R. v. Seaboyer; R. v. Gayme - SCC Cas

Contents:

• R. V. SEABOYER AND R. V. GAYME (1987, 1991)
• PERATN OF THE RAPE SHIELD: R. V. SEABOYER AND R. V. GAYME THE ONTAR COURT OF APPEAL
• R. V. SEABOYER AND GAYME, (1991) 48 O.A.C. 81 (SCC)
• FEMIST ARGUMENTATN BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA R. V. SEABOYER; R. V. GAYME: THE SOUND OF ONE HAND CLAPPG

R. V. SEABOYER AND R. V. GAYME (1987, 1991)

Gayme. Gayme were acced of sexual asslt, and charged unr the Crimal Co. Gayme sought to troduce evince about the sexual history of the plaant his se.

Gayme appealed that cisn to the Supreme Court of Canada.

R v Seaboyer and R v Gayme, 1991 • Rat: It is a leadg cisn where the SCC stck-down a rape-shield provisn of the CC as vlated the right to "full answer and fence" unr s. Gayme, the Court unanimoly cid the appeal on other grounds, but agreed that sectn 246. Nigel Gayme (appellant) v.

PERATN OF THE RAPE SHIELD: R. V. SEABOYER AND R. V. GAYME THE ONTAR COURT OF APPEAL

Seaboyer and Gayme. Gayme the Ontar Court of Appeal (1989-1990), 3 C.

R. V. SEABOYER AND GAYME, (1991) 48 O.A.C. 81 (SCC)

Jan-Pl Wald and Allan Herman, for the appellant Gayme;.

FEMIST ARGUMENTATN BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA R. V. SEABOYER; R. V. GAYME: THE SOUND OF ONE HAND CLAPPG

Wald, Kenedy, Toronto, Ontar, for the appellant Gayme;. Gayme: The Sound of One Hand Clappg” (1992) 18 Melbourne Universy Law Review 391 450.

Gayme mak pla, however, that the right to speak and make an argument do not clu a rrpondg obligatn on the part of judg to listen, to unrstand, or even to answer femist analysis.