Man at centre of naked judge case was a sex performer: lawyer

WINNIPEG – A man who complained about being shocked and traumatized by nude Internet photos of a Manitoba judge was no stranger to cyber sex and was willing to perform sex online for money, the judge’s lawyer alleges.

by Steve Lambert, The Canadian Press

WINNIPEG – A man who complained about being shocked and traumatized by nude Internet photos of a Manitoba judge was no stranger to cyber sex and was willing to perform sex online for money, the judge’s lawyer alleges.

Alex Chapman, whose sexual harassment complaint sparked an inquiry that could cost Justice Lori Douglas her job, has his own online sex history, claims an affidavit filed by Sarah Whitmore. The document was filed in Federal Court as part of an application to quash a Canadian Judicial Council inquiry into Douglas’s actions.

Whitmore says in her affidavit that evidence, which has not been heard at the inquiry, “showed Chapman had signed up to be an online sex performer: He would perform sex acts in front of a video camera on the Internet in front of strangers who paid to watch.”

There is also evidence that Chapman had pornographic images on his computer and had engaged in group sex with “three or four women at a time,” Whitmore said.

Chapman’s sexual past calls into question his credibility, Whitmore said, because he claimed to have been traumatized by seeing sexually explicit photos of Douglas and by being asked by her husband to have sex with her.

“All of this evidence was relevant to the lack of credibility of Chapman’s story of harassment.”

The allegations in the affidavit have not been proven in court.

Chapman referred questions Monday to his lawyer, Rocco Galati. Galati said he had not yet seen Whitmore’s affidavit.

The contents of the affidavit are the latest in a string of tawdry sex accusations that have erupted since Chapman complained to the Canadian Judicial Council in 2010 about his dealings with the judge’s husband seven years earlier.

In 2003, Douglas was a family law lawyer along with her husband, Jack King. King had uploaded sexually explicit photos of Douglas to a website dedicated to interracial sex and said his wife was looking for a black partner. He also emailed photos to Chapman, who is black, and who King had represented in a divorce. He asked Chapman to have sex with Douglas.

Chapman complained to King’s law firm and King settled the matter within weeks by paying Chapman $25,000 to return all the photos and to never discuss the matter. Chapman broke that deal in 2010 and complained to the judicial council, saying Douglas was part of the sexual harassment.

The inquiry, which has been suspended amid court challenges and allegations of unfairness, is also examining whether Douglas failed to disclose the matter when she was appointed a judge in 2005 and whether the very existence of the photos disqualifies her from continuing as a judge.

Douglas, who rose to become associate chief justice of the Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench, has denied all the allegations. She and King have said he acted alone without her knowledge and was suffering from depression at the time.

The five-member panel overseeing the inquiry began hearings in the summer, but quickly ran into unfairness complaints from some of the lawyers involved. Chapman was the first witness to testify and Sheila Block, Douglas’s principal lawyer, was prevented by the panel from cross-examining him about his sexual past.

That decision is one reason why Douglas’s lawyers have accused the panel of bias. They have asked the Federal Court of Canada to halt the inquiry. There is no word on when the application will be heard.

Another wrench was thrown into the inquiry last month, when Guy Pratte, the independent lawyer leading the inquiry, suddenly resigned. Pratte was upset that the panel had another lawyer to cross-examine witnesses on its behalf. The panel cannot sit in judgment of the case while also participating and grilling witnesses, he said.

Galati said he will be fighting Douglas’s lawyers attempts to halt the inquiry, in part because Chapman was not named as a respondent.

“I’m moving to quash the application on that basis and on the basis that the application, and the manner in which they’re proceeding, is an abuse of process.”




Browse

Man at centre of naked judge case was a sex performer: lawyer

  1. So if you rape a hooker it’s okay? All sexual workers in Canada are open to be harassed by their lawyers because they perform sexually? The victim is a man so it’s okay?

    Since Canadian law is partly based on precedence, they might as well tread carefully. Tomorrow it’s your mother, sister, daughter, son, brother or father who are going to be positioned for sex by their lawyer and it will be okay if they are not a virgin.

    • That’s a really good point. The emphasis, by the media, seems to be changing, towards accusing Chapman of wrongdoing instead of the person who is the subject of the inquiry – Lori Douglas.

  2. This will give defence lawyers a great boost. Next time some fellow is accused of sexual harrassment or rape, they should be able to broadcast the accuser’s sexual history all over the national media to determine whether the accuser should have been traumatized by the alleged incident or not. If the public determines that the accuser’s past is less than stellar, this would obviously indicate that the accusation has no merit.

    • Please note, Chapman is specifically saying that seeing the photos traumatized him. That is the sole and sum total of his complaint. He also got paid 25k and an apology from the husband who had sent the photos when he made his complaint known — then went and decided that wasn’t good enough and he was going to sue anyway.

      Also note that none of this is a criminal trial. This is all civil. That is, Chapman trying to get even more money.

      This is a *hell* of a lot different from a rape or sexual harassment charge, which are criminal charges. This was a mistake by a person who, yes, should have known better, but once he realized it was a mistake, went to some distance to try to make up for it.

      • Chapman also said there were repercussions from that, but his comments got twisted by the people reporting them because they didn’t understand. Just as women who complained about sexual harassement had their lives changed forever – loss of career, people suspicious of them and harassing them, so has this happened for Chapman.
        These were powerful lawyers, protected by their fellow legal community. It can make it hard to get a lawyer after that. And then there is the emotional harm, of someone who is male, dominant, probably traditional like his countrymen, but perhaps not in his country of origin, I don’t know. See my blog, Sue’s Views on the News, for more on this complex matter.
        This inquiry is about Lori Douglas, by the way, and whether she should have become a judge or should continue as one.

  3. It doesnt matter what he is-King contacted Him for services; both he and his wife have behaviours unbecoming to her profession, and have become a sick joke.

    • Curious. Judges aren’t allowed to have sex lives? Is that in the job description somewhere? Or are the only allowed to have sex lives that meet your puritanical standards?

      The only thing unbecoming is that it’s become a public and messy affair, and for that blame Chapman, not the couple.

      • Yes, lawyers and judges can have private sex lives, but not by pressuring their clients to join in, and not by posting pics on the internet. Google ‘Alex Chapman, sex performer; Lori Douglas, sexual wallflower?’

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *