Lawyer-judge couple caught in bizarre affair
Q. When is your private life not private?
A. When it gets posted on the Internet.
This answer is obvious to most of us, but apparently not to the Associate Chief Justice (ACJ) of the Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba, Lori Douglas, and her lawyer husband, Jack King. Recently Douglas was granted a leave of absence from her post after a former client of her husband made public his complaint that King had solicited him as a sex partner for his wife.
The former client, Alexander Chapman, alleges that King showed him nude photos of his wife and told him about a website where more photos were posted, showing Douglas in compromising sexual poses. Douglas says the photos were posted without her knowledge.
The whole thing is completely sordid, fodder for the tabloids. Except that it is about lawyers and judges, people who advocate for and decide questions of people's rights and responsibilities. While Canadians do not have a high regard for lawyers, they do for judges, which is a little strange considering that the main criteria to be a judge is to have been a lawyer for at least 10 years.
In this bizarre Douglas-King-Chapman affair (no pun intended), Chapman made a complaint to the Law Society of Manitoba and to the Canadian Judicial Council (CJC), the latter of which investigates judges in Canada for inappropriate behaviour.
When the story surfaced, commentators argued that Douglas should have included this information in her application to be a judge. One question on the 13-page application reads: "Is there anything in your past or present which could reflect negatively on yourself or the judiciary?" If there is, you are to provide a detailed explanation. Prior to becoming a judge, Douglas was also subject to her professional code of ethics and as virtually every other professional, be it teacher, nurse, accountant or lawyer, you can be disciplined by your professional association for "conduct unbecoming" that profession.
We have seen some over-zealous application of professional codes. Take Chris Kempling, a teacher in Quesnel, B.C., who was disciplined by the B.C. College of Teachers for "conduct unbecoming " after publishing letters in the local newspaper expressing concerns about how high schools were directing students to inappropriate gay organizations without parental knowledge or consent.
Saskatchewan practical nurse Bill Whatcott was disciplined by his professional body for handing out graphic pro-life materials under this same "conduct unbecoming" section. This was later overturned by a court.
Still, if the standard has become one where you can be disciplined for publishing letters to the editor or handing out flyers, why would posting inappropriate sexually explicit photos on a website be exempt? Your private life becomes public when it is posted on the Internet. Douglas would not the first person to have compromising photos posted without her consent.
It will be up to the Canadian Judicial Council, comprised of all the chief justices and associate chief justices from courts across Canada, to decide if Douglas should be removed as a judge. If the Judicial Council finds that Douglas did not complete her application for appointment to Canada's judiciary in a manner that fully and frankly disclosed things that reflect negatively on herself or the judiciary, the judge faces an uncertain future. Moreover, any new applicants for judgeships will also have to take a deep look into their personal and professional lives before applying.
This complaint will no doubt wind its way through the appropriate official channels. Meanwhile, the Manitoba Bar Association, which represents lawyers in that province, has raised a complaint against the CBC, which broke the story, accusing them of tabloid journalism. Of course, the problem is the story itself. It is not every day that lawyers and judges expose themselves in such a provocative and titillating fashion.
Dear Readers:
ChristianWeek relies on your generous support. please take a minute and donate to help give voice to stories that inform, encourage and inspire.
Donations of $20 or more will receive a charitable receipt.Thank you, from Christianweek.
