Canada: Family Court Judge Shows Up On A "Bondage" Site

Started by Captain Courageous, Oct 24, 2010, 06:11 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

Captain Courageous

Oct 24, 2010, 06:11 PM Last Edit: Oct 25, 2010, 12:42 AM by Captain Courageous

It makes sense that perverts preside over a justice system that persecutes men and wrecks families.

Winnipeg's elite was doing damage control Wednesday after a formal complaint against Lori Douglas, Associate Chief Justice of Manitoba in charge of Family Law. Alex Chapman, a Trinidadian immigrant, complained that in 2002, Douglas' husband Jack King pressured him to engage in depraved sexual acts with his wife. King was acting as Chapman's family lawyer at the time. Both King and Douglas were partners in an elite Winnipeg law firm.

King introduced Chapman to the web site, devoted to Black men torturing and raping white women. The site featured about 30 naked photos of Lori Douglas in various forms of bondage, in chains, with sex toys, and performing oral sex. "I wanted to puke," Chapman said. "The pictures were disgusting. I couldn't believe my lawyer was doing this to me." "It made me sick to my stomach, like I'm living in a country with no integrity," said Chapman. It makes sense that perverts preside over a justice system that persecutes men and wrecks families. According to CBC News, it wasn't the first time King sought out a Black man to have sex with his wife. An ad on the Darkcavern site shows nude photos of Douglas and seeks "smooth black male or Mexican" to join the couple during a trip to Cancun in Feb. 2002. The ad specifies that the man is wanted "to seduce her with an intent of getting her enmeshed in the submissive, multi-partner, interracial sex scene." "Husband will help and facilitate," it goes on to say.

Douglas' lawyer and many apologists argue disingenuously that she was unaware of her husband's solicitations. This is unlikely since she appeared on the web site, and met Chapman many times for lunch. Her husband emailed Chapman: "I think she certainly likes you..what do you think of the pics?" (Winnipeg Sun, p.3) Chapman said it felt "like a first date." Chapman kept silent until his legal business with King was finished. Then he hired another lawyer and took his complaint to King's law firm.

Chapman was paid $25,000 to sign a confidentiality agreement and King left the firm. However Douglas who was also a partner in the same firm, did not resign. She became a judge in 2005. Chapman says he broke the agreement because he fears new legal business may be compromised, and because of his sense of justice. "She should not be a judge. She has no integrity at all. She was a partner in the law firm."

Ironically, Douglas is a member of the Canadian Judicial Council, to whom the complaint is addressed. Only an Act of Parliament can remove Douglas, who is a federally-appointed judge.


After initial bold disclosures, the local media is downplaying this scandal. The Freemason-owned Winnipeg Free Press headlined the story: "Couple in Unwanted Spotlight." The subhead is: "Judge,lawyer spouse's past personal affairs exposed in man's complaint to regulators." Another FP story, "Prominent city jurist [is] the victim: legal experts" pivots on the lie that Douglas was unaware of her husband's activities. Bruce King, a managing partner at Pitblado LLP (no relation to Jack King,) said it's "unfortunate" Douglas's qualifications as a judge are being called into question.

He said there is no evidence she had any idea that her husband was posting nude photographs of her online when she was interviewing for her current posting as a judge. "From everything that has been seen or heard, Justice Douglas is a victim. There is no evidence to suggest otherwise," he said. Bryan Schwartz, a law professor at the University of Manitoba, agreed. He said the existence of embarrassing material on the Internet shouldn't disqualify somebody from being a judge if they're the innocent victim of a marital breach of trust.

"It double-victimizes you. People should have sympathy for you. It's a pretty reprehensible thing to do to a spouse," he said. "It sounds to me like people should be very slow to come to any judgments about this." "If people were doing something that wasn't unlawful and somebody breaches that and blabs it to the public, I don't see how that disqualifies you from being a judge." Local Ethics Professor Arthur Schafer told the CBC that a person's private activities have no bearing on ability to be a judge. He implies that anything goes in the private domain.

A columnist in "Canada's National Newspaper," the Globe and Mail makes the same argument. The Globe's story appears here. Out-of-town legal experts are less forgiving. Sabastien Grammon, Dean of Law at the University of Ottawa said a judge ultimately represented the ideal of justice and therefore the judge's conduct and image reflect on the conduct of the justice system as a whole. The judge is the embodiment of the justice system. He doubts Douglas would have been appointed had she disclosed activities that would bring dishonor on the office, as required. Prime Minister Stephen Harper refused to comment on the controversy Wednesday. "It would be completely inappropriate for the prime minister to comment on matters that are before the Canadian Judicial Council," he told reporters in Mirabel, Que.


In February of this year, Canadians were shocked to learn that Col. Russell Williams, the man in command of Canada's largest air force base, CFB Trenton, had been arrested for sexually assaulting and murdering three women. He also broke into hundreds of women's homes to finger their lingerie. This man flew the Prime Minister's private jet! This and the Douglas case are reminders that a vast satanic and criminal underground exists in parallel with respectable society. Many of our most "respectable" citizens may be criminals or perverts. This is what movies like Kevin Costner's "Mr. Brooks" is signaling. The title character was businessman-of-the-year and devoted family man by day; serial killer by night. A satanist by night, he killed for the thrill.

The fact that so many are surfacing to defend Lori Douglas indicates that the forces of darkness want to dominate. They want to mainstream sadism and perversion. Any exoneration of this woman would be tantamount to that. Douglas got her "thrill" by being a bondage submissive by night; she got promoted to Judge by being a feminist by day! At times like this when the mask of authority slips, we discover what a bizarre world we live in.

Captain Courageous

More, thanks to Henry Makow, PH.D. -


At some point the Manitoba Law Society is going to have to explain to the public why it stood idly by and allowed a Manitoba lawyer to be appointed to Court of Queen's Bench -- the family division, no less -- when it knew there were naked pictures of that lawyer posted on the Internet.

Law Society senior general counsel Kristin Dangerfield refused to reveal to the Winnipeg Sun this past week exactly when they knew about the online nude shots of Justice Lori Douglas. We found out last week that the Law Society was aware of the sordid dealings between Douglas' lawyer husband Jack King and his then-client Alex Chapman. Trouble is, they won't admit to us exactly how much they knew and when they knew it. However, we do know a few things.

If the Law Society had documentation of all aspects of King and Chapman's case when they investigated it back in 2004, it follows logically they knew a Manitoba lawyer who was about to become a judge had pornographic pictures of her all over the Internet. They just won't admit it. "We had some knowledge in 2003 of the existence of nude photos," Dangerfield said. "But I can't comment on when, or if, we had knowledge of whether there had been any posting of those photos on the Internet." Why? Because Dangerfield says that information has been sealed by the Court of Appeal. So what?

If that were truly a legal impediment, Dangerfield would have told me that when I first asked her Friday morning. Instead, she said she wasn't sure if the Law Society knew or not about the pics being online in 2005 and would have to get back to me. Two hours later she got back to me and took the new position that she simply can't comment on it at all. That might be understandable for a non-lawyer who had to seek legal advice before speaking publicly about an issue. But Dangerfield is a senior lawyer at a law society. That's just spin.

I also asked her if she thought it was the ethical and legal responsibility of a law society to ensure anyone who is becoming a judge be vetted properly, including weeding out people with online porn shots of themselves. Whether Douglas consented to having her pics on the Internet or not, or whether her demented husband did it behind her back, is a separate issue. But it was up to the Law Society to disclose this information.

"The steps that we took in this instance were ones that we thought were reasonable in the circumstances to protect the public," said Dangerfield. Really? Wow. Those are pretty weak steps, especially when a lawyer is about to become a judge in a family court. Douglas might not have consented to the pics going online, we simply don't know at this time.

But if the Law Society knew about online nude pics and didn't ensure that information was brought to the right authorities, they failed in their duty to uphold the integrity of the court. "I can't comment on what information may or may not have been provided to any vetting committee," said Dangerfield. "There's certainly a very extensive vetting process that takes place in the appointment of a judge." Obviously not extensive enough. As I've written before, this case will not bring the administration of justice into disrepute. That's already been done through our disastrous criminal justice system. But what it does show is government and the legal community have a pretty lousy process for vetting applicants who want to be judges. They have a lot of work to do to fix that.


Oct 24, 2010, 06:59 PM Last Edit: Oct 24, 2010, 07:04 PM by neoteny
Good for Mr. Chapman for taking the step of formally complaining about the behavior of the judge and her husband. Only by exposing the scams pulled by people in positions of public trust -- and associated power -- can we hope to lessen the incidence of such.
The spreading of information about the [quantum] system through the [classical] environment is ultimately responsible for the emergence of "objective reality." 

Wojciech Hubert Zurek: Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical


This thread is worthless without pics of the Honerable Judge Douglas being rogered by a huge chocolate dong.
You may sleep soundly at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence upon those who seek to harm you.

Captain Courageous

Judge's nude photos ordered returned
Husband files countersuit alleging privacy violated

CBC News
Lori Douglas has been temporarily relieved of her duties as a sitting justice of Manitoba's Court of Queen's Bench. (CBC) Sexually explicit pictures of a prominent Manitoba judge must be returned to her husband, a judge ruled Thursday.

Justice Joan McKelvey of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench ruled that Alex Chapman must immediately return "all documents, emails and photographs" ever sent to him by Winnipeg lawyer Jack King.

McKelvey's ruling also compels Chapman, of Winnipeg, to ask that any of the material held by someone else be returned. He is forbidden to distribute the material to anyone else.

The photos show King's wife, Justice Lori Douglas, associate chief justice of the family division of the Court of Queen's Bench, naked and in various forms of bondage, with sex toys and performing oral sex.

Read more:


Ah yes order the evidence returned so it can be destroyed.
You may sleep soundly at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence upon those who seek to harm you.

User 0

It's shocking how rabidly they are defending her.  What do you think the odds are that this Chapman fellow will end up dead?

Captain Courageous

I'd say they were good, unfortunately.

Captain Courageous

Of all the posts they could have assigned her, it had to be Family Court. I sure hope the Father's Rights guys in Canada pick up on this and run with it. Imagine Lori "B & D" Douglas telling you you're an unfit father, or convicting you of DV. Crikey!

Captain Courageous

Ooops! Sorry about that.

[I only checked as far back as September 2nd.]


Ooops! Sorry about that.

[I only checked as far back as September 2nd.]

no big deal.-just thought maybe these could be maybe merged?

Captain Courageous

I just sent a request to dr e, with a copy to you.


The reason I mentioned the photos in my first post is because I would like to see a man fucking a family court judge rather than the other way around for once. :)
You may sleep soundly at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence upon those who seek to harm you.


The reason I mentioned the photos in my first post is because I would like to see a man fucking a family court judge rather than the other way around for once. :)

those would be worth circulating wouldn't they

maybe a poster with a caption like the above in your post

Go Up