Popular in Professional

Culture and Society

The City as a Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place

New York University Harvey Moltoch

Education

The Role of Education in Reducing Racial Inequality

University of Southern California Pedro A. Noguera

Law

Diversity and Social Mobility in the UK legal profession

Law Society I. Stephanie Boyce

Internet Law

The Law of AI for Good

University of San Diego Orly Lobel

Pharmacy

Cytotoxic Activity and Anti-Migratory Effect of Berberine-Phytantriol Liquid Crystalline on Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

University of Technology Sydney Kamal Dua

Human Rights Law

Transforming Restorative Justice for Transitional Settings

University of Nottingham Kerry Clamp

Education

Reckoning with Racism: Police, Judges, and the RDS Case

View more insights in Books - Professional - Law - Socio-legal Studies

View more figures from University of Ottawa

View the page of Constance Backhouse

Read the Study

Contance Backhouse tells about the story of the nation’s first black woman justice, Corrine Sparks, who heard the first case: a white Halifax cop choked a black teenager and charged him with assault and resisting arrest.

Image courtesy of interviewee. January 24, 2024

Generating Workspace

Export as PDF

This video video discusses the significant RDS case from 1994 in Canada, centering on the issues of racism within the legal system and the experiences of marginalized communities. The case involved a black teenager, Rodney, who was accused of assaulting a white police officer while trying to intervene in the arrest of his cousin. The trial was judged by Canada's first black female judge, Justice Sparks, who ultimately acquitted Rodney based on the lack of evidence against him and made comments regarding the tendency of police to overreact to non-white youth.

The case shifted focus to accusations of racial bias against Judge Sparks herself, igniting discussions about race and bias within the judiciary. After appeals, a panel of white judges criticized her ruling, emphasizing perceived anti-white bias in her comments, leading to a new trial order before a different judge. Throughout this process, the systemic racism present in the legal system and broader society in Canada is highlighted, showcasing the backlash faced by Justice Sparks.

Despite challenges, Rodney found relief and became an advocate in his community, while Judge Sparks faced professional repercussions and increased isolation. Her legacy evolved as she became an icon in the black community, advocating for diversity in the judiciary. This video video concludes with a call for recognizing the historical context of racism in Canada and the importance of bringing diverse lived experiences into the judicial process to create a more equitable legal system.

Language:

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.375 --> 00:02.545
Well, I was very interested in, history

00:02.605 --> 00:06.425
of racism in Canada, specifically within the law

00:07.165 --> 00:08.545
and among Canadian judges.

00:09.085 --> 00:13.705
And, this RDS case, named the, the initials named

00:13.705 --> 00:18.505
after the teenager who was being prosecuted, was heard

00:18.765 --> 00:22.865
by Canada's first black female judge in Nova Scotia

00:22.865 --> 00:23.945
in 1994.

00:24.875 --> 00:28.425
Ironically, it was also the first case

00:29.235 --> 00:32.665
where a charge of race bias against a judge

00:33.205 --> 00:34.505
was heard by our top court.

00:34.925 --> 00:37.425
So I think it's a significant case in terms

00:37.745 --> 00:42.185
of thinking about racism and, and what constitutes bias.

00:42.845 --> 00:45.105
Canada as a nation perceives itself

00:45.165 --> 00:46.905
as largely without racism.

00:48.365 --> 00:51.065
Um, and so the evidence is often buried.

00:51.805 --> 00:53.025
Uh, you look through legal records,

00:53.025 --> 00:54.225
there's no mention of race.

00:54.725 --> 00:57.865
Um, people are shocked when you point out

00:57.865 --> 00:59.585
that there is a long history of racism.

01:00.365 --> 01:03.705
Um, so they're both obvious and hidden sources.

01:04.285 --> 01:07.185
Um, I began with the written records from the case, I,

01:07.375 --> 01:09.905
it's quite voluminous written records,

01:10.645 --> 01:13.505
and then I wanted to know about all the people involved,

01:13.845 --> 01:18.025
the accused, the police officer, the lawyers, the judges,

01:18.565 --> 01:19.945
the reporters who covered it.

01:20.445 --> 01:22.905
So I did, many of them were still alive.

01:23.365 --> 01:27.945
And, so I did 97 oral history interviews with all

01:27.945 --> 01:29.665
of them that I could locate.

01:30.245 --> 01:34.865
And, I also did quite a number of interviews

01:34.975 --> 01:39.225
with, anti-racist activists in the,

01:39.605 --> 01:41.545
in the community in Nova Scotia.

01:42.125 --> 01:43.305
And I looked at,

01:43.315 --> 01:45.185
everything I could find about the history

01:45.185 --> 01:47.625
of the black population in Nova Scotia.

01:48.045 --> 01:49.345
It is one of our oldest

01:49.485 --> 01:52.065
and largest communities in Canada, mostly

01:52.935 --> 01:54.905
unknown in the rest of Canada.

01:55.565 --> 01:58.105
Uh, they have a 400 year history in Nova Scotia,

01:58.565 --> 02:02.785
and they have a long experience with, surviving racism

02:03.405 --> 02:04.825
and, resisting racism.

02:05.495 --> 02:09.145
What happened in 1994 was that a white police officer

02:10.465 --> 02:13.425
handcuffed, a black teenager boy, black teen boy,

02:13.425 --> 02:15.345
placed him in a choke hold

02:15.965 --> 02:18.505
and charged him for intervening in his

02:18.505 --> 02:19.745
young cousin's arrest.

02:21.205 --> 02:25.465
On the appeal of the, the case, for some reason,

02:25.685 --> 02:29.425
the focus shifted from racist police practices

02:30.365 --> 02:32.665
to do judicial race bias.

02:33.725 --> 02:36.465
And, the irony, of course, is that the judge

02:36.465 --> 02:40.465
who was under attack was Canada's first black female judge

02:40.965 --> 02:43.625
who was accused of race bias against whites.

02:45.085 --> 02:48.025
Um, and she was at the center of the storm

02:48.055 --> 02:52.985
because she was appointed at age 34 to be the

02:53.495 --> 02:56.705
Nova Scotia's first black judge in the family court,

02:56.925 --> 02:58.545
and Canada's first black female

02:58.675 --> 02:59.675
Judge.

02:59.905 --> 03:04.135
At the trial, a white police officer testified

03:04.135 --> 03:06.775
that he had warned the black teenager

03:06.915 --> 03:10.655
to stay away from the scene of the arrest, but Rodney

03:11.035 --> 03:14.015
and the accused us giving a license to use his first name,

03:14.115 --> 03:17.735
Rodney rode his bicycle into the officer's leg, according

03:17.995 --> 03:21.415
to the officer, and shoved him with his hands and shoulders.

03:22.155 --> 03:25.495
Um, Rodney in contrast, testified

03:25.495 --> 03:28.255
that he had never personally touched the officer

03:29.205 --> 03:32.175
that he was just trying to speak with his young cousin

03:32.395 --> 03:33.815
who was in handcuffs

03:34.635 --> 03:37.535
and asked his cousin whether he wanted

03:37.535 --> 03:38.855
Rodney to call his mother.

03:39.955 --> 03:42.055
Uh, judge Sparks that the found

03:42.055 --> 03:44.895
that the prosecution had not proven the case

03:44.895 --> 03:46.095
beyond a reasonable doubt.

03:47.075 --> 03:51.935
And she stated in open court that officers had been known

03:52.235 --> 03:56.335
to overreact, particularly when dealing

03:56.405 --> 03:57.735
with non-white youth,

03:59.585 --> 04:03.765
and that this officer had probably overreacted in keeping

04:03.875 --> 04:06.685
with the prevalent attitude of the day.

04:07.145 --> 04:08.285
And she acquitted Rodney.

04:09.985 --> 04:13.565
Uh, now she had graduated from Dalhousie Law School in 1979

04:13.905 --> 04:16.725
in a class with only two other black students,

04:17.505 --> 04:18.925
and she was the only black woman,

04:20.025 --> 04:22.125
and she was appointed in 1987,

04:22.265 --> 04:24.205
the only black female judge in Canada.

04:25.265 --> 04:28.685
And she had already on the bench faced isolation,

04:28.955 --> 04:33.565
disparagement and disrespect as a black judge,

04:34.565 --> 04:37.205
a newcomer to the Nova Scotia judiciary.

04:37.825 --> 04:40.885
But she was an icon within the black community.

04:42.105 --> 04:46.565
Um, so her ruling was appealed through a series

04:46.625 --> 04:47.965
of courts of appeal.

04:48.875 --> 04:52.845
Five white Nova Scotia judges reviewed the case

04:53.545 --> 04:57.085
and with one dissent, each of them critiqued her ruling.

04:58.425 --> 05:00.125
And they said that her comments were an

05:00.125 --> 05:02.685
unfortunate overgeneralization.

05:03.345 --> 05:06.365
She was wrong to base her decision on matters not in

05:06.485 --> 05:08.765
evidence, and they ultimately included

05:08.765 --> 05:11.445
that There was evidence of reasonable apprehension,

05:11.525 --> 05:12.925
apprehension of bias.

05:13.275 --> 05:16.485
They ordered the case to go back for a new trial in front

05:16.485 --> 05:19.885
of a different judge, which would've meant a white judge

05:20.475 --> 05:23.005
because she was the only black judge in the province.

05:24.355 --> 05:26.965
Fortunately for everyone, Rocky Jones,

05:27.185 --> 05:30.725
who was the defense lawyer, was, very,

05:30.725 --> 05:32.365
very well known throughout Canada.

05:32.905 --> 05:37.085
He was, often described as Canada's Black Panther,

05:38.585 --> 05:41.805
and he pulled together resources from Legal Aid,

05:42.295 --> 05:44.125
which is never well funded in Canada.

05:44.865 --> 05:48.645
Uh, he got support from Dalhousie Law School's,

05:49.595 --> 05:51.325
faculty and student body,

05:51.825 --> 05:55.045
and he got the black community to stand behind Judge Sparks,

05:55.105 --> 05:57.125
and he got the case taken up all the way, way

05:57.125 --> 05:58.325
to the Supreme Court of Canada.

05:59.265 --> 06:02.205
And in terms of the context, again,

06:02.485 --> 06:03.605
Canadians don't know this,

06:04.385 --> 06:07.765
but there was a very long history of economic, political,

06:07.945 --> 06:11.685
social discrimination against blacks in Nova Scotia,

06:12.725 --> 06:17.715
a history of race, riots, police, racial profiling,

06:18.375 --> 06:21.395
police harassment and violence against blacks.

06:22.215 --> 06:25.355
Uh, several years before this case, there had been a very,

06:25.695 --> 06:29.995
significant royal inquiry, Royal Commission

06:29.995 --> 06:33.555
of Canada inquiry against,

06:33.895 --> 06:37.195
the wrongful conviction of Donald Marshall Jr.

06:37.975 --> 06:40.955
Who was an indigenous man who'd been wrongfully convicted

06:40.955 --> 06:42.555
for a murder he did not commit.

06:43.655 --> 06:47.115
And that Royal Commission had produced voluminous findings

06:47.305 --> 06:50.395
regarding systemic racism against both blacks

06:50.535 --> 06:52.555
and in indigenous communities in

06:52.775 --> 06:54.035
the criminal justice system.

06:54.575 --> 06:58.155
So it's hard not to see that record as a clear basis

06:58.455 --> 07:00.195
for Judge Spark's remarks,

07:00.775 --> 07:03.675
but again, white Canadians don't know anything

07:03.675 --> 07:04.915
about this history.

07:05.095 --> 07:10.085
And so, I think, the white judges were shocked.

07:10.615 --> 07:13.445
White reporters who covered the case were shocked.

07:14.265 --> 07:16.525
And ultimately, when it got to the Supreme Court of Canada,

07:16.865 --> 07:20.365
the majority reluctantly upheld the acquittal.

07:20.705 --> 07:22.845
But they mostly saw evidence

07:22.865 --> 07:25.565
of anti-white bias in Judge Parks's words,

07:25.705 --> 07:29.645
and they critiqued her quite severely for what she had said.

07:31.095 --> 07:34.275
The only ray of hope, as I read the decision,

07:34.455 --> 07:37.315
it was a concurring judgment by

07:38.175 --> 07:40.995
two white women at the Supreme Court of Canada.

07:41.065 --> 07:42.955
They were the only women on the bench

07:43.615 --> 07:45.875
who supported Judge Sparks as comments

07:47.135 --> 07:49.755
and insisted that judges should be entitled

07:49.815 --> 07:51.995
to bring their own experience into their

07:51.995 --> 07:53.035
assessment of evidence.

07:54.055 --> 07:57.835
And it's noteworthy that it was the two women who recognized

07:57.835 --> 08:01.395
that both of whom had faced similar allegations of bias

08:02.425 --> 08:03.445
on a basis of gender.

08:05.955 --> 08:09.615
Um, so I think that sums up a a bit about the case.

08:09.645 --> 08:13.335
Obviously, it's, it's a, a specter for me

08:13.555 --> 08:17.015
of a long line of white judges,

08:18.045 --> 08:22.135
reviewing the remarks of the sole black female judge

08:22.805 --> 08:25.735
with complete lack of understanding of the history

08:25.755 --> 08:27.815
and the experience of the black community.

08:28.335 --> 08:32.375
I think most significant legal decisions both

08:33.195 --> 08:37.255
can be used to shore up racism and to resist.

08:37.595 --> 08:38.975
And I think that's what happened here.

08:39.995 --> 08:42.895
Um, I think RDS exemplified

08:43.975 --> 08:47.735
a concerted effort to reign in one

08:47.735 --> 08:51.925
of Canada's first racialized judges to send a message

08:52.345 --> 08:56.285
to her and those who might follow, not to speak of racism,

08:57.505 --> 09:00.405
not to call out evidence of racist policing

09:00.665 --> 09:03.285
or racist prosecution or racist judgments.

09:04.665 --> 09:05.925
So at the core,

09:06.195 --> 09:10.045
however, the case examined the concept of objectivity

09:11.525 --> 09:14.025
and what passes for even evenhandedness

09:14.285 --> 09:18.185
or common sense in law and society.

09:19.085 --> 09:22.305
Um, what you can see from it is that if you

09:22.895 --> 09:27.825
make an accusation of white racism, it provokes

09:28.435 --> 09:33.185
steep resistance demands for detailed proof

09:33.445 --> 09:36.745
beyond a reasonable doubt that this set of white actors,

09:37.355 --> 09:40.785
these events demonstrate intentional bias

09:41.335 --> 09:44.185
against this specific black victim.

09:44.725 --> 09:47.865
And that there is no other plausible explanation

09:48.975 --> 09:51.825
that stands for common sense still in Canada.

09:53.005 --> 09:54.785
But when there are claims

09:55.215 --> 09:59.345
that blacks are biased against whites, by contrast,

10:00.925 --> 10:04.025
it promotes immediate white fragility.

10:04.165 --> 10:05.385
To use the famous phrase,

10:06.415 --> 10:08.425
there's always another explanation.

10:09.095 --> 10:12.785
There's always some insistence that there's no bad intent.

10:13.805 --> 10:15.065
Uh, there's always a concern

10:15.065 --> 10:18.425
that blacks are overreacting when they call out whites

10:18.425 --> 10:21.265
as racist, that blacks are too sensitive

10:21.535 --> 10:24.985
that they misapprehend the situation, so they won't take

10:25.685 --> 10:29.585
any evidence really of, racism against whites.

10:29.655 --> 10:32.905
Seriously, that's the, the reaction. It's a double standard.

10:34.325 --> 10:37.665
Um, so it's, what it does,

10:37.985 --> 10:40.945
I think is it undermines our notion

10:40.965 --> 10:43.185
of objectivity as common sense.

10:44.165 --> 10:48.635
You have to ask yourself who objectivity,

10:49.635 --> 10:52.665
whose life experience is weighing in here.

10:53.845 --> 10:58.105
Um, and there is I think, a marked difference depending on

10:58.565 --> 11:01.425
who the judge is and what the case is about.

11:02.405 --> 11:04.335
There's mixed results.

11:05.995 --> 11:09.095
Um, I mean, on some level,

11:10.315 --> 11:14.915
this should have been a ringing endorsement of black judges,

11:15.125 --> 11:18.715
indigenous judges, Asian judges capacity

11:19.135 --> 11:20.315
to rule honestly

11:20.375 --> 11:23.595
and openly about the racism that they have lived

11:23.815 --> 11:26.235
and understand better than whites do.

11:27.575 --> 11:31.195
Um, we didn't get there in this case.

11:31.375 --> 11:33.755
The, the reaction from the white judges

11:34.015 --> 11:36.555
who heard the appeals were very, was very mixed.

11:37.455 --> 11:39.475
Um, but there were some good things that came out of this.

11:40.175 --> 11:43.755
Um, Rodney, the young teen at the center

11:43.775 --> 11:46.515
of this was obviously greatly relieved that

11:46.515 --> 11:50.155
after three years that the case, spiraled up

11:50.155 --> 11:52.715
to the top court, he was actually acquitted,

11:53.065 --> 11:54.405
his acquittal was supported.

11:54.705 --> 11:56.005
He went back to university

11:56.985 --> 12:00.525
and took a job working for a nonprofit organization

12:00.675 --> 12:04.925
that assists black youth, to set up in businesses.

12:05.465 --> 12:08.885
And he's become a leader in the Black Halifax community.

12:10.705 --> 12:12.845
The sad side of this is

12:12.845 --> 12:16.765
that Judge Sparks paid a huge price in her own career,

12:18.075 --> 12:20.485
whereas she had been previously isolated

12:21.345 --> 12:23.045
within the legal community

12:23.105 --> 12:27.635
and, isolated from other white judges

12:27.825 --> 12:29.115
that intensified.

12:30.775 --> 12:34.315
And the lesson was not lost on minority judges across

12:34.315 --> 12:37.995
Canada, many of whom told me that they were anxious,

12:39.135 --> 12:42.995
watching the professional repercussions,

12:43.145 --> 12:45.675
land on Judge Sparks,

12:45.935 --> 12:50.435
and that it was, a scary story for them that

12:50.495 --> 12:52.595
to hold their tongues instead

12:52.595 --> 12:55.035
of calling out racism in open court.

12:56.095 --> 12:59.955
Um, the good part is that her community rallied in support

13:00.055 --> 13:01.275
of Judge Sparks

13:02.015 --> 13:04.995
and, for the 30th anniversary of her

13:05.675 --> 13:10.275
judicial appointment, there was a big celebration,

13:10.325 --> 13:12.795
where tributes were paid by black lawyers

13:12.895 --> 13:15.355
and judges from across Canada and the us.

13:16.295 --> 13:18.475
So, her standing

13:18.575 --> 13:23.315
as an icon within the black community has only accentuated,

13:24.055 --> 13:26.475
and I think that's a, for all

13:26.635 --> 13:28.755
that this has cost her in terms of her life

13:28.755 --> 13:31.755
and career, I think that's only fair,

13:31.815 --> 13:34.675
for Canadians concerned about reducing racism.

13:36.595 --> 13:39.555
I would hope that the RDDS case will teach us

13:40.345 --> 13:42.355
that our history is filled with discrimination

13:43.455 --> 13:46.715
and that hiding behind misperceptions

13:47.345 --> 13:50.075
that we live in a country that is racially neutral

13:51.065 --> 13:54.875
will do nothing to improve upon the historical record

13:55.015 --> 13:56.155
as we move into the future.

13:57.335 --> 14:01.155
And I think the case raises very critical questions about

14:01.265 --> 14:02.555
what we want from our judges

14:04.825 --> 14:06.445
as we begin efforts

14:06.625 --> 14:11.325
and we have begun to racially diversify our judiciary.

14:12.905 --> 14:14.525
We would want, I would hope

14:14.795 --> 14:17.685
that our newcomers will bring lived experiences

14:17.785 --> 14:19.045
and knowledge into the courtrooms,

14:19.865 --> 14:23.485
and that they will rule on the true realities

14:23.825 --> 14:25.245
of Canadian society.

14:26.545 --> 14:29.445
And we should expect that our judging will begin

14:29.445 --> 14:31.715
to look different and

14:31.715 --> 14:34.355
that it will unveil unpleasant dimensions

14:34.535 --> 14:35.555
of our legal system.

14:36.575 --> 14:39.955
And that without that, we will not be able to move forward

14:40.775 --> 14:44.115
in terms of improving the justice that we deliver

14:44.115 --> 14:45.195
through our legal system.

00:00 - Well, I was very interested in, history of racism in Canada, specifically within the law and among Canadian judges. And, this RDS case, named the, the initials named after the teenager who was being prosecuted, was heard by Canada's first black female judge in Nova Scotia

00:22 - in 1994. Ironically, it was also the first case where a charge of race bias against a judge was heard by our top court. So I think it's a significant case in terms of thinking about racism and, and what constitutes bias. Canada as a nation perceives itself as largely without racism. and so the evidence is often buried. you look through legal records,

00:53 - there's no mention of race. people are shocked when you point out that there is a long history of racism. so they're both obvious and hidden sources. I began with the written records from the case, I, it's quite voluminous written records, and then I wanted to know about all the people involved, the accused, the police officer, the lawyers, the judges, the reporters who covered it. So I did, many of them were still alive.

01:23 - And, so I did 97 oral history interviews with all of them that I could locate. And, I also did quite a number of interviews with, anti-racist activists in the, in the community in Nova Scotia. And I looked at, everything I could find about the history of the black population in Nova Scotia. It is one of our oldest and largest communities in Canada, mostly

01:52 - unknown in the rest of Canada. they have a 400 year history in Nova Scotia, and they have a long experience with, surviving racism and, resisting racism. What happened in 1994 was that a white police officer handcuffed, a black teenager boy, black teen boy, placed him in a choke hold and charged him for intervening in his young cousin's arrest. On the appeal of the, the case, for some reason,

02:25 - the focus shifted from racist police practices to do judicial race bias. And, the irony, of course, is that the judge who was under attack was Canada's first black female judge who was accused of race bias against whites. and she was at the center of the storm because she was appointed at age 34 to be the Nova Scotia's first black judge in the family court, and Canada's first black female Judge.

02:59 - At the trial, a white police officer testified that he had warned the black teenager to stay away from the scene of the arrest, but Rodney and the accused us giving a license to use his first name, Rodney rode his bicycle into the officer's leg, according to the officer, and shoved him with his hands and shoulders. Rodney in contrast, testified that he had never personally touched the officer that he was just trying to speak with his young cousin who was in handcuffs

03:34 - and asked his cousin whether he wanted Rodney to call his mother. judge Sparks that the found that the prosecution had not proven the case beyond a reasonable doubt. And she stated in open court that officers had been known to overreact, particularly when dealing with non-white youth, and that this officer had probably overreacted in keeping with the prevalent attitude of the day.

04:07 - And she acquitted Rodney. now she had graduated from Dalhousie Law School in 1979 in a class with only two other black students, and she was the only black woman, and she was appointed in 1987, the only black female judge in Canada. And she had already on the bench faced isolation, disparagement and disrespect as a black judge, a newcomer to the Nova Scotia judiciary. But she was an icon within the black community.

04:42 - so her ruling was appealed through a series of courts of appeal. Five white Nova Scotia judges reviewed the case and with one dissent, each of them critiqued her ruling. And they said that her comments were an unfortunate overgeneralization. She was wrong to base her decision on matters not in evidence, and they ultimately included that There was evidence of reasonable apprehension, apprehension of bias.

05:13 - They ordered the case to go back for a new trial in front of a different judge, which would've meant a white judge because she was the only black judge in the province. Fortunately for everyone, Rocky Jones, who was the defense lawyer, was, very, very well known throughout Canada. He was, often described as Canada's Black Panther, and he pulled together resources from Legal Aid, which is never well funded in Canada. he got support from Dalhousie Law School's,

05:49 - faculty and student body, and he got the black community to stand behind Judge Sparks, and he got the case taken up all the way, way to the Supreme Court of Canada. And in terms of the context, again, Canadians don't know this, but there was a very long history of economic, political, social discrimination against blacks in Nova Scotia, a history of race, riots, police, racial profiling, police harassment and violence against blacks.

06:22 - several years before this case, there had been a very, significant royal inquiry, Royal Commission of Canada inquiry against, the wrongful conviction of Donald Marshall Jr. Who was an indigenous man who'd been wrongfully convicted for a murder he did not commit. And that Royal Commission had produced voluminous findings regarding systemic racism against both blacks and in indigenous communities in the criminal justice system.

06:54 - So it's hard not to see that record as a clear basis for Judge Spark's remarks, but again, white Canadians don't know anything about this history. And so, I think, the white judges were shocked. White reporters who covered the case were shocked. And ultimately, when it got to the Supreme Court of Canada, the majority reluctantly upheld the acquittal. But they mostly saw evidence of anti-white bias in Judge Parks's words,

07:25 - and they critiqued her quite severely for what she had said. The only ray of hope, as I read the decision, it was a concurring judgment by two white women at the Supreme Court of Canada. They were the only women on the bench who supported Judge Sparks as comments and insisted that judges should be entitled to bring their own experience into their assessment of evidence. And it's noteworthy that it was the two women who recognized

07:57 - that both of whom had faced similar allegations of bias on a basis of gender. so I think that sums up a a bit about the case. Obviously, it's, it's a, a specter for me of a long line of white judges, reviewing the remarks of the sole black female judge with complete lack of understanding of the history and the experience of the black community. I think most significant legal decisions both can be used to shore up racism and to resist.

08:37 - And I think that's what happened here. I think RDS exemplified a concerted effort to reign in one of Canada's first racialized judges to send a message to her and those who might follow, not to speak of racism, not to call out evidence of racist policing or racist prosecution or racist judgments. So at the core, however, the case examined the concept of objectivity and what passes for even evenhandedness

09:14 - or common sense in law and society. what you can see from it is that if you make an accusation of white racism, it provokes steep resistance demands for detailed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that this set of white actors, these events demonstrate intentional bias against this specific black victim. And that there is no other plausible explanation that stands for common sense still in Canada. But when there are claims

09:55 - that blacks are biased against whites, by contrast, it promotes immediate white fragility. To use the famous phrase, there's always another explanation. There's always some insistence that there's no bad intent. there's always a concern that blacks are overreacting when they call out whites as racist, that blacks are too sensitive that they misapprehend the situation, so they won't take any evidence really of, racism against whites.

10:29 - Seriously, that's the, the reaction. It's a double standard. so it's, what it does, I think is it undermines our notion of objectivity as common sense. You have to ask yourself who objectivity, whose life experience is weighing in here. and there is I think, a marked difference depending on who the judge is and what the case is about. There's mixed results. I mean, on some level,

11:10 - this should have been a ringing endorsement of black judges, indigenous judges, Asian judges capacity to rule honestly and openly about the racism that they have lived and understand better than whites do. we didn't get there in this case. The, the reaction from the white judges who heard the appeals were very, was very mixed. but there were some good things that came out of this. Rodney, the young teen at the center

11:43 - of this was obviously greatly relieved that after three years that the case, spiraled up to the top court, he was actually acquitted, his acquittal was supported. He went back to university and took a job working for a nonprofit organization that assists black youth, to set up in businesses. And he's become a leader in the Black Halifax community. The sad side of this is that Judge Sparks paid a huge price in her own career,

12:18 - whereas she had been previously isolated within the legal community and, isolated from other white judges that intensified. And the lesson was not lost on minority judges across Canada, many of whom told me that they were anxious, watching the professional repercussions, land on Judge Sparks, and that it was, a scary story for them that to hold their tongues instead

12:52 - of calling out racism in open court. the good part is that her community rallied in support of Judge Sparks and, for the 30th anniversary of her judicial appointment, there was a big celebration, where tributes were paid by black lawyers and judges from across Canada and the us. So, her standing as an icon within the black community has only accentuated, and I think that's a, for all

13:26 - that this has cost her in terms of her life and career, I think that's only fair, for Canadians concerned about reducing racism. I would hope that the RDDS case will teach us that our history is filled with discrimination and that hiding behind misperceptions that we live in a country that is racially neutral will do nothing to improve upon the historical record as we move into the future. And I think the case raises very critical questions about

14:01 - what we want from our judges as we begin efforts and we have begun to racially diversify our judiciary. We would want, I would hope that our newcomers will bring lived experiences and knowledge into the courtrooms, and that they will rule on the true realities of Canadian society. And we should expect that our judging will begin to look different and

14:31 - that it will unveil unpleasant dimensions of our legal system. And that without that, we will not be able to move forward in terms of improving the justice that we deliver through our legal system.

Faculti AI can make mistakes