Manitoba judge Lori Douglas faces inquiry over leaked explicit photos

Given its lurid nature, will the Canadian Judicial Council be able to keep the inquiry into Justice Lori Douglas's fitness to remain on the Manitoba bench from turning into a circus?

The hearing began Monday in Winnipeg with arguments over who should have standing to participate, The Canadian Press reported.

Douglas, a judge on the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, is accused of sexually harassing Alexander Chapman, a former client of her lawyer husband Jack King. King sent sexually explicit photos of his wife, including in bondage gear, to Chapman and asked him to have sex with her. He also uploaded the photos to the Internet.

The incident happened more than seven years ago, when Douglas was not a judge. King admitted he acted without her knowledge and all parties agreed that while Chapman had two meetings with Douglas, they never had sex.

Now, however, Chapman's lawyer wants standing at the inquiry so he can question witnesses and make submissions, the The Canadian Press reported.

"A fair hearing cannot take place without Mr. Chapman having his own counsel here," said Rocco Galati, who is also asking the inquiry panel to approve funding to represent Chapman, the Winnipeg Sun reported.

"This hearing may very well come down to a 'he says, she says' battle of credibility."

But Galati's arguments have "no merit," according to inquiry counsel Guy Pratte.

"To the extent that Chapman has any rights, his remedies are available in other courts," Pratte said, according to the Sun.

Two other people, including a Winnipeg blogger, have also asked for standing.

[ More Daily Brew: The Newsroom falls flat with real journalists ]

Douglas, who has taken a leave from hearing cases, has said it was her husband who harassed Chapman and who posted the nude photos to the web. She shouldn't be removed from the bench for something someone else did, she argues.

King, who paid Chapman $25,000 in 2003 to settle a sexual-harassment claim, admitted he had approached Chapman. The settlement included a promise that Chapman return the photos and not discuss the matter. But Chapman went public in 2010 and the photos subsequently reappeared on the Internet, the Star said.

"Based on the information that I have, I think she's done nothing that should warrant her removal from the bench," Karen Busby, a law professor at the University of Manitoba, told The Canadian Press.

"It is troubling that a judge could be removed because she has been victimized by others or has participated in a common and lawful activity — even if that activity is disturbing to some."

The hearing in part is to determine whether the incident undermines confidence in the justice system and impairs Douglas's ability to function as a judge. It's also examining allegations she failed to reveal the matter when she was screened for her judicial appointment in 2005.

The hearing could run off and on until the end of July.