London, Ontario-Canada: Five former players from Canada's junior national teame on trial for sexual assault

[CaptRenault]

A trial of 5 former Canadian junior national team members for sexual assault opened today in London, Ontario. The alleged crime took place in 2018 in London, Ontario on a night when the team attended a celebration of its victory in the Junior (ages 16-19) World Championship. Police investigated the alleged assault and decided not to file charges, mainly because the complainant decided not to cooperate. Later the complainant pursued a civil case and won a financial settlement. Eventually news of the settlement became public and caused a scandal. Subsequently police launched another investigation and a prosecutor decided to file charges. In the meantime the players who are charged went on to careers in the NHL, though none of them are active on current NHL rosters.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/world-junior-hockey-sexual-assault-trial-london-1.7511439

 

[ttcRider]

Thank you CaptRenault, I was hoping one of us would start a thread on this.

 

[CaptRenault]

One of the key questions in the trial is whether the complainant consented to the sexual encounters. According to her, she consented to some but not all of the sex. However, because the players were conscious that there might be a problem with proving that they had the woman's consent to engage in sex with the group, they recorded two short videos asking her to acknowledge that she had consented to sex. According to a recent article in the NY Times/The Athletic, the complainant was quoted as follows in the short videos:

It’s nearly 3:30 a.m. on June 19, 2018, and inside a room at the Delta Armouries Hotel in London, Ontario, a six-second cellphone video is being recorded.

“You’re OK with this?” an unidentified man asks a young woman, who is shown from the neck up. “I’m OK with this,” she responds before the video cuts off.

Almost an hour later, another cellphone video is recorded. This one is about 12 seconds long. The same woman stands with a towel covering her chest.

She asks, “Are you recording me?” before declaring, “It was all consensual. You are so paranoid, holy. I enjoyed it, it was fine. It was all consensual. I am so sober, that’s why I can’t do this right now.”...

 

[ClearAhead]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/livestory/sex-assault-trial-of-ex-world-junior-hockey-players-in-london-ont-unexpectedly-adjourned-for-the-day-9.6732547

Quite a compressive summary to date at the above link.

Otherwise today the trial was unexpectedly adjourned over a matter that transpired during lunch break amongst the lawyers however the media isn’t allowed to report the reason.

(source is above link)

Here are the agreed statement of facts​

Kate Dubinski
That concludes the Crown’s opening statement.

The Crown and defence have agreed on some of the facts, so they don’t have to argue about them. The agreed facts are:

• Room 209 was registered to McLeod and Formenton.
• The date in question is June 19, 2018.
• Surveillance video from Jack’s bar and the Delta hotel are authentic and admitted.
• Five videos from Drake Batherson’s phone taken inside Jack’s bar are authentic and admitted.
• McLeod gave police two videos from his phone in 2019. The first was taken at 3:35 a.m. and the second at 4:26 a.m.
• In 2022, police got five Snapchat videos taken at Jack’s bar that night from McLeod’s phone.

 

[CaptRenault]

The prosecution ("the Crown") made its opening statement in the trial Wednesday morning. After the lunch break, the judge adjourned the trial for the day to discuss a procedural matter with the attorneys.

Crown says London hockey trial 'a case about consent' | TSN

In the government’s opening statement in the trial of five former members of Canada’s 2018 world junior hockey team, assistant Crown attorney Heather Donkers told the jury on Wednesday that the case against the five players, "is about consent. And equally important, it is about what is not consent."

www.tsn.ca

 

[ClearAhead]

Legal arguments continue at Hockey Canada sexual assault trial

The sexual assault trial of five former Team Canada junior hockey players won’t be back before the jury until Friday.

lfpress.com

The sexual assault trial of five former Team Canada junior hockey players won’t be back before the jury until Friday.

 

[ClearAhead]

Well…

https://twitter.com/x/status/1915771781995995426

https://twitter.com/x/status/1915771823238660467

 

[ClearAhead]

This doesn’t happen very often, entire jury dismissed and a new panel to be selected.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1915772288214892576

 

[CaptRenault]

This doesn’t happen very often, entire jury dismissed and a new panel to be selected.

I'm not surprised at this news, because the delay of 1.5 days to discuss a legal matter with no jury present indicated that there was some serious legal problem with the trial.

 

[CaptRenault]

Now that a mistrial has been declared and the original jury was dismissed, how does the court proceed so quickly (the same day) with the process of selecting a new jury? Are there dozens of potential jurors who were just standing by? The process seems much quicker than what would happen in the U.S.

LIVE: Mistrial declared in sexual assault trial of former junior hockey players

Jury selection is underway for the second time in the high-profile sexual assault case against five former junior hockey players.

www.cp24.com

Jury selection is underway for the second time in the high-profile sexual assault case against five former junior hockey players.

Around 11:25 a.m., formal selection began with a total of 16 jurors to be selected, 12 of which will decide the case.

When court broke for lunch just after 1 p.m., seven jurors had been selected - four men and three women.

The previous jury was comprised of 11 women and three men.

Earlier in the day, a mistrial was declared.

 

[ClearAhead]

Now that a mistrial has been declared and the original jury was dismissed, how does the court proceed so quickly (the same day) with the process of selecting a new jury? Are there dozens of potential jurors who were just standing by? The process seems much quicker than what would happen in the U.S.

LIVE: Mistrial declared in sexual assault trial of former junior hockey players

Jury selection is underway for the second time in the high-profile sexual assault case against five former junior hockey players.

www.cp24.com

I don’t understand that either. Typically if a prospective juror is not chosen they’re free to leave. It could be they were all contacted yesterday with a request they be present at the courthouse today. In that case that the initial jury was about to be dismissed yesterday was a best kept secret.
JMO

Ontario judge declares mistrial in world junior sex assault case | Globalnews.ca

An Ontario judge has declared a mistrial in the high-profile sexual assault case involving five former members of Canada’s world junior hockey team.

globalnews.ca

“The process to select a new jury began shortly after Carroccia’s mistrial declaration; almost 200 prospective jurors were present at the courthouse, Global News observed.”

 

[CaptRenault]

Ontario judge declares mistrial in world junior sex assault case | Globalnews.ca

An Ontario judge has declared a mistrial in the high-profile sexual assault case involving five former members of Canada’s world junior hockey team.

globalnews.ca

“The process to select a new jury began shortly after Carroccia’s mistrial declaration; almost 200 prospective jurors were present at the courthouse, Global News observed.”

I guess what happened is that the mistrial was declared early enough in the day that there was still a large pool (200) of potential jurors on site who had not yet been assigned to another case or excused. A decision was made to allow the judge in the hockey trial to draw new jurors from that pool of jurors before they were questioned and assigned to another case. I had thought that the judge would have been forced to wait until Monday when a new pool of potential jurors showed up.

 

[Ceedee]

Now that a mistrial has been declared and the original jury was dismissed, how does the court proceed so quickly (the same day) with the process of selecting a new jury? Are there dozens of potential jurors who were just standing by? The process seems much quicker than what would happen in the U.S.

LIVE: Mistrial declared in sexual assault trial of former junior hockey players

Jury selection is underway for the second time in the high-profile sexual assault case against five former junior hockey players.

www.cp24.com

I’m an Ontario resident (Toronto), and the last time I was called for jury duty I reported in the morning and was told what room to go to. It was a straightforward sounding civil case expected to last a week with a short witness list, so the jury was selected within about 30 minutes. At that point, they told us to stay in the room because they’d see if any other trials needed jurors. On our day, none did, but they would’ve had 30+ people in our room alone to choose from if there had been a need.

According to news reports they selected a new jury already (Rick Westhead: New jury selected in London hockey case | TSN), but had they run out of people on Friday, more people reporting for routine jury duty this week would have been a new pool of options too.

 

[CaptRenault]

Monday's court session was mostly a repeat of the Crown's opening statement from the first trial (which was declared a mistrial though we don't know why).

Jury shown surveillance video in 2018 hockey sexual assault trial

The jury on the first day of the second trial for five former NHL players accused of a 2018 sexual assault on Monday was shown closed-circuit videos from the bar on the night of the alleged incident.

www.sportsnet.ca

Monday’s appearance in court in front of the jury was shorter than usual because of the federal election. Testimony is expected to continue on Tuesday.

 

[Ceedee]

CBC’s live updates are really good: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/li...h-key-races-still-too-close-to-call-9.6738893

I know things don’t move quickly in court and they were up front about the fact that this would take 8 weeks, but this seems to be moving at a glacial pace so far - the detective has been testifying since yesterday and it sounds like they’ve only reviewed a few photos and videos.

 

[otto]

Update on trial. Victim testified about night that she was assaulted. Shocking, degrading evening with five men abusing her.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/livestory/e-m-recalls-details-of-degrading-alleged-sex-assault-in-testimony-at-trial-of-ex-world-juniors-players-9.6748199

 

[Ceedee]

Her testimony is horrifying. IMO even if they’re not convicted, this behavior is so vile they’ll never play in the NHL again.

 

[otto]

End of the day, she is being cross-examined by five lawyers representing the five accused. From those questions, it sounds like there is also a civil suit. Good for her! They were a "team" through hockey, and a "team" during the rapes and assaults.

It's hard to believe that police were so laid-back after hearing what happened; that they were reluctant to lay charges.

"Humphrey asks E.M. about inconsistencies between her initial statement to police and her Hockey Canada statement of claim in her civil suit.

E.M. says there might be inconsistencies because the civil suit was started two years after her police statement, and she hadn’t reviewed her initial police statement when she reviewed her civil statement."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/livestory/recap-during-intense-testimony-e-m-recalls-degrading-alleged-sex-assault-by-ex-world-junior-players-9.6748199

 

[CaptRenault]

...It's hard to believe that police were so laid-back after hearing what happened; that they were reluctant to lay charges.

"Humphrey asks E.M. about inconsistencies between her initial statement to police and her Hockey Canada statement of claim in her civil suit.

E.M. says there might be inconsistencies because the civil suit was started two years after her police statement, and she hadn’t reviewed her initial police statement when she reviewed her civil statement."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/livestory/recap-during-intense-testimony-e-m-recalls-degrading-alleged-sex-assault-by-ex-world-junior-players-9.6748199

It's not hard to believe that the players were not charged after the initial police investigation of the incident in 2018. Police frequently investigate possible sexual assaults, present their findings to a prosecutor and the prosecutor decides that there is not enough evidence to get a conviction. That often happens in cases like this one, which is a "she said, he (or they) said" case. In other words, it's possible that the complainant consented to what happened and that is what the defense is arguing. Based on what has been reported about the case so far, I think there is reasonable doubt about whether the defendants committed sexual assault. There is a ways to go in the trial, but I think the defendants will be found not guilty.

There was no trial in the civil suit in 2022. Hockey Canada (the national governing body of hockey in Canada that is partly funded with public money) agreed to a settlement with the complainant and her lawyers. The players learned about the suit and the settlement after it was already settled. That suit and the settlement were initially not public but news of it leaked out and it caused an uproar. The politics around Hockey Canada's use of some of its money to pay off an accuser caused a scandal and pushed the London police to reopen the case and file charges.

 

[missy1974]

I didn't even know this trial had started! I just read the updates from this week ... not sure I will be able to follow the whole trial, sure seems like they don't get much done in a day.

I will try to go back to the beginning of the trial and read.

@CaptRenault From what little I have read of the trial so far and what I remember about how this all came out, I agree with your opinion/assessment above.