo was harmed in any way by Pearson, the statement of defence says, it wouldn’t be the force’s fault.

“Any of the damage allegedly suffered by the plaintiff was caused solely by the unauthorized conduct of Pearson, and the Crown defendants are not responsible for that conduct,” the statement says.

Gastaldo’s lawsuit was among the first of several involving female RCMP officers who have claimed they were assaulted, harassed and abused on the job.

[...]The statements of claim and defence contain allegations that have not yet been tested in court.

The RCMP has so far issued denials in several sexual abuse and harassment lawsuits against the force and its officers.

The highest-profile case involves Cpl. Catherine Galliford, a former spokeswoman for the Air India and Robert Pickton cases. She filed a lawsuit last year alleging years of abuse by numerous officers.

Const. Karen Katz has a lawsuit alleging a colleague harassed and sexually assaulted her, as well as a second lawsuit that alleges more widespread abuse spanning her entire career.

And Janet Merlo, a 19-year veteran of the force, filed a class-action lawsuit in March alleging sexist comments, sexual pranks and derogatory remarks while on the job. Her lawyer has suggested dozens of other officers are prepared to join the case.

Aggressive "defense" tactics deployed by the RCMP display many of the elements that characterize systemic rape culture, as well as a toxic work environment.  The failure of the police force to treat its officers and other employees - male and female - with the respect they deserve as human beings, is typical of military-type organizations based on the very worst misogynist practices "tolerated" if not encouraged by the leadership.

The photo above is from here.

Asking For It, part 2

As Kay Mère has repeatedly demonstrated, not only is she tone deaf with regard to women's issues, her rigid rightwing blinkers also make her rabidly anti-feminist.

Over and over again she has clumsily yielded her hatred as a battering ram in situations requiring rational thinking and common sense judgement.

When she fixed her gaze upon the response to one tweet, she missed the basic message.

Don't rape.

It's that simple and basic. Responsibility and accountability for one's actions. No man - or woman, since sexual assault laws do not discriminate on the basis of gender - can justify forcibly coercing someone to have sex with them, no matter how their victim is clothed, or not.

But MASSIVE scold Kay mère has already designated the villains on this issue, the people she perpetually blames for all evil in society: feminists.

Can you identify how many kinds of wrong Kay shrieeeks about here?

Dressing like a slut – and nobody has to define it; we know it when we see it – may have started as an ironic fashion trend, the same as ripped jeans, but it has now become an activist costume, and strutting one’s sexual charms in a mimicry of prostitutes’ behaviour an act of political theatre.

What is forgotten in this “rights” performance is that real women — the ones most at risk of assault by men who crave their services but who have nothing but contempt for them as people — are being mocked. Most prostitutes would give their eye teeth to be “respectable” women wearing respectable clothing. They dress the way they do, because they have to. When women who don’t have to dress like prostitutes do so anyway, they are mocking society’s their most vulnerable sisters.

Strangely, Kay has nothing to say about the way Krista Ford and the members of the Lingerie Football League choose to dress, not even pronouncing judgement on whether their attire is "respectable" enough for Kay's impeccable standards of respectability.

Oh, and your piteous bleating about *mocking society's most vulnerable sisters*? Shove your faux-solidarity up your sanctimonious orifice, won't you?

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. Kay and other enraged anti-feminist ladies against women embody Poe's Law.

To complement Barbara Kay's gynophobic views, I posted a trailer for a clever horror movie that explores what might happen if women evolved physiological weaponry that cut down rapists at the root of the problem.

Asking For It

So, this Franciscan dude in a dress friar accuses young sex-abuse victims of seducing the poor hapless priests.

"Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster -- 14, 16, 18 -- is the seducer," said Groeschel, the host of a weekly show called Sunday Night Prime.

"Well, it's not so hard to see -- a kid looking for a father and didn't have his own -- and they won't be planning to get into heavy-duty sex, but almost romantic, embracing, kissing, perhaps sleeping but not having intercourse or anything like that."

The New York-based clergyman with the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal went on to say he doesn't think child sex abusers should be tried on their first offence.

"...I'm inclined to think, on their first offence, they should not go to jail because their intention was not committing a crime."

Groeschel sympathized with former Penn State University assistant football coach and serial child molester Jerry Sandusky.

"Here's this poor guy -- Sandusky -- it went on for years ... Why didn't anyone say anything?"

After the predictable shitstorm hit, everybody concerned walked it back and apologized. No, no, no, that's not what he/I meant. And besides he's an old fart who has medical issues.

Riiight. But this is no obscure loony Todd Akin in a frock.

He's quite a big noise in the Vatican Taliban.

Father Benedict Joseph Groeschel, C.F.R., (born July 23, 1933) is a Catholic priest, retreat master, author, psychologist, activist and host of the television talk program Sunday Night Prime with Father Benedict Groeschel, which is broadcast on the Eternal Word Television Network. He has also hosted several serial religious specials in addition to Sunday Night Prime. He is the director of the Office for Spiritual Development for the Catholic Archdiocese of New York as well as associate director of Trinity Retreat[1] and the executive director of The St. Francis House.[2] He is professor of pastoral psychology at St. Joseph's Seminary in New York and an adjunct professor at the Institute for Psychological Sciences in Arlington, Virginia. He is one of the founders of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal.

These little 'off-leash' comments are entirely in keeping with his history and beliefs.

Groeschel has also been a highly visible Catholic activist, first in the civil rights movement. He publicly criticizes insulting depictions of the church in popular culture and the media. In September 1998, he led protests outside of an Off-Broadway theater in New York City against the production of Terrence McNally’s play Corpus Christi.[17] In his 2002 book, From Scandal to Hope, he accused The Boston Globe, The New York Times and The San Francisco Chronicle of revealing anti-Catholic prejudice in their respective coverage of the sexual abuse scandal that disrupted the church. “Seldom in the history of journalism have I seen such virulent attacks on any institution that is supposed to receive fair treatment in the press,” he wrote.

His Wiki page desperately needs updating.

Grievous bodily harm.

What do Robert Pickton, Fernando Manuel Alves, Daniel Katsnelson, Justin Fuminori Onzuka and Russell Williams as well as, allegedly Amitabh Chauhan and Suganthan Kayilasanathan, have in common?

They are predators and takers. They drugged women, they sexually assaulted them when they were unconscious, they preyed upon them by isolating them from other people and they exploited their vulnerabilities.

Consent is not a concept they understand or choose to negotiate with a potential sexual partner. These assailants select and use women who are unable to stop them or they take whatever means necessary to ensure they get what they want.

Three of the men mentioned are also physicians though Onzuka lost his license to practice medicine in Ontario.

Amitabh Chauhan and Suganthan Kayilasanathan have taken impressive means to dodge criminal charges laid against them. Nonetheless, the Toronto police suspect these alleged predators have done this before; this case has been publicized widely to encourage other women to report similar assaults.

Robert Pickton believed the women he drugged, sexually assaulted and in many instances also murdered and dismembered were "immoral, impure or greedy". He took what he wanted from them and he justified his crimes with selected passages from the Bible.

Though the men named may be sociopaths, their shared proclivity for sexual torture and terrorism is reinforced by a prevalent rape culture - which includes misogynist p0rn0graphy that dehumanizes women and children.

From here:

Fortunately, not all men are prone to abuse, violate, brutalize, and/or murder female family members, intimate partners, spouses, neighbours, work colleagues, parishioners, clients or acquaintances. Unfortunately, the minority of men who engage in these actions are recidivists and their level of violence tends to escalate if they're not stopped by their peers or the criminal justice system.

Unless systemic efforts are made to identify the reasons why violent misogyny rules some men and concerted strategies are taken to prevent its development in boys, incidents like this will increase.

The affidavit said the assault started after a 19-year-old boy invited the [11-year-old] victim to ride around in his car. He took her to a house [...] where one of the other men charged, also 19, lived. There the girl was ordered to disrobe and was sexually assaulted by several boys in the bedroom and bathroom. She was told she would be beaten if she did not comply, the affidavit said.

A relative of one of the suspects arrived, and the group fled through a back window. They then went to the abandoned mobile home, where the assaults continued. Some of those present recorded the sexual acts on their telephones, and these later were shown among students.

Residents in the neighborhood where the abandoned trailer stands [...] said the victim had been visiting various friends there for months. They said she dressed older than her age, wearing makeup and fashions more appropriate to a woman in her 20s. She would hang out with teenage boys at a playground, some said.

“Where was her mother? What was her mother thinking?” said Ms. Harrison, one of a handful of neighbors who would speak on the record.

More relevant would be to question the parents of those boys who allegedly detained and repeatedly sexually violated this girl. Sadly, were the victim an 11-year old boy, it's unlikely members of the community would so easily absolve the assailants of responsibility for their actions.

As with pedophile priests, rape culture facilitates a knee-jerk response that shames / blames girls and women for the violence done to them.