'MORAL DEPRAVITY' NOT A CRIME

Girl, 13, Turned Out On Streets
Woman's Acquittal Shocks Officials

A 41 - year-old Winnipeg woman committed "an act of moral depravity"
- --but not a crime --when she steered a troubled 13-year-old runaway
toward a life of drugs and sex-for-money with adult men, a judge ruled Tuesday.

Natalie Matinet broke down in tears and hugged her lawyer after being
acquitted of crimes that could have carried a lengthy jail term,
including procuring, living off the avails of prostitution and assault.

Queen's Bench Justice John Scurfield told Matinet she wasn't leaving
court with clean hands, but that he was unable to find the Crown had
proven the necessary elements of the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.

"There is no doubt she contributed to the corruption and destruction
of a young girl's life. For that she must accept moral, if not legal,
responsibility," Scurfield said.

Several justice sources privately expressed shock at the verdict. The
Crown has 30 days to decide whether to appeal.

Roz Prober, a Winnipeg-based advocate who operates the Beyond Borders
organization, was nearly speechless.

"There seems to be very little sympathy or understanding from the
justice system for children who are in these situations," she said in
an interview.

Prober said she was surprised Scurfield was so scathing in his
comments toward a woman he had just let walk free.

Scurfield said the biggest problem with the Crown's case was the
testimony of the young victim, who changed her story repeatedly and
couldn't be entirely believed.

"There's no doubt she was, and remains, a victim of horrible child
abuse," Scurfield said.

"But she did not portray her life experiences accurately. She was the
sort of witness prepared to lie... capable of transferring her own
responsibility for her actions to other people."

Scurfield said it appeared the troubled teen was trying to "portray a
more virtuous self-image" to the court.

The young girl had claimed at one point she was a virgin when she
first met Matinet and that her first sexual encounter was with a john
on the streets. Later, it was revealed she had previously been
intimate with a boyfriend.

She also claimed to have had no prior drug involvement until Matinet
introduced her to cocaine, but Scurfield noted she later admitted to
earlier use.

"Sadly, she had probably already been exposed to the darkest side of
life before she met the accused," he said. Scurfield said there was a
"core of truth" to her story, but too many flaws to ignore.

"There is serious doubt as to the reliability of her allegations," he said.

The teen was a runaway who had been taken in by Matinet and her
boyfriend in late 2001, court was told.

Police and the Crown alleged that Matinet began "pimping" the girl
out and then taking all the money she made in order to buy drugs. The
teen also told court she was regularly "pushed around" by Matinet and
physically intimidated into working the streets.

Scurfield said the more likely scenario was that the teen, Matinet
and the boyfriend were involved in a common prostitution enterprise
and that the proceeds were being shared among them to feed their addictions.

Prober said the fact the girl may have already been exposed to the
"dark side" shouldn't count against her.

"Anybody preying on a child for profit, in any way, shouldn't be held
less responsible in those circumstances. They're just piggybacking
off the abuse others have already committed," she said.

The Crown needed to prove Matinet was specifically profiting from the
teen's prostitution in order to secure a conviction.

Scurfield said it's also possible Matinet's boyfriend was pushing the
teen into drugs and sex, but that she was too scared of him to tell
police the truth. The man was never charged.