A lawyer for a Canadian man on trial for the second time in a controversial rape case has sparked outrage by asking the alleged victim on cross-examination whether his client's penis size may have swayed her to have consensual sex with him.
Alexander Scott Wagar, 29, is being retried in Calgary for an alleged sexual assault of a woman, then aged 19, which took place at a house party in 2011.
Justice Robin Camp acquitted Wagar in 2014, but that verdict was overturned on appeal and a new trial was ordered after it has emerged that the judge asked the alleged victim, "why couldn't you just keep your knees together?"
According to the Globe andMail, Camp also said: "Some sex and pain sometimes go together...that's not necessarily a bad thing."
During the woman's cross-examination this week, Alexander Wagar's defense attorney, Pat Flynn, asked her if she was drawn to his client after he flashed his manhood to a room full of guests at the party and she saw that "he was larger than most men," reported The Canadian Press via Huffington Post Canada.
The 24-year-old woman, who has repeatedly testified that she was attracted to women, responded to Flynn, "No".
The lawyer also argued that the sexual encounter was consensual because Wagar and his accuser had engaged in 'aggressive foreplay"- to which she again said "No" - and that she had concocted the rape story because she was angry that his client had sex with another woman at the party later that evening.
The complainant testified during the original trial that she was at the house party in Calgary in December 2011 when Wagar entered the bathroom, locked the door behind him, ripped off her clothes, then bent her over the sink and sexually assaulted her for 15-20 minutes.
But Judge Camp, who presided over Wagar's first trial, demanded to know "why she allowed the sex to happen if she didn't want it?"
"Why didn't you just sink your bottom down into the basin so he couldn't penetrate you," he asked the homeless woman. "Why couldn't you just keep your knees together?"
He also noted that the alleged victim, whom he repeatedly called "the accused," had asked Wagar if he had a condom - a question which he perceived to have "an inescapable conclusion [that] if you have one I'm happy to have sex with you".
This fall, a Canadian Judicial Council launched an inquiry into Camp's professional conduct, and the panel is currently in the process of determining whether he should be removed from the bench.
In September, the alleged victim tearfully told the Council that Camp, 64, made her feel "like a slut" with his line of questioning.
Camp, who was a provincial judge during the original trial and is now a federal justice, apologized for being "rude a facetious."
He also said his questions were "offensive" and "carried with them the implication that the complainant should have done something", the Huffington Post reported.
In court this week, Alexander Wagar again insisted that his encounter with his accuser was consensual, staunchly denying that he would ever force himself on anyone.
"I am not a f***ing rapist," he protested. "If she would have made any sort of objection, I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt, swear on the Bible, I am a Christian.
"My mother put it in my mind since I was a kid that if a woman says no, it means no."
Presenting his version of events in graphic detail, Wagar said, referring to the accuser: "She grabbed my penis and complimented the size of it," reported The Guardian.
He later admitted that while the woman never expressly gave him her consent, "she never told me 'no.' She never said 'stop,' or 'you're hurting me.'