An update on this story. The Crown is assisting the sexual assault victim in having the publication ban lifted....but she has to wait until May 14 so that the defendant's counsel can argue he has standing to make submissions about why the pub ban should NOT be lifted. https://twitter.com/TorontoStar/status/1383051468865990665

This is wild for an number of reasons. The pub ban is ONLY on the name of the victim (and she didn't ask for it). The defendant is not covered by it and has been named by police and in my story.

There is also, as the judge today observed, no known legal basis for the defendant to have standing. The Crown is opposing standing and only notified the defendant as a courtesy.

The agent appearing for the defendant's lawyer proposed a date in JUNE which would have been three months since the victim first tried to get the publication ban lifted. The judge was not amused, nor was the Crown or victim, and it's now set for mid-May.

The scheduling judge agreed to the adjournment out of fairness but observed to the victim: "but for the intervention of the gods, your wish to have the ban lifted will be granted.”

The victim told the court that it is not lost on her that the man who was convicted of assaulting her is now trying to keep her silenced.

I look forward to seeing the submissions filed by the defendant's lawyer.

This does illustrate the problem with a system that requires victims to file their own applications to get a publication ban on their own identity lifted. It is great the Crown is now assisting this victim in this case but that's not the automatic policy per the ministry.

If the Crown wasn't helping her, she'd have to get her own lawyer to oppose this defence application, flimsy as it may be, or have to do her own legal research.

Media organizations, including the Star, sometimes help with these things too but that shouldn't be the solution either.