Justice Rhys Morgan in Canada told Steven Cranley that he "cannot form a romantic relationship of an intimate nature with a female person" as part of his sentence for abusing his former lover. I’ll give the judge a ten for creativity, but I have to wonder whether he’d been downing shots of Yukon Jack prior to making his ruling. How the heck are they going to enforce this one?
I’m sure that many of us can cite examples of sexual relationships in which one side feels a much stronger sense of intimacy or love. In other cases, both sides may feel that their relationship is just a "fling" and remain friends even after the sex ends and they decide to move on. It also is possible for a non-sexual relationship to become close, and even obsessive to the point that it unhealthily interferes with a marriage or other aspects of life.
So if sex alone is not the benchmark, how is a court to decide whether this poor slob has a girlfriend, or is otherwise involved in an "intimate" relationship, and what objective standard can it possibly assign? Will Cranley be arrested if he is observed going to a movie every week with a lifelong female friend? What if after a year of not having a girlfriend, he breaks down and hires a stripper to come in for a lap dance? Will he have violated his sentence if he becomes so enthralled that he considers the stripper his "girlfriend" for the time she is there, even if there is no abuse?
Another interesting side-note to the case is that the judge did not appear to place any limitations on marriage. In theory, Cranley could find a mail-order bride on the internet and take out wedding papers while remaining in compliance with his sentence, putting the girl in a dangerous situation when she wants to leave after discovering that he’s a freak. I suppose it’s okay to expose a woman to a potential hazard so long as Cranley demonstrates some sort of acceptance towards traditional family values.
Article comments
1 - Dr Dreadful
This sounds like the sort of moralistic sentence a judge in Iran might come up with...
2 - Graham McKnight
An excellent read about an interesting subject. I would not be suprised should we discover a successful appeal fought against this ruling. The judge doesn't appear to be all that hot on the mechanics of social interaction.
3 - RJ
Good post, weird ruling. I got nothing else.
4 - Kevin
Why sentence him to jail for a first time offender? Why not just order him to seed counseling?
5 - Yabosi
Kevin,
There are several reasons to jail this guy. First, too many people who commit violent acts are just let back onto the streets with no real consequences.
Second, outside of a controlled environment, it's difficult at best to ensure that the offender actually goes to his therapy sessions. It's true that he could be jailed for not going to therapy but it's too easy for the offender to skip out on this type of sentence.
A minimum security jail is appropriate because it takes away his freedom with less exposure to hardened criminals than at a max or medium security facility, while proivding a controlled environment where his attendance at therapy can readily be monitored.
Yabosi
6 - STM
Sorry Yabosi, I'm with the judge on this one. If someone's too immature to form a relationship that doesn't involve abuse, perhaps a bit of time to mature might be beneficial.
Also, a jail sentence for a first offence can have the opposite effect, with offenders coming out angrier and more violen t than when they went in. Also, there are varying degrees of abuse when it comes to consideration by the courts.
A slap on the face might be regarded a lot differently to rape within a relationship, for instance. In his case, rightly or wrongly, his personality disorder is a mitigating factor.
He's already done four months inside, anyhow.
7 - Zedd
Yabosi
I see your point.
However I love the idea of this ruling. No need for counseling (eye roll). Just cut him right off!! Most adults seem to know if they are in a relationship with someone or not. I don't think that its that blurry. It could be problematic if someone wanted to make false accusations however.