text:
Why the international education crisis will linger long after students return
The Conversation: Over 145,000 international student visa holders are stuck overseas. Even if they do arrive in time for the start of the 2022 academic year, this won't overcome the issue of the "pipeline" effect.
Tuesday 26 October 2021
A series of recent announcements about Australia's borders reopening mean there is hope of an end to the crisis in our international education sector.
But there is still a long way to go. Over 145,000 international student visa holders are stuck overseas. It is still unclear when and how these students may be able to enter Australia.
Even if they do arrive in time for the start of the 2022 academic year, this won't overcome the issue of the "pipeline" effect. Disruptions to the flow of new students over the past two years will have a long-term impact.
International students normally study for two to four years. It can take some time for enrolments to return to previous levels as missed or reduced intakes work their way through the system.
Where are we now?
Since March 2020, the number of international student visa holders has fallen by 205,854, or 33.5%, according to the most recent government data.
Complicating this picture is that many international students will be studying offshore because of the closed borders.
The chart below shows the number of international student visa holders in Australia and outside for every week since March 2020.
International student visa holders have steadily declined
By October 2021, the number of international student visa holders in Australia was down to 266,000. In October 2019, before the pandemic, 578,000 international student visa holders were living in Australia.
This is a reduction of over 300,000 international students living in Australia, or about 54%.
What impacts is this having?
The halving of the number of students living in Australia will be having profound effects on those who rely on the international education sector. About 60% of the economic value of international education is a result of spending in the broader economy.
We can see this impact in the latest Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) data. The chart below shows the quarterly value of international education since June 2019. It also includes the value of students studying online.
The value of international education has fallen since the start of the pandemic
According to the ABS, the value of the onshore international education sector was A$5.5 billion in the June 2021 quarter, compared to $9.1 billion in the June 2019 quarter. While the growth in online learning has partly offset the losses, it is not enough to make up for the overall fall in international student revenue.
What about the pipeline effect?
The stock of students is constantly changing as students finish their courses and new ones begin their studies.
One of the biggest challenges facing the sector is the impact of the pipeline effect – a disruption to the flow of new students takes some time to work its way through the pipeline.
International students often progress from pathway courses, such as an English language or preparatory course, to studying a diploma or a degree at an education institution.
For instance, in 2020, about 62% of Chinese international students completed a pathway course before enrolling in higher education for the first time.
This partly explains why year-to-date enrolments of Chinese students at universities have fallen only 8% in 2021 compared to 2019, while the number of Chinese international students holding higher education visas has fallen by about 30%.
Many of the students now starting higher education courses were already working their way through the pipeline when borders closed. They have progressed from a pathway course to a higher education course.
If new international students enrol once borders reopen, many of them will again need to progress through this pipeline.
And will the flow of new international students make up for the currently enrolled students who are finishing their courses? If not, total student numbers will continue to fall.
Why is this important anyway?
Revenue from international education has been an important part of how Australia resources its tertiary education system for 30 years.
International students generally pay higher fees than local students. This enables universities to supplement the income they receive from local students.
As international students return to Australia, there is a case for a more managed policy environment.
For instance, international students are highly concentrated in certain courses and institutions. In 2020, Group of Eight universities received over 50% of the $9 billion the university sector collected in international student revenue.
In the vocational education and training sector, only 4.7% of international VET students enrol at public providers. This means TAFE institutions miss out on important revenue streams. Domestic students at TAFEs also miss out on the benefits of interacting with international students.
The complex link between the migration and education system can also mean some students cycle through cheap courses to maintain their visa status.
The prospect of growth is returning to the international education sector. Now is the time to plan how to manage that growth. It needs to be done in a way that is sustainable and protects everyone's investment in the sector, especially the investment international students make.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
COVID to halve international student numbers in Australia by mid-2021
The Conversation
As international students start trickling back, the new year will be crunch time
The Conversation
Australia's international education market share is shrinking fast.
The Conversation
Our unis do need international students and must choose between the high and low roads
The Conversation


text:
Walter de la Mare's Quest
Joe Griffiths
And still would remain
My wit to try...
All words forgotten - -
Thou, Lord, and I.
('The Scribe')
Walter de la Mare's writing life began in the Decadence of the 1890's, shortly after Nietzsche had announced God's death. It continued until 1956, with God still intimating that news of His death was premature. During those sixty years de la Mare persisted in what Luce Bonnerot, his best critic, calls his 'aventure spirituelle', to find 'Earth's everything, Heaven's everywhere', as he phrases it in Winged Chariot.
His output was huge, including novels, stories, poems, anthologies, essays, criticism, and reviews. He is remembered as a poet of childhood, a teller of ghost stories, or a writer whose work evokes past epochs better than it does the twentieth century. Such popularity has deflected attention from the spiritual quest which is central to his writing.
Theresa Whistler, his biographer (1993), has read all his work, and finds throughout 'the tang of authentic spiritual experience…' Some may recall from their schooldays the taste of this in his poem 'The Listeners', where the Traveller's question, 'Is there anybody there?', is answered only by the 'strangeness' and 'silence 'of the 'phantom listeners', whose physical absence makes more palpable their spiritual presence. Or, perhaps, in the similarly inconclusive encounters of his short stories, such as 'The Riddle', where existence itself remains enigmatic, as the reader decides whether the forbidden chest, into which the children venture, represents life or death. Here, childhood and old age are the closest to the mysteries of our origins and destination.
The frisson that comes from such ghostly literature, surrounded by the associations of another historical era, probably accounts for its continuing popularity. Predictably, the appetite for Gothic horrors seems to grow as the taste for more wholesome art declines. Yet Ruskin reminds us that Gothic, in another sense, is a sign of individual, spiritual vitality. He contrasts the work of the medieval craftsman with that of the Victorian machine operative, the gargoyles of the old cathedrals with the 'accurate mouldings' of his own time. De la Mare's admiration for medieval art is evident, for instance, in the poem quoted at the beginning of this article. The scribe records 'Earth's wonders' lovingly throughout his life, but remains perplexed at his relationship with God, a reaction more characteristic of a modern writer than of a medieval scribe.
The trappings of de la Mare's poems and stories are not a misguidedly nostalgic attempt to recreate the past. Nor are they exercises in the eerie and the uncanny. Rather, he employs the form of the ghost story, or the perspective of a previous age, as an oblique way of exploring some of life's most disconcerting questions. Through what they encounter, his travellers, seekers, and pilgrims force the attentive reader to look behind the present century's deification of materialistic and utilitarian values, to query its trust in a narrowly scientific rationalism, and to confront the presence of evil in a world where death is one of the most unsettling certainties. Moreover, they do so without relying upon the dogmatic certainties of institutional religious belief.
His story 'All Hallows' is set in an empty cathedral at dusk. The title may suggest a hallowe'en tale, but the accompanying quotation from Richard Hooker reminds us that 'the hallowing…must consist in the shape or countenance which we put upon the affaires that are incident in these days.' From the conversation between the naïve sightseer, awed by the presence of the cathedral, and the knowing but mysterious verger, the reader slowly realises that the story is exploring how an age without religious faith can have any hope of sanctification, in the verger's words, 'how close to the edge of things we are: and how we are drifting'.
The only hope of hallowing lies in the human link between the two men, since those responsible for the cathedral appear more interested in the preservation of the fabric than in the assault upon its values by the forces of a modern dark age. The verger explains that the decay which he sees in the church is not 'a corroding loss' but 'an awful progress'. The 'Great War is over,' but there are 'strife and juggleries and hatred and contempt and discord wherever you look.' His disillusionment with his world and the guardians of his faith is profound. Yet the story does not conclude on a bitter note but with the vision of innocence which the two men share in the shape of the verger's sleeping grandson. Faith and hope are more readily encountered in the young and old, than in the minds of a post-Christian world, or the leaders of the Christian Church.
Russell Brain records (in Tea with Walter de la Mare) a conversation when de la Mare spoke of his visit to St David's Cathedral. He was perplexed by a man in gaiters asking him: 'Are you one of us?' His own answer to this question is given in a letter to Edward Wagenknecht: '…the Christian and Catholic idea of Man and the Universe is the richest, profoundest, most imaginative and creative, beautiful and reasonable conception of any I have knowledge of… Therefore…it is…the most likely to be true.'
This appears to be a genuine tribute to the Christian faith, but sometimes the reservations implied in this remark are more evident than is the admiration for Christianity. The search for a purposeful Maker leads to anguished dismay at His absence in 'The Miracle', where nature's bounty seems no more than a 'vain quest', and the miracle is not one of resurrection, but of human persistence in a hostile world:
Rejects delight, ease, pleasure, hope;
Seeking in vain, but seeking yet,
Past earthly promise, earthly scope,
On one aim set:
As if, like Chaucer's child, he thought
All but 'O Alma!' nought.
The reference to Chaucer expresses a wish for belief in the miraculous Creator, rather than a committed faith in him. The certainties of medieval Christianity are no longer shared by the modern traveller.
His writing stems from a dialectic between what he observes as an awesomely absorbing world enclosed by mortality, and what his intuition and imagination tell him is a presence that suggests survival and continuity beyond death. His description of the impulse behind lyric poetry captures the interplay of these opposites:
An insatiable delight in life haunts it, and the keen mortal regret that stalks
in life's shadow. It springs from a height of living, however transitory, a
tension of spirit, a sense of wonder and mystery, a faith in all that is held
most dear, a hope and hunger for an unknown that transcends the known.
(from his introduction to Behold, This Dreamer)
This results in poems which probe experience with repeated questions in their
search for an answer. Echoing the question of the horseman in 'The Listeners',
'Who's there?' cries one of the lost revellers in the hilarious black comedy
of 'The Feckless Dinner Party', as the ominously named butler, Toomes, leads
them from their revelry to oblivion: 'My God! We've lost our way!' cries one.
Those dedicated to a life of pleasure find death is something which destroys
their enjoyment.
Even at their most bleak, however, his best poems leave open other possibilities, refusing to surrender to dissolution and death as the answers to probing questions:
1st Stranger: Who walks with us on the hills?
2nd Stranger: I cannot see for the mist.
3rd Stranger: Running water I hear,
Keeping lugubrious tryst
With its cresses and grasses and weeds,
In the white obscure light from the sky.
2nd Stranger: Who walks with us on the hills?
Wild Bird: Ay!...Aye!...Ay!...
The bird's (spirit's?) cry could be an expression of grief, but it could also be an affirmation of a meaningful presence. Readers may recall whom the third person, the stranger, turns out to be on the road to Emmaus in St Luke's Gospel. The poem was published a year before The Waste Land, where the same episode is invoked:
Who is the third who walks always beside you?
Searching for what endures beyond death led him, in his seventies, to explore ideas of a redemptive love. 'All that we are is in our love', he wrote in the introduction to his last anthology, Love (1943). It is this theme which dominates The Traveller (1945) and Winged Chariot (1951), his longest poems. They are an astonishing demonstration of his creative courage in affirming his belief in the power of a loving God within life.
The former is a narrative poem in which another traveller seeks 'Impassioned love, its goal beyond the grave.' Near the end of the journey he senses 'a presence' in the world,
Past human understanding to conceive;
Of virgin innocence, yet source of all
That matter had the power to achieve
Ere man created was, ere Adam's fall.
At the point of death, he is described as 'A son of God', 'From whose clear gaze a flame divine burned through'. His final word is 'Alas'…
And then the night-tide of the all-welcoming grave...
Inn at the cross roads and the traveller's rest...
The 'cross' here is no more than a parting of the ways between body and soul, with the grave a temporary resting place from the soul's recurrent journey. Survival is Hindu or Buddhist not Christian, reincarnation not resurrection.
Winged Chariot is a meditative poem in which time drive the poet, as it did Marvell, to realize his love. The poem has a marginal commentary of quotations, such as the two from the medieval English lyric, 'Quia Amore Langueo', in which Christ seeks to convince the errant human soul of His enduring love. These frame the final ten sections, where de la Mare comes closest to an acceptance of the Christian vision. He recalls how 'Scripture tells' of the incarnate Christ in the stable, mentions the 'carking Cross', and quotes finally, from 'Quia Amore Langueo', Christ's words:
...'Long thou for love never so high,
My love is more than thine may be'...
Ours is that wine; that water clear and cool;
That very vineyard; and the troubled pool;
Wherewith to fill the thirsting spirit full.
His spiritual odyssey leads him to accept Christian love in revelation, in poetry, and above all, in the joys and tribulations of ordinary life.
Although we should still remember his earlier caution, in the introduction to Bells and Grass, that the 'I in a rhyme is not necessarily me', the personality of the poet is much more obvious in these later poems than in the scribe and travellers of his earlier ones. The phantoms of the historical past are less in evidence, as the poet engages more directly with his themes. This shift is also evident in the less archaic and more colloquial language and style of these poems. They indicate that he is a major poet still not given his rightful place among his peers.
* This essay appeared in issue no 1 of The Walter de la Mare Society Magazine, 1998, and was originally published in the Fairacres Chronicle, 1997. It is reproduced here by kind permission of the author.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
This year, Concordia Choir bids a temporary farewell to a beloved colleague and conductor and welcomes an old friend. Dr. René Clausen will be taking time off this year to focus on his own projects while Michael Smith returns for his last year as a conductor but his first time conducting Concordia Choir.
"I really feel like I was called here for this year," Smith said.
Clausen has taken time off in order to focus on some special projects he has been assigned for this year. According to Dr. John Roberts, Professor of Music and Chair of the Department, the Reformation Celebration, commemorating the 500th anniversary of the birth of Protestantism is coming soon and President Craft has invited him to write an oratorio for the Concordia Choir to perform. An oratorio is a very large composition for orchestra, soloists and the choir, that will require a great deal of dedication from Clausen.
"There is the expectation and absolute surety that [Dr. Clausen] is coming back," Roberts said. "He will be back next year on board again as our leader."
According to Roberts, in face of Clausen's time off, the Concordia Choir will not be traveling internationally until next year, but will have the chance to travel nationally with Smith.
When looking for a replacement, Roberts and Craft relied on the opinions of Dr. Clausen and the music faculty to determine the best candidate for the job. Based off of their response, Roberts decided that Smith was the perfect fit.
"He has been here in the past for many, many years," Roberts said, " … and was beloved and well liked and was extremely effective and efficient."
Isaac Lovdahl, vocal music education major, was a freshman in the men's choir when Smith was here during his last year and first met Smith in a meeting during the college's music scholarship program. Smith was one of the people that had convinced Lovdahl to come here.
"He is so full of life. You just always leave a conversation with him with a smile on your face," Lovdahl said.
According to Smith, before he conducted at Concordia, he was a high school conductor at Aitkan, Wilmar and Brainerd for 25 years. After conducting for so many years, Smith had decided on retirement.
Yet, shortly after retiring, he obtained a conductor position at Concordia. Six years later he returned to retirement only to find himself back at Concordia for one last year. After this year is over, Smith is pretty certain he will stay in retirement.
"I don't think I am going to flunk retirement for the third time," Smith said.
Smith felt inspired to accept this job offer for various reasons. He loves the Concordia family, the mission that the college upholds and he especially loves and missed the students of Concordia.
"There is a certain sense with students that is not fake, I think they are real," Smith said. "They come with an ideal they will make a difference."
Coming from a strong, educational background, Smith presents some differences in his techniques and style as a conductor. While Roberts believes Smith's background in high school education will give him the opportunity to help music education majors know how to interact with that age, one of his past students noticed something different.
Sally Pigeon, English Literature major, was an alto two in Cantabile choir when Smith conducted in the past. She noted that while Clausen focused on voice blending and sound, Smith was more technical in his teachings.
"I told the choir I am not René Clausen, but I come with certain gifts too that I hope to share," Smith said.
Noting Clausen's smooth motions when he conducts and his focus on voice, compared to Smith's rigid hand motions and technical approach, Pigeon hopes that her and her fellow students can learn about what matters most.
"The differences the conductor makes [in the choir] does not have to be the most important thing," Pigeon said. She believes that the differences that Smith may make as a conductor aren't necessarily bad because what's most important is the process to creating meaningful music.
"Anyone who can help us get there is worth listening to and working with," Pigeon said.
Smith and Clausen also exhibit a few similarities due to their similar musical backgrounds. Both graduates of St. Olaf and students of the same music teacher, they share similar vocal concepts. Products of the Lutheran Christianson Choral tradition, they focus on a singing quality that connects with the audience.
"René Clausen is one of my best friends. I have the utmost respect for the choral tradition here and the Concordia Choir," Smith said. "I told him I would do my best to uphold the tradition."
In face of this year's position, Smith feels great excitement in what lays ahead. He is excited to make great music and to meet his students. Yet, Smith has also felt a healthy amount of pressure taking on this position as well.
"Anytime you fill in for anyone that has a long tradition, where there are expectations not only from the choir, but from the alumni and the community, they want to have quality work," Smith said, " … that is the challenge I have taken on. It makes me humble, and very honored."
When Lovdahl heard that Clausen was leaving for the year he felt sad because he had become comfortable with Clausen and had become very attached to him. Yet, he was happy that
Clausen was getting the time off he deserved, and once it was announced that Smith was filling the position, Lovdahl was elated and relieved.
"They didn't announce it was Smith right away, and I kind of got a head rush," Lovdahl said. But when he found out it was Smith, "it took away a lot of the sting. If anybody was going to fill the void, it would be Smith."
Some of the expectations that Pigeon has for Smith is not only that he continues the choir's excellence, but that he is present in the moments the choir shares and that he fosters the close relationships within the choir as well. Along with these expectations, Pigeon also expects Smith to learn something as well.
"I hope that he feels like he's made a difference in us and that he just wasn't a stand in," Pigeon said, "he is just as important to this choir as a whole and as a legacy as Clausen is."
Hello there!
I'm the editor for the variety section. I will be graduating in 2017 and I am a double major in multimedia journalism and political science. This is my third year writing for the paper, but my second year on staff. On campus I also like to perform in spoken word events. In my free time I enjoy writing poetry, reading a good book, or just getting off campus and spending time with my friends.


text:
Digital Fruits For Lunch: Feeding Embodied Conversational Agents With Wikipedia Knowledge
Title: Digital Fruits For Lunch: Feeding Embodied Conversational Agents With Wikipedia Knowledge
Authors: Ulli Waltinger, Alexa Breuing, Ipke Wachsmuth
Pub/Conf: Interdisciplinary College
Recent advances in Artificial Intelligence and Natural Language Processing have enhanced the vision of using embodied conversational agents as an interaction paradigm for accessing the Web of Data [1]. One important aspect of such knowledge intensive expert systems is that they decisively depend on the availablity ofmachine-readable (semi-) structured knowledge resources. That is, being able to automatically explore the wealth of (encyclopedic) information about the worldin a structured manner. Question Answering (QA) plays an important role in this context, since it endows conversational agents with the capability of understanding and answering natural language questions asked by human users. We describe the architecture of an open domain QA system for our embodied conversational agent Max which integrates a large amount of available common-sense knowledge drawn from Wikipedia. The QA engine utilizes an open topic model [2] as a reference point for context detection, object disambiguation and hypothesis generation. It includes different linguistic filtering methods and natural language pattern matching components which additionally enable to access the RDF-based dataset provided by the DBpedia project [3]. The resultant QA component shall invite human dialog partners to ask natural language questions and to explore the encyclopedic knowledge of Wikipedia just by means of interacting with our conversational agent Max.
@misc{2425217, author = {Waltinger, Ulli and Breuing, Alexa and Wachsmuth, Ipke}, language = {English}, location = {G{\"u}nne at Lake M{\"o}hnesee}, publisher = {Interdisciplinary College}, series = {Postersession at the Interdisciplinary College}, title = {Digital Fruits For Lunch: Feeding Embodied Conversational Agents With Wikipedia Knowledge}, year = {2011}, }


text:
ESPN.com recently embarked on a mission to rank front offices in the NBA. The Chicago Bulls came in fifth overall, with Tom Thibodeau ranked second amongst coaches, GM/President combo Gar Foreman and John Paxson coming in 14th amongst executives, and owner Jerry Reinsdorf ranking ninth amongst owners.
That Thibs would come in behind only Gregg Popovich doesn't surprise me, nor does GarPax being considered middle-of-the-pack. What does surprise me is Mr. Reinsdorf's place.
I have, in any number of contexts, expressed my annoyance with Mr. Reinsdorf. His general unwillingness to spend a single cent more than he absolutely has to on the Bulls drives me nuts, especially when it manifests itself in things like the dismantling of the bench from the 2011-12 team. And when he says things like how basketball is a game while baseball is religion, I want to tear my hair out. That he's considered the ninth best owner in the NBA is mildly incredible to me.
But that doesn't change the fact that Mr. Reinsdorf isn't a terrible owner. He isn't the worst owner in history, nor is he close. And it's important to keep that in mind. Peter Holt, he ain't. But he also isn't Donald Sterling or even Dan Gilbert. He isn't meddlesome, and he does have some ability to ignore the bottom line if he thinks it will help the team. Witness last season, when he was willing to hold on to Rip Hamilton at the trade deadline and pay the luxury tax rather than send out a first round draft pick, which would've hurt the team down the road. And he was all set to pay the tax this season, even reaching into the coffers for Mike Dunleavy, until … well, you know.
If you want to hate him, that's your business. I'm not going to tell you he hasn't done frustrating things. And there are plenty of organizational issues — like the fact that the Bulls seem to bad-mouth all their players on the way out the door, to name one — which concern me quite a bit and which I believe start from the top. But he's not a terrible person, and he's far from a terrible owner.


text:
Prevalence and sonographic patterns of uterine fibroids in Northern Nigeria
Yusuf Lawal1, Ishaku Bala Yaro2, Ayyuba Rabiu3, Richard Emmanuel2
1 Department of Radiology, Bayero University Kano/Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Kano, Kano State, Nigeria2 Department of Medical Radiography, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, College of Health Sciences, Bayero University Kano, Kano, Kano State, Nigeria3 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Bayero University Kano/Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Kano, Kano State, Nigeria
Correspondence Address:Ayyuba RabiuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Bayero University Kano/Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, P.M.B. 3011, Kano, Kano State NigeriaSource of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: NoneCheckDOI: 10.4103/nnjcr.nnjcr_4_18
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
DOI: 10.4103/nnjcr.nnjcr_4_18
Background: Uterine fibroids are benign tumors which commonly affect women of reproductive age. Ultrasound scan is regarded as the commonly available method of diagnosing and growth monitoring of uterine fibroids. Objectives: To determine the prevalence of uterine fibroids, their sonographic pattern, and their association with body mass index (BMI) among patients undergoing pelvic ultrasound scan. Methodology: It was a descriptive cross-sectional study that was conducted among patients in Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital. Ethical approval was obtained from the hospital's Ethics Committee. Information such as sociodemographic characteristics was recorded in the questionnaire after obtaining informed consent. Mindray Digital Ultrasound Imaging System (Model DC6; Shenzhen Mindray Biomed Electronics, Shenzhen, China) was used for the study. The data obtained were analyzed using SPSS software version 20 (SPSS Inc., IL, Chicago, USA). A test of association was computed on the categorical variables using Fisher's exact test. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The prevalence of uterine fibroids was 12.1%. Age group of 36–40 years had the highest number of patients with fibroids (25 [29.8%]). Multiple fibroids of more than two nodules were the findings in almost half of the participants (41 [48.8%]). There was no statistically significant association between the number of fibroid nodules and parity P (Fishers') = 0.474 or BMI P (Fishers') = 0.181. Age group was statistically associated with the number of fibroid nodules P (Fishers') = 0.030. Conclusion: The prevalence of uterine fibroids in this study was high. Mixed echo pattern of fibroid nodules was the predominant finding in this study.
Keywords: Fibroids, Northern Nigeria, prevalence, sonographic patterns


text:
Wednesday morning Kathy Finn, a stringer for Reuters, asked if she could speak with me about recent events at the Annual Meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention in New Orleans. I had just sat down after losing an appeal to overrule the Chair regarding a motion I made. The motion had been ruled out of order. My brother Paul texted me to tell me I was out of order. You have to love brothers with a satirical sense of humor.
We moved to the hallway where Kathy turned on the recorder. After a series of questions regarding Dr. Luter's election and my motion she asked about another vote. Finn wanted to know how I felt about the approval of Great Commission Baptists as a descriptor, or tag line, for Southern Baptists.
I searched my own website to see if I had written anything about the matter. Nothing came up in the search. That should tell you something. I was/am ambivalent. When the vote was taken, I was in a coffee shop with a couple of friends. We celebrated the election of Dr. Luter.
We Southern Baptists hold autonomy in high regard. Just ask the fellows who for years have been trying to get full disclosure on Executive salaries in the SBC. Autonomy is the patterned response. Folks at my church know what I make. They read the line each month when we approve our Treasurer's report. Many think this old fashioned, out of date. I think it keeps suspicion down. After all, members' tithes and offerings provide my salary and benefits. It works the same in all SBC denominational structures, save for Lifeway.
Evidently Finn had been given quite the quote from someone who did not like the outcome of the vote.
Patti Swaggert, of Colyell, Louisiana, disagreed with the proposal, saying on Wednesday that use of the new name could "change who we are."
"I feel like, if you joined the Southern Baptist Church, then you intended to be Southern Baptist," she told Reuters. "You don't go to a Methodist church and ask them to change it to Catholic."
Now that is a reporter's dream. Ask someone who makes category mistakes how they feel and you can be sure to get a whopper like that. Where would Finn find a different opinion. I confess, my comments on Dr. Luter's election and my motion seemed more provocative to me. Finn quoted me at the end of her piece.
But Todd Littleton, pastor of the Snow Hill Baptist Church in Tuttle, Oklahoma, said allowing use of the Great Commission Baptists name on a voluntary basis could help to expand the reach of a church that has long been identified with one section of the country.
One of my good friends is a religion reporter. I trust him when he edits any comments he solicits. This statement is more summary, and a good one. Let me explain. Nathan Finn could have easily helped Ms. Finn understand that for Baptists, Southern Baptists in particular, our sense of autonomy would have allowed any church to self-identify as a Great Commission Baptist Church. Why, if a Southern Baptist Church wanted to identify themselves in any particular way they could. That is how we play autonomy as Southern Baptists.
The confusing part would be for folks visiting such a church. Since there is no denomination incorporated as Great Commission Baptists the question would inevitably be, "What kind of Baptist are you?" Trust me, the first phrase would not be, "We are autonomous Baptists." The response would indicate that while cooperating with the Southern Baptist Convention they preferred to publicly identify differently. "Cooperating Southern Baptist Church" is gobbledygook, euphemism, for "we give money." How do you explain that without sounding critical like that last sentence?
Our option is to play to our peculiar confessional theology. The only problem is that we don't always coalesce around the Baptist Faith and Message. We did pass a resolution on the matter. But, the fine print of Southern Baptist resolutions is that they are non-binding statements. Yes, you guessed it, autonomy again.
Maybe you see the difficulty in expressing enthusiasm over a decision that really does not mean anything different than what any Southern Baptist Church could have already practiced. My comment, and Kathy Finn picked this up well, was intended to suggest that there are parts of the Country where Southern may not be so endearing. For those like Dave Miller in Iowa, he simply needs to spend some time in Oklahoma. He would soon realize that many here view Southern, as in Southern Baptist, the same way.
In our autonomy we did not give an overwhelming mandate to the much ballyhooed vote either. Even Dave, who won the election for 2nd Vice-President, acknowledged the slim margin. While he pointed to the 52.78% who voted for the addition, it should not get a pass that less than 5000 people voted. It was just over 4800 out of 7800+ messengers. Remember, I was at the coffee shop. I was/am ambivalent about the issue.
Lifeway reported SBC numbers are down. But, they are not down to a level that helps explain less than 10,000 messengers from 44,000 churches and missions. It is easy to see why Dave, who favored the new descriptor for sensible reasons, felt less than enthusiastic.
Why so much e-ink on this subject about which I am ambivalent? Largely because the piece demonstrates what we Southern Baptists often do. Talk about things that change little and keep quiet about things that should change much. Like, say, repudiating racism/racial comments and plagiarism publicly as a Convention and re-orienting our practices around our stated commitment to racial reconciliation. We should take action not offer a majority opinion. More on that to come.
1 comment on "Quoted by Reuters or, What About My Other Comments On the SBC?"
I could see Paul sending such a text. I wish I had thought of it :).


text:
How to Book Petit Tor
Petit Tor is bookable via Airbnb which is a global holiday booking system and offers protection to both holiday-maker and host. We enjoy being part of the Airbnb community.
For prices, availability and to book, click the link to take you to our Petit Tor page on Airbnb.
Thank you – we look forward to meeting you soon!
Prices & Availability & Booking.
Excellent Isle of Wight self catering accommodation
What's included
- Bed linen and towels
- Travel cot on request
- High chair on request
- Tiled flooring throughout
- Central heating
- Fridge
- Freezer
- Electric cooker
- Microwave
- Wi-Fi internet
- LCD television and DVD player
- Selection of DVDs for adults and children
- Radio and CD player
- Booking reassurance through Airbnb
Excellent Isle of Wight self catering accommodation


text:
I thought I'd address some common problems in litigation of sexual offence charges. The most common problems, I'd suggest, are prior consistent statements, bad character evidence, and a presumption of truthfulness (explicitly stated or otherwise) being ascribed to the complainant. I'll discuss these – along with concerns about s. 276 and conviction rates – below.
Prior consistent statements
The law on this is confusing and constantly misunderstood. The idea is that prior consistent statements of a witness are not supposed to be used by the trier of fact to support the credibility of the witness. How about if inconsistencies are an issue during cross-examination of the complainant? R. v. N.W., 2018 ONSC 774 (CanLII) suggests it's still not allowed; also see here. Note the improper use of prior consistent statements noted in the following recent appellate decisions: R. v. G.J.S., 2020 ONCA 317 (CanLII); R. v. D.K., 2020 ONCA 79 (CanLII); R. v. A.V., 2020 ONCA 58 (CanLII); and R. v. A.S., 2020 ONCA 229 (CanLII).
However, perhaps this is unfair? Inconsistencies can be used to show a lack of credibility and/or reliability of the witness (e.g. inconsistencies in witnesses' statements can be a sign of poor reliability – per Brown and Witkin's 2nd edition of Prosecuting and defending sexual offence cases, 2020 – Alberta Law Libraries e-book link, at pp. 205-6.), so why can't consistencies be used to show the reverse? I think it's fair, as we're trying to be fair to the accused, and the accused is generally the one who gains by the rule against prior consistent statements. In any event, the above cases appear to state that this is the law. If it is a "one-way street", that's not necessarily problematic.
However, it appears that some courts have struggled with this concept – of the defence having it "both ways". See R v Griffin, 2018 ABCA 277 (CanLII):
[33] Neither does the record support the appellant's argument that the trial judge used Taylor's prior consistent statements to bolster her credibility. As stated in R v Lavallee, 2015 ABCA 288 at paragraph 22:
- The defence cannot have it both ways. It cannot argue at trial that a complainant's various accounts of what happened are inconsistent, and therefore, unreliable – compelling the court to look at them – and then argue on appeal, once this argument has been rejected, that the court erred by considering the consistency of the statements for the purposes of assessing the reliability of the complainant's evidence.
I'm frankly confused.
Bad character evidence
Another issue is bad character evidence of the accused. The Crown might be tempted to lead evidence of a history of rape by the accused toward the complainant, or a variety of other negative background details (i.e. never helped around the house, never had a job, didn't take out garbage, didn't pay bills, bad father, etc.). These would be helpful in terms of the context of the relationship. However, many (if not most) of these types of details should be inadmissible as bad character evidence. Further, some of this (e.g. history of rape) is also evidence of prior sexual activity, which would be barred if led by the defence absent a s. 276 application – of course, no two-way street there, as the Crown is able to adduce this evidence – pre-Barton, anyway (constitutional problem right there, methinks).
In terms of bad character evidence, see the classic Paciocco/Stuesser text: The Law of Evidence, Irwin Law, Toronto, 2015 (7th edition) – Alberta Law Libraries e-book; 8th edition recently released, at (pp. 56-57):
The Exclusion of General Bad Character about the Accused
The Crown cannot call general bad character evidence, being evidence that shows only that the accused is the sort of person likely to commit the offence charged. This rule of exclusion is bolstered by a "prohibited inference." Even where evidence is admissible for other purposes, if it incidentally exposes the general bad character of the accused, the trier of fact is prohibited by law from inferring that the accused may be guilty because he is the sort of person likely to commit the offence charged .
Naturally, in a criminal prosecution, the Crown can prove the conduct being prosecuted no matter how badly this may reflect on the character of the accused. What the Crown cannot do is lead "extrinsic evidence" – evidence about the accused's behaviour on other occasions or about his general character – "simply to show that the accused is the sort of person likely to commit the offence charged." In R. v. Handy, the leading Canadian case on character evidence, Justice Binnie explained this "primary rule of exclusion, "one of the most deeply rooted and jealously guarded principles of our criminal law," as follows:
While logically it may be easier to believe that a person of bad character would commit the offence charged – that someone who has burgled before would burgle again – evidence of general disposition is apt to add more heat than light. The trier of fact may convict not because of the natural strength of this kind of evidence, but as a reaction to the discreditable, contemptible, or stigmatizing character of the accused. For these reasons, in spite of its modest relevance, "[i]t is trite law that 'character evidence [called by the Crown] which shows only that the accused is the type of person likely to have committed the offence in question is inadmissible." Where the Crown seeks to lead evidence, including by cross-examining the accused, about his extrinsic conduct or his character traits or practices, it is therefore essential to ask the threshold question of whether "the proposed evidence [is] discreditable to the accused ?" If it is, the rule applies. "Bad character evidence" is determined by asking whether the ordinary person would disapprove of the conduct or character revealed. Such conduct or character need not be criminal to engage this rule. Discreditable evidence includes any conduct or information about the accused that others are likely to find to be morally objectionable or apt to demonstrate that he has a contemptible or reprehensible character, and can include activities such as watching pornographic movies or engaging in phone sex. It even extends beyond this to include proof of a stigmatizing condition such as mental illness or alcohol abuse. Historically, it extended to same sex preference but given current attitudes, such evidence should fall outside of the bad character evidence rule, just as evidence of marital infidelity after separation now does.
- Proof of general disposition is a prohibited purpose. Bad character is not an offence known to law. Discreditable disposition or character evidence at large, creates nothing but "moral prejudice" and the Crown is not entitled to ease its burden by stigmatizing the accused as a bad person.
See also the words of Mitchell J. in R. v. A.B.A., 2018 ONSC 2198 (CanLII), at paras. 30-31:
[…]Mr. A.B.A. admitted to suggestions by Crown counsel that he was of poor, or at the very least, low moral character. Character assassination does not prove his guilt nor does it make him more likely to have sexually assaulted S.B.
Apparently however, this is allowed for "narrative" or "context" when damaging to accused – obviously not for complainant, though, in the s. 276 context. See R. v. F., D.S., 1999 CanLII 3704 (ON CA). Even then, however, require application and limiting instructions to the jury regarding the specific nature of the inferences allowed to be deduced from the evidence. Similarly, R. v. F.(J.E.), 1993 CanLII 3384 (ON CA), which also deals with prior consistent statements, has this to say about bad character evidence:
With respect to this issue, the appellant submits that the evidence of the appellant's physical abuse of the complainant's mother was inadmissible. This evidence was clearly admissible because it was witnessed by the complainant and was one reason given by her as justifying her fear of the appellant and her resultant silence about his abuse to her. There should, however, have been a limiting instruction to the jury that this evidence should not be relied upon as proof that the appellant was the sort of person who would commit the offence charged and on that basis infer that the appellant was in fact guilty: see R. v. B.(F.F.), 1993 CanLII 167 (SCC), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 697 at pp. 707-08, 79 C.C.C. (3d) 112 at p. 119.
It appears that this evidence is inadmissible unless specifically for permitted purposes, with appropriate limiting instructions. I'll admit that I'm confused on this issue, as well.
Rape myths
In a problematic decision – R. v. A.B.A., 2019 ONCA 124 (CanLII), the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned a very solid fact-driven acquittal based on what it perceived to be reliance on rape myths, at para. 17:
The trial judge then went on to explain why she did not believe the complainant, applying the stereotypical views about how victims of sexual assault should behave which have been described above. The trial judge's determination that she believed the respondent was inextricably linked to her assessment of the complainant's credibility, which itself was fundamentally affected by legal error.
In yet another disturbing overturning of a solid fact-driven acquittal, the Alberta Court of Appeal found in R v ADG, 2015 ABCA 149 (CanLII), at para. 33:
No inference should be drawn regarding a complainant's credibility that is based on assumptions about how a victim of sexual assault is supposed to react to the assault. The Supreme Court of Canada has made clear that sexual assault cases should be decided "without resort to folk tales about how abuse victims are expected by people who have never suffered abuse to react to the trauma": R v Shearing, 2002 SCC 58 at para 121, [2002] 3 SCR 33. There is no inviolable rule on how victims of sexual assault will behave: R v DD, 2000 SCC 43 at para 63, [2000] 2 SCR 275. It cannot be assumed that sexual assault victims will react to abuse in any objectively identifiable way. Findings of credibility should not be affected by the timing of disclosure alone – that is, affected by a comparison between a complainant's disclosure and the disclosure of a hypothetical 'objectively reasonable' victim.
For yet another disturbing overturning a solid fact-driven acquittal (of an unreported decision, reviewed here), which of course, led to serious consequences for the accused and the judge (both of whom I'd categorize as victims in this case), see R v Wagar, 2015 ABCA 327 (CanLII).
Also, see the downright wrong analysis, in yet another overturning of an acquittal (an unreported decision, hence challenging to assess how poor the appellate court's thought process otherwise was) – R. v A.R.D., 2017 ABCA 237 (CanLII) – appeal to SCC dismissed (para. 39, emphasis added):
The more important question is what, if anything, can evidence of a lack of avoidant behaviour by a complainant tell a trier of fact about a sexual assault allegation? The answer is simple—nothing.
Note also the strong rhetoric in para. 9:
To be clear, reliance on a stereotype to found an assessment of credibility bearing on reasonable doubt is impermissible—it is an error of law. Accordingly, reasonable doubt is not a shield for appellate review if that doubt is informed by stereotypical and therefore prejudicial reasoning. Similarly, to suggest that stereotypical thinking is merely logic or common sense is a licence for it to continue unmasked and unabated. That is why, as a matter of law, this type of reasoning must not be insulated from appellate review.
See the far less problematic approach in the very recently released R. v. Roth, 2020 BCCA 240 (CanLII), at para. 130:
However, this does not mean that the evidence surrounding the driver's attendance at the home, including the complainant's conduct during that interaction, was not open for consideration in the credibility assessment and the trial judge was obliged to steer away from it. The risk of myths and stereotypes distorting a judge's fact‑finding or reasoning process does not prohibit use of a complainant's behaviour for all analytical purposes (assuming the evidence surrounding that behaviour is properly before the court). Although a piece of evidence may carry the potential for impermissible reasoning, it may also have a permissible role to play as a circumstance to consider in assessing the evidence as a whole, in the context of the case's particular "factual mosaic": R. v. D.(D.), 2000 SCC 43 at para. 65; Kiss at paras. 101–102. In my view, what A.R.D. and like cases warn against is the improper use of this type of evidence, not any use at all.
This is a rather "generous" interpretation of ARD. My reading of ARD suggests that it absolutely warns against any use of this evidence – per para. 39, above.
Roth then quotes Dufraimont – thankfully, not Craig or Tanovich. I cite Dufraimont here, in the context of her critique of Craig, and her article can be found here. Dufraimont is more accurate than Craig, but hardly as clear as I'd like, given the popularity of "butchering" the law in this area, as I've noted extensively in this post and past posts (para. 131):
On this point, I agree with the comments of professor Lisa Dufraimont in "Myth, Inference and Evidence in Sexual Assault Trials", (2019) 44 Queen's L.J. 316 at 353:
Criminal courts … carry the heavy responsibility of ensuring that every accused person has a fair trial. Subject to the rules of evidence and the prohibition of particular inferences, this requires that the defence generally be permitted to bring forward all evidence that is logically relevant to the material issues. Repudiating myths and stereotypes means rejecting certain discriminatory lines of reasoning, but it does not make whole categories of evidence irrelevant or inadmissible. Indeed, sweeping prohibitions that would rule out any consideration of particular forms of evidence are avoided as inconsistent with the accused's right to make full answer and defence and with our overall approach to finding facts. Outside the prohibited lines of reasoning identified as myths, relevance remains an elastic concept that leaves a wide scope for reasoning from logic and human experience. [Emphasis added; internal references omitted.]
Even better is R. v. J.M., 2018 ONSC 344 (CanLII), wherein Justice Harris says overgeneralization is the problem – but the evidence is not inadmissible; at para. 67 (underlining added)":
The legal position with respect to delays in disclosure dealt with by the Supreme Court in R. v. D. (D.), 2000 SCC 43, [2000] 2 S.C.R. 275 and as recognized in A.R.D. at para. 55 is analogous. Delays do not automatically count against the complainant's credibility. This is a serious error of law and is founded on stereotypical thinking. A judge must appreciate the psychology and circumstances that may lead to delayed disclosure. In D. (D.) at para. 65, it was said, and the comments apply equally to association evidence, the reasons for delayed disclosure "are many and at least include embarrassment, fear, guilt, or a lack of understanding and knowledge." A delay can, however, undoubtedly damage a complainant's credibility, particularly when disclosure is made coincident with the impetus of a motive to fabricate.
Note also Paciocco's text (pp. 534-5, emphasis added):
This does not mean that proof relating to a delay in complaining will necessarily be irrelevant and inadmissible. There may be circumstances in the particular case that make it reasonable to expect that had the sexual assault occurred, the complainant would have said so earlier. Where this is so, it remains proper to cross-examine the complainant about the failure to make a timely complaint. […]
S. 276 and conviction rates
In R. v. Seaboyer; R. v. Gayme, 1991 CanLII 76 (SCC), the majority of the Supreme Court struck down s. 276 which – at the time – excluded any evidence of prior sexual activity of the complainant. Apparently, the impugned provisions were in place for 8 years at that point. The majority of the SCC realized (after nearly a decade, anyway) that this was a major problem in terms of trial fairness to the accused. Unfortunately, the majority only struck it down to the extent that it had been a blanket exclusion – it subsequently still required a voir dire to determine the purpose of the evidence and to allow the judge to determine whether the evidence was problematic due to the "twin myths". Parliament had the sense to adopt this revised version in its reworked version of s. 276 in 1992 rather than allow s. 276 to disappear like other archaic legislation, which is largely what we continue to be stuck with today. This is better than what had previously been the law, but it remains highly problematic. Why is all of this evidence presumptively inadmissible until the accused can prove that it's necessary? Why not have no such rule, and simply require the judge to exclude the evidence if it appears to be supportive of the twin myths? Kind of how "myths and stereotypes" are supposed to be approached – carefully, but evidence that there was a delay in disclosure is neither presumptively inadmissible nor irrelevant.
In practice, Crowns and courts typically object strenuously to any defence-led evidence about the sexual relationship of the accused and complainant – even when it's obviously for context only. Context appears to be necessary in every other trial – just not defence-led evidence that relates to history of a sexual relationship. Of course, if Crown wants to lead this evidence (and they often do), s. 276 does not bar them from doing so (note ss. 2 of s. 276 in the Criminal Code: "evidence shall not be adduced by or on behalf of the accused") – although Barton says that they cannot. Seaboyer and s. 276 continue to be highly problematic. Of course, L'Heureux-Dubé's dissent in Seaboyer was that the blanket exclusion was acceptable, and her problematic approach to criminal law (evidenced clearly in that case) contributed to wrecking the law in this country for more than a decade (e.g. Ewanchuk, Osolin, O'Connor, etc.) and into the foreseeable future.
Later, see R. v. Darrach, 2000 SCC 46 (CanLII), at para. 69:
The right to make full answer and defence, moreover, does not provide a right to cross-examine an accuser.
WTF? Note the majority in R. v. Osolin, 1993 CanLII 54 (SCC):
(1) Cross-examination as a Fundamental Aspect of a Fair Trial
There can be no question of the importance of cross-examination. It is of essential importance in determining whether a witness is credible. Even with the most honest witness cross-examination can provide the means to explore the frailties of the testimony. For example, it can demonstrate a witness's weakness of sight or hearing. It can establish that the existing weather conditions may have limited the ability of a witness to observe, or that medication taken by the witness would have distorted vision or hearing. Its importance cannot be denied. It is the ultimate means of demonstrating truth and of testing veracity. Cross-examination must be permitted so that an accused can make full answer and defence. The opportunity to cross-examine witnesses is fundamental to providing a fair trial to an accused. This is an old and well established principle that is closely linked to the presumption of innocence. See R. v. Anderson (1938), 1938 CanLII 195 (MB CA), 70 C.C.C. 275 (Man. C.A.); R. v. Rewniak (1949), 1949 CanLII 358 (MB CA), 93 C.C.C. 142 (Man. C.A.); Abel v. The Queen (1955), 1955 CanLII 473 (QC CA), 115 C.C.C. 119 (Que. Q.B.); R. v. Lindlau (1978), 1978 CanLII 2366 (ON CA), 40 C.C.C. (2d) 47 (Ont. C.A.). The importance of the right to cross-examine was well expressed by the Court in the reasons of Ritchie J. in Titus v. The Queen, 1983 CanLII 49 (SCC), [1983] 1 S.C.R. 259, at pp. 263-64. There he wrote:
In R. v. Seaboyer, 1991 CanLII 76 (SCC), [1991] 2 S.C.R. 577, it was once again emphasized that the right to cross-examine constitutes a principle of fundamental justice that is critical to the fairness of the accused's trial. In that case, the right to cross-examine was placed in the context of the right to make full answer and defence (at p. 608, per McLachlin J.):
- I think it essential to stress the purpose for which the cross- examination is permitted, namely, in order that the defence may explore to the full all factors which might expose the frailty of the evidence called by the prosecution. That the accused as he stands in the prisoner's box on trial for murder is deemed to be innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is one of the fundamental presumptions inherent in the common law and as such the accused is entitled to employ every legitimate means of testing the evidence called by the Crown to negative that presumption and in my opinion this includes the right to explore all circumstances capable of indicating that any of the prosecution witnesses had a motive for favouring the Crown.
In short, the denial of the right to call and challenge evidence is tantamount to the denial of the right to rely on a defence to which the law says one is entitled. The defence which the law gives with one hand, may be taken away with the other. Procedural limitations make possible the conviction of persons who the criminal law says are innocent. Cross-examination is all the more crucial to the accused's ability to make full answer and defence when credibility is the central issue in the trial. Such was the finding made by the Ontario Court of Appeal in R. v. Anandmalik (1984), 6 O.A.C. 143, at p. 144:
- The right of the innocent not to be convicted is dependent on the right to present full answer and defence. This, in turn, depends on being able to call the evidence necessary to establish a defence and to challenge the evidence called by the prosecution.
The same point was made by the Alberta Court of Appeal in R. v. Giffin (1986), 1986 ABCA 107 (CanLII), 69 A.R. 158, at p. 159:
- In a case where the guilt or innocence of the [accused] largely turned on credibility, it was a serious error to limit the [accused] of his substantial right to fully cross-examine the principal Crown witness. It would not be appropriate in the circumstances to invoke or apply the curative provisions of s. 613(1)(b)(iii).
To the same effect is R. v. Wallick (1990), 1990 CanLII 11128 (MB CA), 69 Man. R. (2d) 310 (C.A.), where at p. 311 it was said:
- We agree …that the events about which counsel sought to cross-examine were relevant on the question of the credibility of the witness …. The accused in this case cannot be said to have had an opportunity for a fair answer and defence when he was not permitted to ask them.
Thus it can be seen that the right to cross-examine has always been held to be of fundamental importance in a criminal trial. That right is now protected by ss. 7 and 11(d) of the Charter. As a result it should be interpreted in the "broad and generous manner befitting its constitutional status" (see R. v. Potvin, 1989 CanLII 130 (SCC), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 525, at p. 544).
- Cross-examination is a most powerful weapon of the defence, particularly when the entire case turns on credibility of the witnesses. An accused in a criminal case has the right of cross-examination in the fullest and widest sense of the word as long as he does not abuse that right. Any improper interference with the right is an error which will result in the conviction being quashed.
Professor Sankoff's recent text, The Law of Witnesses and Evidence in Canada (formerly "Witnesses") published by Thomson Reuters (Alberta Law Libraries e-book link) has a thorough, excellent treatment of s. 276 in Ch. 12 (see 12.3 – (iv) — The Test for Admissibility: Section 276(2)) – quoting from Chapter 12.4:
Each of these examples would have to be excluded if s. 276(1) were to be read literally. It is fortunate, thus, that most of the courts that have directly considered the matter have adopted Paciocco's approach, and the Supreme Court, in the process of dismissing a constitutional challenge to the legislation in R. v. Darrach, appears to have implicitly done so as well. In rejecting the accused's claim in that case that the operation of s. 276(1) would inevitably lead to the exclusion of probative evidence relating to consent, Gonthier J. wrote that:
It follows that prior sexual history evidence can be offered to rebut claims of consent or to impeach credibility, so long as this is done directly, rather than by making a contention based on the complainant's character.
- Far from being a "blanket exclusion", s. 276(1) only prohibits the use of evidence of past sexual activity when it is offered to support two specific, illegitimate inferences. These are known as the "twin myths"… If evidence of sexual activity is proffered for its non-sexual features, such as to show a pattern of conduct or a prior inconsistent statement, it may be permitted.
He points out that ambiguity in s. 276 ("by reason of the sexual nature of that activity, the complainant[…] is more likely to have consented to the sexual activity that forms the subject-matter of the charge"), which is generally (hopefully) interpreted in the manner suggested by Paciocco and that is relatively favourable to the defence (that evidence not directly related to the twin myths is admissible – after an accused's s. 276 application, of course), while others, of course, would prefer a "L'Heureux-Dubé – style" blanket exclusion, with or without an application.
Conviction rates
Craig notes a "profoundly dysfunctional legal system" (in her book, at p. 22, reviewed here), and low conviction rates. Note Tanovich's influential 2015 article, "Whack" No More: Infusing Equality into the Ethics of Defence Lawyering in Sexual Assault Cases, 2015 CanLIIDocs 164, available here, at p. 503 (my review here):
In addition, heightened zeal has ramifications rarely seen in other cases. These collateral consequences include under-reporting for fear of being "whacked," secondary trauma to complainants and low conviction rates.
While I was reviewing Tanovich, I noticed this disturbing footnote commenting on (at p. 504):
Defence counsel wanted to use the painting "to make the point that the theme of false accusation is not the exclusive invention of criminal defence lawyers."37
Ibid. at para 2. If anything, given the reluctance of women to report sexual assault and the fear of being violated and humiliated in court, it is hard to imagine why someone would bring a false claim. This point is made by Justice L'Heureux-Dubé in Osolin SCC, supra note 4 at 625, where she notes that, "[t]here is absolutely no evidence to suggest that false allegations are more common in sexual assaults than in other offences; indeed, given the data indicating the strong disincentives to reporting, it seems much more likely that the opposite is true." See also, Sampert, supra note 28 at 307–11 where Professor Sampert notes that one of the myths surrounding sexual assault that is often portrayed in the media is that "innocent men are regularly accused of sexual assault and women regularly lie about it." This is not to suggest that there are not wrongful sexual assault convictions, but there is little, if any, evidence that this concern extends beyond cases that turn on identification evidence—that is, where the issue is not consent nor whether the act occurred, but whether, in fact, it was the accused who assaulted the complainant. In this category of sexual assault cases, the concerns with "whacking" rarely arise since the focus is not on making the complainant out to be a liar but with whether that identification is mistaken.
This horses**t passing for "expertise" in social science and/or evidence and law is simply ridiculous. I've addressed this previously here. Tanovich is dead wrong about this. There are countless wrongful convictions on a regular basis – in part due to butchering of the law thanks to "scholarship" such as his (and that of Craig and L'Heureux-Dubé, etc.), and in part due to the fact that complainants lie. Mistaken identification is probably rarer than both of those scenarios (consent and whether the act occurred). The fact that complainants lie should not be a rape myth – it's a plain fact, and one that's borne out by statistics – since we're so concerned about statistics. Besides – isn't it a myth and stereotype that women don't lie about these complaints, and/or that it's "hard to imagine why they would bring a false claim"? I get affirmative action, but let's not use it to secure wrongful convictions and promote outdated, archaic, and stereotypical thinking.
I've discussed statistics previously here, which tend to show weaknesses in the assertions of L'Heureux-Dubé and Tanovich. Further, there is a plethora of social science research documenting the extremely common false allegations of child sexual abuse in divorce/separation cases. One does not have to be a Mensa scholar to infer that it's not merely false allegations of child sexual abuse that are being concocted in those cases.
Besides, as Greenspan points out, the question "why would a woman lie about rape?" is silly and misleading, and no more appropriate nor relevant than "why would a man rape?" or "why do people commit crimes?" or "why is the sky blue"? Of course, however, it's a much more dangerous question, given that it's used to insinuate that complainants – in a particular kind of case – are being truthful.
Note that it is wrong to presume that witnesses are being truthful and accurate in their testimony (R. v. Thain, 2009 ONCA 223 (CanLII), at para. 32, cited in Paciocco at p. 534, footnote 1). This is distinct from the concept that the witness herself (not her evidence) is presumed to be of good character and truthful (ibid., citing R. v. Giraldi (1975), 28 C.C.C. (2d) 248 (B.C.C.A.), leave to appeal to S.C.C. refused (1975), 28 C.C.C. (2d) 248n (S.C.C.)).
Of course, s. 276 assumes that it will "encourage the reporting of sexual offences" – as if this were a fact. I'm surprised it doesn't add the tantalizing expectation of higher conviction rates, the reduced likelihood of "whacking the victim", and rehabilitating our "dysfunctional legal system," for good measure.
It is partly due to some of the "scholarship" mentioned above (that is irresponsible at best) that a male victim (wrongfully accused of sexual assault) has a better chance at a fair trial in China or Russia than in Canada from 1983 onward.


text:
Some of may have been using Bing Rewards during the past years. The program lets you accumulate credits everytime you search on Bing, and use those credits to earn rewards and sweepstakes for prizes.
Now the program is changing, becoming Microsoft Rewards.
With Microsoft Rewards the program will evolve, and users will be able to earn more points, that are going to replace credits, to earn rewards and sweeptakes even faster. Users will get poits when shopping on the Windows Store, when using Microsoft Edge and exploring daily offers.
Yet the program is only available ONLY for US residents, but you can register and accumulate points if you're going to move to the US soon.
Read More | Microsoft Rewards


text:
Bournemouth v Manchester United, Saturday 3rd November, 12:30
French duo making waves
Prior to the Everton game we talked about the form of Anthony Martial, backing him to find the net, and the French attacker did not disappoint.
He's now scored more than any other player since making his debut with 41 goals, putting in a man of the match display as he won the penalty for the opener before curling a beautiful finish into the corner to seal the points.
His confidence appears to have returned after his career took a dip following the misguided arrival of Alexis Sanchez, pushing him out of the first team picture initially, but his latest contribution means that he and Paul Pogba are now joint-highest scorers this term ahead of Romelu Lukaku.
The burly Belgian was rightly dropped to the bench after going eight games without a goal, while he did himself few favours as he missed a free header after replacing Marcus Rashford with just over 25 minutes to go.
Rashford appears another low on confidence and needs to contribute more, especially when handed a rare start from a central position.
That leaves Martial as the clear danger man going forwards, while his prospects of scoring are boosted by his relationship with fellow countryman Pogba.
They appear to have a telepathic understanding, with Pogba assisting 60% of Martial's successful attempts this term.
Martial to score and United to win – WAS 4.00 NOW 4.50*
Lindelof standing tall
It's taken some time, but Victor Lindelof is finally looking like a proper United player, though the Swede is only 24 years old which is still quite young for a defender and has his best years ahead of him.
He'd hardly be the first to take a while to adapt to the rigours of the Premier League (think about what a player Nemanja Vidic turned out to be) but his last two performances have been exemplary.
He was arguably our best player hosting Juve in the Champions League with a number of last-ditch tackles to limit the scoreline, while he kept Richarlison fairly quiet against the Toffees.
A clean sheet against high-scoring Bournemouth will be tough, however with Chris Smalling alongside him, though at least it offers some signs of encouragement at the back.
Smalling may be better than Jones, but he's by no means a suitable long term partner for Lindelof at the heart of the defence, while Eric Bailly has lost his confidence and appears a shadow of the player that offered some promise in his early United career.
United to win and over 2.5 goals – WAS 2.50 NOW 3.00*
Fred the Red
After being ignored from the bench against Juve as Jose Mourinho elected to keep things as they were, Fred came back into the side against Everton and was industrious alongside Nemanja Matic and Paul Pogba.
There were no rash tackles this time as he used his energy to good effect, and will be important in trying to prevent Bournemouth playing between the lines.
Mourinho's best teams have featured plenty of power and physicality from the middle of the park, with the Brazilian likely to be afforded more opportunities in future.
For the latest odds on the game, click here
*all odds are subject to change