“This perpetuates that stereotype of ‘doctors will protect doctors,’” said lawyer Simona Jellinek.
Yes. It also perpetuates the impression that Muslims can get away with virtually anything as long as non-Muslim authorities continue to be petrified by fear of charges of “Islamophobia” and “racism.”
“Toronto doctor gets no professional penalty for sex assault on 16-year-old after panel finds he was ‘struggling to express’ gay identity,” by Jacques Gallant, Toronto Star, June 19, 2020:
A Toronto doctor who pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a 16-year-old boy was “struggling to express his identity” as a gay man, said a discipline panel in deciding to impose no punishment.
A discipline panel at the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario ruled in a rare split decision last month that Dr. Farooq Khan should receive no penalty and not have to pay any costs for his discipline proceedings.
In doing so, the majority of the panel rejected a joint submission from both the college’s and Khan’s lawyers that said the doctor should receive a 12-month suspension and pay $20,550 in costs.
Khan had admitted before the panel to an allegation of “having been found guilty of an offence that is relevant to his suitability to practise” — related to the fact that he pleaded guilty in court in 2015 to a criminal charge of sexual assault.
He received an absolute discharge in court, meaning he didn’t get a criminal record as a result of the guilty plea and didn’t have to serve a sentence.
The charge related to a 2009 incident in a which a then-24-year-old Khan, who was a medical resident at the time, was sleeping over at the home of a 16-year-old boy identified as AB in the discipline panel’s decision.
The two were sharing a bunk bed, and one night Khan went down to the bottom bunk and fondled AB while masturbating, believing him to be asleep, according to the panel’s decision.
In the discipline proceedings, three of the panel’s five members — two doctors and one community member — rejected the proposed punishment of a 12-month suspension submitted by both sides.
Joint submissions, whether at the college level or in court, are typically accepted. The Supreme Court of Canada has said they should only be rejected if it “would bring the administration of justice into disrepute or would otherwise be contrary to the public interest.”
After reviewing evidence from mental health experts, the majority on the panel found that it was a single offence that happened “in the remote past,” that it was “impulsive,” that Khan was at a low risk to reoffend and that he has shown remorse for his actions.
“There is another delicate issue to consider. The assault took place when Dr. Khan was a young gay man struggling to express his identity in particularly trying circumstances,” wrote the three majority members, Drs. Deborah Hellyer and Harvey Schipper and community member Major Abdul Hafeez Khalifa.
They continued: “It is important to be clear that this is mentioned not to excuse the offence, only to contextualize it. Dr. Khan has been forthright and unwavering in that view, supported by ample expert evidence: nobody ‘gets off the hook’ for a criminal action by virtue of their colour, ethnicity or sexual orientation.
“However, the committee gives some recognition to the fact that prejudicial social pressures which, in recent years, our society has made strides in relieving, did play a role here.”…
“The heart of what they’re saying perpetuates one of the most dangerous myths and stereotypes about gay men: which is that in struggling to come to terms with their sexual identity, they are predatorial, assaultive and target young boys,” lawyer Angela Chaisson said.
“I don’t know a queer person who hasn’t struggled with their sexual identity, we all go through that period, but we don’t assault children as part of that figuring out process.” She added: “I think that all queer people would be insulted by this.”…
“This perpetuates that stereotype of ‘doctors will protect doctors,’” said lawyer Simona Jellinek, who specializes in civil sexual abuse cases and who described as “very reasonable” the joint submission on penalty that the majority rejected.
“While I applaud the fact that the college is sensitive to such matters, the fact remains that the college has a bigger duty than to that one physician who may have been struggling with his identity, and that is the protection of the public.”
Kilauea says
Is forcible sodomy not a crime in Canada if you’re a Doctor?, Muslim? Oh, Canada.
CogitoErgoSum says
Being gay and being Muslim must be quite a struggle. The article does not say how he resolved the problem in his own mind. According to his religion if he is ever caught committing the “sin of Loot” he could be killed but if he outright denounces his Islamic religion he could also be killed. Lucky for him he resides in a country ruled by people whose less harsh attitudes on such matters can be traced back to Christianity and not to Islam.
gravenimage says
Under other circumstances I might feel sorry for this guy–but *not in this case*–not when he tried to rape a child.
This may also be more a case of Muslims raping Infidels than it is his actually being gay. Muslims rape boys as well as women and girls.
LB says
Just out of curiosity, when does a boy becomes a man in islam? 18? Because 16 seems mature enough (in islam at least). Or maybe the age doesn’t matter as long as it’s rape and the victim is an infidel? How would that go in sharia court? I’m genuinely curious.
Honest Ali says
And yet, no riots over this…
gravenimage says
+1
Harold says
Muslim Lives Matter.
Templer says
White life’s matter stop the santic Muslim invasion santic scum
mortimer says
Let Dr. Farooq Khan practice in Pakistan where his behavior is normative in madrassahs.
gravenimage says
+1
James Lincoln says
From the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario:
“Summary:
On April 10, 2018, the Discipline Committee found that Dr. Farooq Ali Khan committed
an act of professional misconduct, in that he has been found guilty of an offence that
is relevant to his suitability to practice.
Dr. Khan is an emergency physician who practises at the Hospital in Toronto. He
received his certificate of independent practice from the College in June 2014.
Criminal Finding
On August 13, 2015, Dr. Khan pled guilty to and was found guilty of sexual
assault under s. 271(b) the Criminal Code. Dr. Khan was granted an absolute
discharge on the basis of a joint submission on penalty.
Facts Underlying Criminal Finding
In August 2009, Dr. Khan slept over at the house of AB. At the time, Dr. Khan was
in his mid-twenties, having recently graduated from medical school and started his
residency program, and AB was a teenager. Dr. Khan and AB were sleeping in bunk
beds in the same room. Dr. Khan was on the top bunk and AB was on the lower
bunk. During the night, Dr. Khan climbed down and fondled AB’s penis while he
believed that AB was sleeping. Dr. Khan masturbated while fondling AB. At one
point, AB moved, and Dr. Khan stopped for a few minutes. When AB was still again
and Dr. Khan believed him to be still asleep, he started fondling him again, while
masturbating. When AB made a noise, Dr. Khan withdrew his hand and went back to
the top bunk. Shortly after that, AB got up, ran out of the room, and told his parents
what had happened.
On April 12, 2018, the Committee reserved its decision on penalty and costs.
Further Procedural History
The hearing resumed on July 20, 2018, at which time the Committee further reserved
its decision on penalty to consider the issue of retrospectivity of Ontario Regulation
262/18 (“O. Reg. 262/18”) which had come into force on May 1, 2018.
In July 2019, the Divisional Court released its decision in Ontario (College of Physicians
and Surgeons of Ontario) v. Kunynetz, 2019 ONSC 4300, holding that the amendments
to the RHPA made under the Protecting Patients Act should not be treated as
retrospective.
On August 20, 2019, the Committee held a further penalty hearing at which time the
parties presented a joint submission on penalty and costs to the Committee. The
Committee reserved decision.
On May 29, 2020, the Committee released its penalty decision in which it ordered and
directed on the matter of penalty and costs that there shall be no penalty imposed on
Dr. Khan in this matter, and no order that he pay costs to the College.”
https://doctors.cpso.on.ca/DoctorDetails/Farooq-Ali-Khan/0297367-104204
gravenimage says
Thanks for that link, James.
Rob R (Brit stuck in Britainistan) says
Sick as fuck.
The “judge” obviously has no problem expressing his Downs Syndrome identity.
Rob R (Brit stuck in Britainistan) says
So anyway, “liberals”, if Islam isnt the most homophobic shitphile in the world then why did he have a “problem” with his gayness? And why do you want to bring such problems here in mass numbers?
mortimer says
Is this a double standard for gay men or a double standard for Muslims, or both at the same time?
I wonder what would happen to a white male doctor who tried Khan’s technique on a Muslim girl? Would the white doctor be punished differently?
curious says
Definitely Muslims – see additional examples below.
E T says
Under the topic of double standards
Theses countries’ laws call to kill gays:
Afghanistan
Mauritania
Pakistan
Somalia
Nigeria
Sudan
Qatar
These countries sit on the UN Human Rights Council:
Afghanistan
Mauritania
Pakistan
Somalia
Nigeria
Sudan
Qatar
gravenimage says
Canada: Muslim doctor gets no penalty for sex assault of 16-year-old, was ‘struggling to express’ gay identity
……………….
What kind of sickening crap is this? Someone might ‘struggle to express their gay identity’ if they had an awkward night out at the local gay bar, not by *trying to rape a child*. Good god.
curious says
I feel similarly, though I would point out it was technically assault, not attempted rape. For an actual rape, see the Texas example below, with no jail time for the Muslim perpetrator. And then of course there are the Muslim rape gangs across Britain, euphemized as “Asian” and “grooming”, as if they had merely opened a salon where the girls got their hair and nails done. If that were the standard for everyone, then this result would make sense, but it is only the standard where the perpetrators are Muslim.
gravenimage says
Technically correct, curious. Thank you.
curious says
This has nothing to do with whether he is gay, and everything to do with the fact he is Muslim. Look what happened in where a TEXAS JURY gave no jail time to a Muslim doctor raped a female patient:
“A former Texas doctor who raped a heavily sedated patient won’t serve prison time after he was found guilty of the crime Thursday.
Shafeeq Sheikh, a former Baylor College of Medicine physician, was sentenced to 10 years’ probation Friday, and he must now register as a sex offender.
Jurors recommended the sentencing, which visiting Senior District Judge Terry L. Flenniken was required to follow by law, according to the Houston Chronicle.”
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/08/18/no-prison-time-ex-houston-doctor-who-raped-heavily-sedated-patient/1031665002/
I wonder if he might appeal or petition later to end the registration.
When Islamic rape gangs of Pakistani origin raped systematically thousands of British girls across multiple cities, the British government and BBC concealed and obfuscated the “grooming” (as if the poor girls had merely got their hair and nails done).
Yet where are the #MeToo protestors? In the new heirarchy, Muslims uber alles: there seems no limit to what crimes they may commit with impunity.
Michelle Reardon says
I searched for evidence of a criminal trial in either case and found nothing. I also found no articles about the crime, a trial, an arrest. Nothing. We live in a twisted world.
Giacomo Latta says
This is what happens anywhere a special group has a ”college.” Upon the occurrence of any particular crime or misdemeanour one’s peers must first find the behaviour of the accused egregious. If it doesn’t then we are all supposed to submit to the judgment of his peers.
Jan Disher says
I refuse to go to a muslim doctor. My GP sent me to 2 of them. Rude/useless medically/arrogant.
Charlie says
Send him down to Minnesota. They have Sharia law. They’ll behead him for you:-)
OLD GUY says
Islamophobia is a joke. The total purpose of islamophobia is strictly a tool made up by the muslim world to prevent the truth being told or published about Islam and Muhammad. It’s kind of like saying if your skin is white you are a racist and must apologize for it. These are radical ideas that are being used by people with an agenda to take personal freedoms and rights away from everyone. Islam is a political ideology using “religion ” as its means to dictate its form of rule on the world. Islam will destroy all non-islamic culture and history from the countries they invade through migration the same way Hitler did in Germany as he gained control over the media and civilian infrastructure.