A Canadian judge sparked backlash after telling a sexual assault survivor it would be 'very unfair' to name her attacker, right before handing the perpetrator a lenient sentence.
Susan Gilbreath, 50, was attacked by her ex-boyfriend Frederick Moore, 54, on March 24, 2023, when he ripped off her pink pants, tried to penetrate her with his fingers, and shoved her tampon into her mouth, she told the Toronto Star.
Moore then chased her out of the unit and banged her head against the elevator wall and threatened to kill her.
'I saw complete evil that day,' she told the outlet.
As the court was gearing up to sentence Moore, Gilbreath decided she no longer wanted the publication ban on her name. The ban also protected Moore, as his name could not be revealed publicly as it would threaten her privacy.
But under Canadian law, there are very limited circumstances where a publication ban would not be lifted at the victim's request.
But Gilbreath said Superior Court Justice Gillian Roberts hesitated to do so, remarking that Moore had been quite candid when he admitted to the rape and suggested he might not have been without the protection of the publication ban.
'I'm concerned there's a basic unfairness in lifting the ban,' Roberts said, according to The Star. 'I feel like I'm ripping the carpet out from under him in a way that feels very unfair to me.'
Susan Gilbreath, 50, was attacked by Frederick Moore, 54, on March 24, 2023, when he ripped off her pink pants, tried to penetrate her with his fingers, and shoved her tampon into her mouth. He was sentenced to 3.5 years after admitting to the crime
Gilbreath was left completely shocked and 'numb' as she sat in the courtroom on October 23, she said.
'It was me, the victim, who kept on having to deal with [Moore's] power and control after the fact. Who are we protecting here? Are we protecting the victim? Or are we protecting the perpetrator?' Gilbreath told The Star.
The judge eventually called for a recess to allow her to review the Criminal Code, which would side with Gilbreath, allowing the ban to be removed. Lifting it allows Gilbreath to talk openly about her assault in any way, including through the press and social media.
But Roberts would leave Gilbreath in disbelief again when she only sentenced Moore to 3.5 years, with an eight-month credit for how long he had been incarcerated since his arrest.
The Crown had sought an eight-year prison sentence.
Roberts explained the low sentence by saying she was 'mindful that this is a very low sentence given the seriousness of the offense and the effect on the victim,' but said the case had 'unique circumstances.'
Part of this included how quickly Moore admitted to his crime, which allowed them to avoid a trial. She also said that Moore attending a rehabilitation facility and giving up alcohol after his arrests also played a part in her decision.
She also allowed Moore's immediate release while he's on bail pending appeal, leaving Gilbreath in fear.
The pink pantsuit she was wearing the day of her attack. When she asked the judge to lift the publication ban, which protected her and his names, the judge said it was 'unfair' to Moore because he had been candid in his testimony. It was later lifted after the judge reviewed the law
Read More
EXCLUSIVE I crashed MAGA's horniest singles party, where Trump's flop turned men on and women spilled secrets
'I am once again facing the possibility that his freedom will continue at the expense of my own sense of safety and peace,' she had written in a letter to the court before sentencing.
Moore was originally given 18 charges in relation to two incidents with his ex-girlfriend, including sexual assault and death threats. However, he was only convicted of aggravated sexual assault.
Moore is appealing, stating that he believes the case should have been thrown out over the police's handling of his cell phone. In June, Roberts ordered the Crown to pay Moore $50,000 for the delay.
The Crown, however, argued it should not be held responsible for the 'misdeeds of the police.'
Gilbreath has also filed a complaint with the Ministry of the Attorney General asking for a formal review of her case and its handling, she told The Star.
She said her biggest concerns are that most of Moore's charges were dropped, as well as the agreement between the Crown and Moore, where she claims a downplayed statement of facts was agreed upon without her knowledge.
Gilbreath was also told on the day of sentencing that Moore would not be required to wear GPS monitoring.
'If I knew he wasn't being monitored, I would have probably taken the advice of the family doctor and left the province,' she told The Star.
Gilbreath said she saw 'complete evil' the day her ex-boyfriend attacked her (Source: Facebook)
She has also put in a formal complaint with the Ministry of the Attorney General asking for a formal review of her case and its handling (Source: Facebook)
'Why is the victim on the run? When the person who has done this is walking free?'
During her victim impact statement, Gilbreath admitted the experience left her physically and mentally scarred. She also said she wanted to build a life without needing to look over her shoulder.
'I survived something that I never should have had to survive,' she told the outlet. 'I beat statistics that too many victims of intimate partner violence do not.
'I feel that because I survived, I'm more or less being punished. I really feel that if he killed me that day, that maybe the outcome would be different.'
Gilbreath told the Daily Mail she does not believe Moore's appeal will go through. And although she has a no contact order against Moore, the 'fear is always there.'
Source link
