Accessibility/Mobile Features
Skip Navigation
Editorial News
Classified Sites

Brandon Sun - ONLINE EDITION

Rape victim 'inviting,' so no jail

Judge rules woman's clothes, conduct ease blame on attacker

A Nov. 2009 file photo of Manitoba Judge Robert Dewar, who recently spared a convicted rapist jail time because the victim sent signals that

Enlarge Image

A Nov. 2009 file photo of Manitoba Judge Robert Dewar, who recently spared a convicted rapist jail time because the victim sent signals that "sex was in the air" through her suggestive attire and promiscuous conduct. (KEN GIGLIOTTI / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS)

A convicted rapist will not go to jail because a Manitoba judge says the victim sent signals that "sex was in the air" through her suggestive attire and flirtatious conduct on the night of the attack.

Kenneth Rhodes was given a two-year conditional sentence last week which allows him to remain free in the community, in a decision likely to trigger strong debate. The Crown wanted at least three years behind bars.

Queen's Bench Justice Robert Dewar called Rhodes a "clumsy Don Juan" who may have misunderstood what the victim wanted when he forced intercourse along a darkened highway outside Thompson in 2006.

Rhodes and a friend met the 26-year-old woman and her girlfriend earlier that night outside a bar under what the judge called "inviting circumstances." Dewar specifically noted the women were wearing tube tops with no bra, high heels and plenty of makeup.

"They made their intentions publicly known that they wanted to party," said Dewar. He said the women spoke of going swimming in a nearby lake that night "notwithstanding the fact neither of them had a bathing suit."

The foursome left the parking lot and headed into the woods, court was told. Rhodes began making sexual advances towards the victim, who initially rejected him but later returned his kisses. Rhodes then forced himself upon the woman once they were alone.

Rhodes pleaded not guilty at the trial on the basis he thought the woman had consented. Dewar rejected his defence -- but said aspects of it can now be considered in sentencing.

"This is a different case than one where there is no perceived invitation," said Dewar. "This is a case of misunderstood signals and inconsiderate behaviour."

Dewar said he didn't want to be seen as blaming the victim but that all of the factors surrounding the case must be viewed to assess "moral blameworthiness."

"I'm sure whatever signals were sent that sex was in the air were unintentional," he said.

The Crown was seeking at least three years in prison for Rhodes, who has no prior criminal record and works for the City of Thompson. They cited numerous precedents from the Manitoba Court of Appeal suggesting the "starting point" for a major sexual assault involving intercourse is a penitentiary sentence.

"This sentencing will raise a number of issues relating to public confidence in the sentencing process," Crown attorney Sheila Seesahai told court. She said the victim was at the mercy of her much larger attacker and his "repugnant and reprehensible" conduct.

In a victim impact statement, the woman described her ongoing fear related to the attack.

"I'm a prisoner in my own home," she wrote. The woman said she bears a permanent reminder of what Rhodes did to her -- a scar on her knee.

"This is a very serious rape case. The harm to the victim can't be underestimated," said Seesahai.

Defence lawyer Derek Coggan told court it's clear alcohol was a factor for both his client and the victim in terms of their ability to make good judgments.

"She had a very different understanding of what was in the accused's mind than he did," said Coggan. He said Rhodes never threatened the woman, didn't have a weapon and was simply "insensitive to the fact (she) was not a willing participant."

Dewar said the case was not "typical" of ones the courts often see and shouldn't be viewed as a precedent.

"There is a different quality to this case than many sexual assaults," he said. "Not all guilty people are morally culpable to the same level. This difference is not to be reflected in conviction. It can be reflected in sentencing. Protection of society is not advanced one iota by putting Mr. Rhodes in jail."

Rhodes will be under a 24-hour curfew for the first year of his conditional sentence, with exceptions to allow him to work and attend to medical appointments. His name will also be placed on the national sex offender registry. The judge also ordered Rhodes to write a letter of apology to his victim.

www.mikeoncrime.com

History

Updated on Thursday, February 24, 2011 at 4:47 PM CST:
Adds photo of judge.

  • Rate this Rate This Star Icon
  • This article has not yet been rated.
  • We want you to tell us what you think of our articles. If the story moves you, compels you to act or tells you something you didn’t know, mark it high. If you thought it was well written, do the same. If it doesn’t meet your standards, mark it accordingly.

    You can also register and/or login to the site and join the conversation by leaving a comment.

    Rate it yourself by rolling over the stars and clicking when you reach your desired rating. We want you to tell us what you think of our articles. If the story moves you, compels you to act or tells you something you didn’t know, mark it high.

Sort by: Newest to Oldest | Oldest to Newest | Most Popular 372 Commentscomment icon

You can comment on most stories on brandonsun.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is register and/or login and you can join the conversation and give your feedback.

@JustWondering

"And don't forget, at the time of the offence it was considered a suitable sentence."

In some circumstances it was. Whether it would have been suitable in this case, is another kettle of fish.

Intangible: Whether that statement is correct or not is debatable; but it certainly wouldn't have caused the same furor. And don't forget, at the time of the offence it was considered a suitable sentence.

@204G

"I guess this means I can't wear a tube top and skirt this summer, never mind my 2 piece bikini."

I think you'll be okay...as long as you wear a hat that says, "No, I won't have sex with you."


@JustWondering

"Indeed, and if he felt obliged to give some sort of reason he could have mentioned the Mr Rhodes spent the last 6 years in the community with no problems. Could have saved a lot of people a lot of time."

Think about that one for a second. Most cases take years to come to trial. Surely you're not suggesting that every accused person who keeps his or her nose clean while out on bail deserves a get-out-of-jail-free card after they're convicted.

I guess this means I can't wear a tube top and skirt this summer, never mind my 2 piece bikini.

factchecker: "He was stupid to have expressed flirtation or attire as mitigating factors in his sentencing."

Indeed, and if he felt obliged to give some sort of reason he could have mentioned the Mr Rhodes spent the last 6 years in the community with no problems. Could have saved a lot of people a lot of time.

@factchecker

"He was stupid to have expressed flirtation or attire as mitigating factors in his sentencing."

Exactly. Therein lies the problem. No transcript is required.

factchecker: "Curious how those who oppose mandatory minimum sentencing when it is proposed by a political party one dislikes but, become fervent advocates when it suits their ideologies."

Ain't that the truth! Of course, laws are meant to keep people you don't agree with under control.

Does anybody have a link to the trial transcripts?

To all you armchair lawyers and judges. Get a copy of the trial transcript and read it. All else is uninformed opinion based on optics and presumed transgressions.

This is not an issue of whether or not the judge thought he was guilty. The verdict was already determined. A judge is not required to present reasons for sentencing. He was stupid to have expressed flirtation or attire as mitigating factors in his sentencing. In fact, if in his sentencing he honestly believed he was applying the principles of sentencing set forth in the criminal code, he is not required to provide any further justification.

@Lawstudent
Please direct me to the section of the criminal code which requires minimum sentencing for sexual assault not involving a minor or a firearm, so that I may be enlightened.

Curious how those who oppose mandatory minimum sentencing when it is proposed by a political party one dislikes but, become fervent advocates when it suits their ideologies.


@multilis

I assume your comment is directed at me since you started off with my quote. I'm not sure what you're getting at with either point if they are responses to my quote but here goes anyway...

I agree that a woman can rape a man. I also think that false rape accusations are horrible and, at the very least, false accusers should be charged with mischief if the court finds that false accusations were deliberately made.

If your point is: do vindictive women exist? Absolutely.

Post Your Commentcomment icon

Comment
  • You have characters left

The Brandon Sun does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. Comments are moderated before publication. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.

letters

Make text: Larger | Smaller

Brandon Sun Business Directory
Sudden Surge: Flood of 2014
Opportunity Magazine — The Bakken
Why Not Minot?
Welcome to Winnipeg

Social Media