Defence counsel Edward Greenspan, as resolute a defender of criminal justice as this country has seen, was fond of telling audiences that even his mother decried his choice of a career.

Greenspan spoke for all defence lawyers. We are forever being challenged to justify acting for those charged with horrific crimes. Safeguarding our clients’ presumption of innocence from public and press attacks becomes second nature.

Still, the overheated attacks made against Marie Henein since she secured acquittals for CBC radio celebrity Jian Gomeshi in a series of sexual assault charges represent a new, low-water mark. Not content simply to condemn Henein for defending her client, critics have accused her of being a traitor to feminism and an apologist for the legal status quo.

Now that Henein has been asked to speak in February at four universities in Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, concerns are being spread that her thoughts and opinions could damage the inquiring minds of university students.

It would be hard to conjure up a more myopic, wrong-headed indictment. The attacks on Henein threaten not only free speech; they chip away at the most fundamental principles of our justice system.

The first pothole into which her critics stumble is the rash assumption that lawyers identify personally with their clients. Ensuring that defendants are not steamrolled by the state or by mob sentiment does not mean defence lawyers condone the crimes they are accused of committing.

No one — and most assuredly, not Marie Henein — would deny the impact sexual assault can have on victims. But that does not change the fact that a robust defence means compelling police and prosecutors to produce sound, reliable, legally obtained evidence. It means challenging witnesses to explain discrepancies and contradictions in their recollections and behaviour.

Missing from the rhetoric generated by the Ghomeshi controversy is any recognition that convicting the innocent serves nobody’s purpose.

One of the themes that runs through critiques of the Ghomeshi proceedings is that defence counsel — and Ms. Henein, specifically — run roughshod over vulnerable sexual assault complainants whenever they testify. While isolated instances of defence excess do occur, there are well-established rules of professional conduct that curtail excessive cross-examination or abusive courtroom conduct. Lawyers are not permitted to question witnesses in an abusive, offensive or rude manner.

Indeed, the fact that neither the Crown nor the trial judge in the Ghomeshi case denounced the tenor or professional integrity of Henein’s defence is sound evidence in her favour. She did not engage in shock tactics or irrelevant questioning. Nor, did she rely on antiquated stereotypes about how women “ought” to act.

At the same time, rules of conduct do not — and should not — shield witnesses who conceal, prevaricate or outright lie to the court. In the Ghomeshi case, Henein poked massive holes in the credibility and forthrightness of the complainants. The process was just. Ghomeshi was acquitted. When those outraged by the result go after a defence lawyer who succeeded in pulling apart a frail case, they are choosing the wrong target for their frustration.

The genderized nature of many of the attacks on Henein also smacks of a double standard. Male lawyers who succeed in defending an accused rapist or murderer are almost invariably lionized. In contrast, Henein has been vilified by some as an enemy of feminism simply because she dared to defend a man accused by female complainants. To further suggest she has propagated rape culture or set back the cause of sexual assault victims is not only offensive, but represents a step backwards for feminism and gender parity. No male lawyer who zealously represents a client is accused of selling out his gender.

Within the criminal law bar, Henein is widely admired for her legal knowledge and her courtroom acumen. She is a leader, a role model and a noted mentor to women in criminal law at a time when the bar has had considerable trouble retaining its female complement. Her ascension to the top ranks of her largely male-dominated profession is the embodiment of feminism.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

The university students who hear Henein lecture will be fortunate. They will hear a dynamic, engaging speaker who offers great insight to young women who may want to be lawyers. She offers living proof that they, too, can be successful in a difficult profession. Henein has also, albeit unwittingly, shown them how to be a model of grace and determination in the face of unwarranted persecution.

Jessyca Greenwood is a criminal defence lawyer and a Toronto director with the Criminal Lawyers’ Association. Keli Mersereau is criminal defence lawyer in St. Thomas and a vice president of the Criminal Lawyers’ Association.

Read more about: