As the weeks go on, there are many revelations about the mass casualty two years ago when a white, wealthy, well-known businessman took 22 innocent lives in our province. There is a lot to reflect on and unpack—from the individual responses, to the systemic and structural dynamics that failed to interrupt the perpetrator to save those lives, to the underlying causes and contexts that are all part of the Inquiry’s mandate. And still there is the question of grief in the face of prolonged legal processes, accountability and ultimately healing- a query for a next post. I write this with heart turned toward the individuals, families and whole communities in the pain and frustration of these 2+ years.
This week, among so many other questions raised with RCMP Chief Superintendent Chris Leather and Superintendent Darren Campbell, was the question about charges laid against Lisa Banfield, her brother and brother-in-law for obtaining/transferring ammunition to the perpetrator. They considered “the optics” of charging or not charging and decided to charge.
This is a big issue. Many vulnerable women who have been victimized by violence over and over, by both individuals and multiple systems, are criminalized when they act in ways that are rooted in their victimization and repeated system failures to protect and validate them. Based on the experiences of organizations like the Elizabeth Fry Societies and many others, this criminalization of the victimized is not unusual or exceptional. Rather, it happens painfully regularly and most commonly for people from Black, Brown and Indigenous communities already plagued by the persistent, pervasive, everyday racism they face.
The ammunition charges were dismissed through a restorative justice process which is not public, so we will never know more detail about the contexts, motivations or impacts on the murderous spree that started in Portapique. The gunman had multiple weapons and means of destruction. And Lisa Banfield spoke repeatedly in her testimony of the perpetrator’s repeated threats to harm both her and her family members. I am relieved Lisa Banfield won’t have to carry the burden of a criminal charge amidst the guilt and shame and notoriety she is already bearing in a life that has been shattered. She spoke of feeling haunted by the possibility that if she hadn’t run and hidden, maybe the others would be alive. It is unlikely this is true. More likely, is that she would have been among the dead.
In the Roundtable held on the morning of July 20th, Dr. Lori Chambers provides a detailed and compelling description of men like the perpetrator who embody the “coercive control” that is so dangerous to women and countless others. Her research likens it to being kidnapped or held as a prisoner of war, emotionally and psychologically punished, systematically stripped of value, worth and agency as they endure constant criticism, threats, brainwashing and sometimes physical violence. Life with someone like that is one of constant fear, anxiety, hypervigilance, walking on eggshells and unrelenting attempts to please and placate that are rarely effective. It is a terrorism and torture behind closed doors that is hard for outsiders to comprehend or respond to.
Unfortunately, in-person attendance at the proceedings during the critical roundtables on the link between GBV/IPV/FV and mass killings, was sparse, mostly populated by those of us from the GBV sector with participant status in the Inquiry and our legal counsel. A missed opportunity for others to understand the inextricable role IPV/FV plays in this and most other mass casualties. And why trying to hold the one surviving victim accountable for the heinous crime is misplaced.
For anyone interested in understanding the nature and dangers of intimate partner violence (IPV) as a significant public health and safety threat, and especially for any individual in any system that plays a role in responding to IPV- police, lawyers, judges, probation and corrections officers, social workers, victims services, child protection, addictions and mental health practitioners, women’s advocates, public safety, public policy folks at all levels of government - the roundtables from July 11 - 21 are a ‘must watch.’
The Commission has amassed some of the most current research evidence from Canada and around the world. They highlight and debunk so many persistent myths and stereotypes that govern our collective response to dangerous men like the perpetrator: what GBV/IPV looks like, (good definitions and distinctions); the biases inherent in the public (and policing) narrative; clear descriptions of “coercive control” as the most dangerous form of intimate partner violence; and the irrefutable link between domestic/intimate partner/family violence, masculinities and mass killings. It is an impressive array of the combined multiple centuries of wisdom of brilliant women and some men who have been unrelenting advocates for change in this field.
And finally in the week of July 11th, the Commission engaged a more intersectional vantage point with researchers and practitioners (some, Nova Scotia colleagues suggested by our team), with expertise from the lens of Black and Indigenous communities, which had been glaringly absent thus far.
I have requested that these Roundtable recordings and the related articles (listed on the website) be included in the province’s newly developing DV Training library as essential learning materials.
While I have not been able to view all the Roundtables, I suggest these as among the ‘must watch’:
1. Link between DV (“private violence”) and mass killings (“public violence”), and why DV/family violence and “toxic masculinity” are significant public safety issues:
o July 13th: testimony by Dr. Janemaree Maher and Dr. Jude McCulloch:
Violence: understanding mass casualties and the role of gender-based and intimate partner violence. Written transcripts are also available for these on the MCC website.
o Read their Commissioned Report: “Understanding Links Between GBV & Mass Casualty Attacks: Private Violence & Misogyny as Public Risk”
o Read the Commissioned Report, “Mass Shootings and Masculinities” by Dr. Tristan Bridges and Dr. Tara Leigh Tober
o July 11th Witness Panel with Dr. Tristan Bridges and Dr. Tara Leigh Tober
2. Connections Between Mass Casualties and GBV/IPV/FV- July 18th :
o Dr. Wendy Cukier
o Dr. Amanda Dale
o Dr. Myrna Dawson
o Dr. JaneMaree Maher
o Dr. Alison Marganski
o Dr. Jude McCulloch
o Dr. Barbara Perry
3. Police and Institutional Understanding and Responses to GBV/IPV/FV- July 20th:
Morning:
o Dr. Lori Chambers
o Dr. Patrina Duhaney
o Dr. Carmen Gill
o Dr. Nancy Ross
Afternoon:
o Emilie Coyle
o Professor Isabel Grant
o Lana MacLean
o Sunny Marriner
o Deepa Mattoo
o Dr. Pamela Palmater
4. Personal and Community Responses to GBV/IPV/FV- July 21st:
o Pamela Cross
o Dr. Deborah Doherty
o Emma Halpern
o Prof. Janet Mosher
o Lorraine Whitman
o Dr. Rachel Zellars
5. Predicting, preventing and understanding perpetrators of Mass Casualties- July 14th:
Morning: Prediction and Prevention
o Prof. Benjamin Berger
o Dr. Myrna Lashley
o Prof. George Szmukler
o Robert S. Wright
Afternoon: Psychology and Sociology of Perpetrators
o Dr. Tristan Bridges
o Prof. David Hofman
o Dr. Angelique Jenney
o Dr. Tara Leigh Tober
The list of all speakers, content and links to the recordings can be found here: