LONDON, Ont. – Protection attorneys started delivering their closing arguments within the Hockey Canada sexual assault trial on Monday, attacking the complainant’s testimony as containing a “cornucopia of credibility and reliability issues” and suggesting that she has re-tooled her narrative to current herself as a sufferer to evoke sympathy from family and friends and in pursuit of the civil lawsuit she settled in 2022.
Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dubé and Cal Foote are all charged with sexual assault after an alleged incident in June 2018. The complainant — a girl referred to as E.M., whose identification is protected by a publication ban — has stated she was sexually assaulted over the span of a number of hours in a London, Ont., lodge room. The gamers had been on the town for a Hockey Canada occasion celebrating their gold medal on the 2018 World Junior Championship.
McLeod can also be going through a second cost for “being a celebration to the offense” for what the Crown has asserted was his function “aiding and inspiring his teammates to have interaction sexually” with E.M. All 5 gamers have pleaded not responsible.
David Humphrey, legal professional for McLeod, was the primary protection legal professional to make oral submissions in entrance of Justice Maria Carroccia within the eighth and closing week of the trial. He pre-empted his argument by telling Carroccia that normally protection groups are “blissful to have just a few hits” on the complainant, however this case has an abundance.
“This can be a case the place the protection has a humiliation of riches,” Humphrey stated. “A cornucopia of credibility and reliability issues in (E.M.’s) testimony.”
E.M. testified that she met McLeod at a neighborhood bar, and engaged in an evening of ingesting and dancing earlier than the 2 went again to his lodge to have consensual intercourse. She stated that following that preliminary sexual encounter, she emerged from the lavatory to search out extra males within the room. Over the course of a number of hours, she stated she was pressured to carry out sexual acts, spit on, slapped and requested to insert golf golf equipment and golf balls into her vagina.
She described feeling scared and susceptible and stated that she went on “autopilot” — dissociating to get via the evening.
A number of gamers testified a few group textual content message they acquired from McLeod, inviting them for a “3 method fast” and supplying his room quantity, however stated she initiated the sexual acts, asking gamers to have intercourse together with her and goading them after they declined.
Humphrey stated that E.M. is a “flawed witness” whose testimony is “unbelievable and unreliable.” She could haven’t wished to acknowledge that she had a “sexually adventurous” evening within the lodge room, Humphrey stated. He stated that she didn’t need to take duty for her actions and advised that embarrassment and remorse prompted her to inform a “white lie” to her mom about what occurred within the early-morning hours of June 19, 2018. Humphrey stated that “white lie” then snowballed right into a legal investigation.
Humphrey seized on E.M.’s preliminary police interview within the days following the alleged incident and famous that she didn’t describe the concern she testified about when talking with Detective Stephen Newton. (E.M. testified that on the time of that June 2018 interview with London Police, she was nonetheless processing what occurred to her and felt uncomfortable speaking about it with a male detective whom she had by no means met beforehand.)
Humphrey stated that the factor of concern was not honest and as a substitute invoked to help her $3.55 million lawsuit towards Hockey Canada, which was resolved through an out-of-court settlement in 2022.
“Her new terror narrative that was superior within the declare was scripted to treatment the deficiencies within the first narrative she had supplied to Detective Newton,” Humphrey stated.
Justice Carroccia’s first substantive comment of the day was to notice the pace with which the Hockey Canada lawsuit was settled:
“Extraordinarily rapidly, frankly,” Carroccia stated. “I’ve by no means seen a settlement that takes place one month after the assertion of declare is served.”
In his submission, Humphrey addressed just a few parts of his consumer’s actions, together with his preliminary interview with police in November 2018 and the 2 movies he known as “consent movies.”
Humphrey acknowledged that when McLeod was interviewed by police he didn’t element the complete contents of the textual content messages he despatched to teammates, together with the group chat message with an invite for three-way intercourse and an invite to a different participant providing a “gummer,” which is slang for oral intercourse. Humphrey stated he wasn’t positive if McLeod simply didn’t keep in mind the content material of his texts or had not finished a deep dive on the contents of his telephone. He expressed disappointment that Newton didn’t ask additional questions after McLeod disclosed he texted teammates that he was ordering meals and had a woman in his room that evening.
Humphrey stated McLeod solely invited a “restricted quantity” of gamers. (The “gummer” textual content was despatched to Taylor Raddysh. The “3 method” textual content was despatched to a bunch chat of 19 gamers.) Humphrey argued that as a result of the textual content describes a “three-way” it wasn’t cheap to conclude he anticipated various gamers taking him up on the invitation.
“He was shocked by the quantity of people that got here,” Humphrey stated.
Humphrey stated the 2 movies recorded within the early morning of June 19, 2018 are vital to McLeod’s protection. In one of many movies, she says “I’m OK” when requested if she’s “OK with this.” Within the different, she says, “It was all consensual.” E.M. has testified that she didn’t recall these movies being recorded however stated that she believes they had been taken on the finish of the evening as a result of she recalled McLeod hounding her to say the sexual acts had been consensual.
Humphrey stated it was an “uncommon” and “awkward” scenario and that McLeod didn’t know if E.M. would get up the subsequent morning to “gloat” about what occurred or with remorse. He praised McLeod’s presence of thoughts in memorializing what he described as proof of her being “blissful” and tremendous with every little thing that was occurring.
“He was drunk however he nonetheless had his head on straight and he wished to ensure she was absolutely consenting,” Humphrey stated.
In his oral submission, Humphrey argued that the Crown had not met its burden of proof in proving the fees towards his consumer past an inexpensive doubt. He added that the alcohol consumption and passage of time that degraded the reminiscence high quality of many witnesses within the trial ought to go away the courtroom with cheap doubt.
Humphrey additionally stated that he wished to elucidate, for these watching the proceedings much less aware of the legislation, that it was not the courtroom’s job to “assess the morality of how the accused or others within the room had been performing, whether or not they may have been higher behaved or extra respectful.”
“These points could also be of curiosity to the general public, however they aren’t points for evaluation by the courtroom,” Humphrey stated.
— The Athletic‘s Dan Robson reported remotely from Toronto and The Athletic‘s Kamila Hinkson reported remotely from Montreal.
(Courtroom sketch of protection legal professional David Humphrey from earlier within the trial by Alexandra Newbould / The Canadian Press through AP)
