Sharpe's Porn Has 'Merit': Court
B.C. man cleared on two of three charges as court defends 'artistic' child pornography
By Mark Hume
Originally published in the National Post, with files from The Canadian Press and Southam News, March 27, 2002
VANCOUVER — A B.C. judge cited the "artistic or literary merit" of stories describing sadomasochistic sex between men and young boys yesterday in finding a man not guilty on two counts of possessing child pornography.
Federal lawmakers were urged yesterday to narrow Canada's definition of artistic merit after the judge ruled John Robin Sharpe's "Kiddie Kink Classics" were not criminal.
At the same time, the court found Sharpe guilty of two other child pornography charges for having 400 pictures of young boys in sexual poses.
The ruling by Justice Duncan Shaw, of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, relied on an earlier Supreme Court of Canada decision that defined pornography under the current legislation, drawing a clear distinction between written and photographic material.
Sharpe was found not guilty of charges of possessing child pornography for the purpose of distribution, specifically a collection of stories he had written which one expert witness summarized as "boys being kidnapped by people with power and then systematically tortured."
However, two other expert witnesses described Sharpe's stories as literature, in line with the works of the Marquis de Sade.
"There is no question that [the stories] describe sadomasochistic scenes of violence and sex directed at boys generally 12 years of age and younger," wrote Judge Shaw. "The scenes portrayed are, by almost any standard, morally repugnant.
"Mr. Sharpe's method of portraying these scenes and the circumstances and story lines surrounding them have been closely examined by eminent literary scholars. Two have found literary merit and the other has not … Mr. Sharpe shows skill in the literary quality of his work and the literary devices that he uses, although not to the level of most established writers."
Judge Shaw said the writings of the Marquis de Sade, an 18th-century French nobleman who spent 14 years in prison, are recognized as having artistic merit, though they include "scenes of sexual torture of women and children, scenes which in terms of sadistic cruelty and horror go far beyond those written by Mr. Sharpe."
Sharpe, a retired town planner, emerged from court smiling yesterday to face a swarm of reporters.
"I did expect that I would be acquitted on my writing. I was extremely pleased," he said.
The verdict on the works of Sharpe's imagination infuriated children's advocates and some federal politicians. The reaction made it clear that the argument over artistic merit—which has stumped Canadian justice ministers for 20 years as they tried to craft child pornography laws—is far from over.
The decision has again raised the troubling question of whether it is possible to define pornography when society's perception of obscenity is highly subjective, even when it comes to children.
Annabel Webb, of the advocacy group Justice For Girls, said it will promote the sexual abuse of children in Canada by helping to normalize the idea that sex with children is acceptable.
"I think the judgment has clearly opened the door for pedophiles to write and promote sexual abuse and torture of children," she said.
Detective Noreen Waters, of Vancouver police, said the decision will make it even harder to fight child pornography. Det. Waters said the B.C. court was limited by last year's Supreme Court decision, which held that even the smallest degree of artistic merit was a valid defence against a possession of pornography charge.
The stories she and other investigators seized from Sharpe, she said, would shock most people.
"The writings are horrific descriptions of children, as young as six years old, engaged in horrific violence, sexual sadomasochistic sex acts, written as if the children want it and are enjoying it—and are coming back for more," she said. "Anybody who looks at this material is going to be horrified."
One MP yesterday called on the federal government to invoke the "notwithstanding clause" of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to uphold child pornography laws.
Dan McTeague, a Liberal backbencher, wrote to the Prime Minister asking the government to overturn rulings protecting child pornography under the Charter, a move he said was justifiable when those limitations protect children.
Vic Toews, Canadian Alliance Justice critic, said: "We as politicians should look at the issue of whether we need to further define the limits of artistic merit by specifically excluding violent sexual exploitation of children."
Sharpe said he felt it was absurd he had to defend his writings at all.
He said the Supreme Court of Canada ruling, in a case in which he argued Canada's child pornography law contravened freedom of speech, underscored a contradiction in the law.
"They have an extremely broad and inclusive definition of child pornography as if it were some sort of highly toxic material. You know, I call it a sort of voodoo theory of child pornography. And yet at the same time, they provide a very generous artistic merit defence. In a sense, the artistic merit defence, well, almost makes a mockery of the main thrust of the law," he said.
"If this story has artistic merit I end up with fame, or more likely infamy, notoriety, but if it is child pornography, then I could face 10 years in jail…. I think that's a bit of an absurdity."
Sharpe refused to describe the contents of his 17 short stories written under the pseudonym Sam Paloc and grew angry when reporters asked him if he was a pedophile or if there was any difference between writing such stories and picking up children on the street. "Look, you people, oh, I don't know, you're sick," he said, pushing through the crowd.
Sharpe will be sentenced on the two possession of child pornography charges on May 2 and could get up to five years in jail.
In letters filed in court, Sharpe said the stories contained "my darkest fantasies," labelling them "sadomasochisticfaggotkiddieporn."
Police were shocked by the material, but literary experts disagreed in court over the key issue of artistic merit. Lorraine Weir, an English professor at the University of B.C., argued in support of the stories, saying Sharpe "has a level of expertise in his craftsmanship and in his controlled use of different literary forms."
But Paul Delaney, chairman of the Department of English at Simon Fraser University, said the stories had no literary merit.
