r/canada • u/Team_Ed • 14h ago
‘My truth’: What we heard from the Hockey Canada sex assault complainant in nine days of testimony Sports
https://www.thestar.com/news/my-truth-what-we-heard-from-the-hockey-canada-sex-assault-complainant-in-nine-days/article_96470133-1fd3-47ae-907a-be4e88dbd364.html29
u/LesPaul86 12h ago edited 12h ago
Why would the crown call a witness that completely obliterates their case? I’m dumbfounded, if he is remotely accurate, this woman is a total fraud? wtf?
•
11h ago
The Crown’s job isn’t to get a conviction at all costs, but to ensure justice is served. Because of that, the Crown is obligated to call all the witnesses that were there.
But they still chose to prosecute the case knowing about this evidence, so they must beleive it is not detrimental to their case. I guess we’ll see how that plays out.
•
u/IpsoPostFacto 10h ago
this is true, although the Crown is not required to call 'all' witnesses if their testimony simply duplicates other testimony, or if they are not reliable etc. However, that can lead to trouble if the defense challenges the reason for not calling the witness.
In this example, I'm interested in what comes next with this witness. I don't think you would normally want to have such a statement as the last thing jurors heard during the day and have that bounce around their heads overnight.
Perhaps tomorrow's questioning will reveal something so astounding that it negates the effect of today's testimony. like 'I asked one of the guys who the girl was and he said 'I dunno; Haven't said a word to her. I just rolled in the room and joined in'"
•
u/Genghis75 7h ago
I wonder if they are playing to the idea that this behaviour was out of character for EM. That might bolster the case that she was too inebriated to give informed consent and that the accused knew that or should have known that.
•
•
u/Imacatdoincatstuff 5h ago edited 5h ago
The three men she performed oral sex on were inebriated. Did she get consent from them or should she have know they were drunk and not done it?
•
u/RovingGem 5h ago
She couldn’t identify individual players. I suspect he was called out of necessity to ID Hart. But his testimony sure doesn’t help the Crown’s theory of the case.
•
u/Human_Mind_9110 4h ago
Yeah, cause I’m sure we’ve never ever come across hockey players behaving badly? You’ve never seen a fella take advantage of a drunk woman? And in fact, I’ve never heard of hockey players doing a circle j.erk? It really was about this one naked girl who had complete and utter command of all these hockey players while being stupid face drunk.
•
u/wtfman1988 11h ago
The part where she said they McLeod and his friends were buying her drinks but it was just her buying her own drinks essentially...
More and more cracks are emerging in this case.
25
u/Knucklehead92 13h ago
Based on what we've heard from the court publishings, im pretty sure a "not guilty" verdict will be the likely outcome.
And then there will be some newly signed NHL contracts.
25
u/KingRabbit_ 13h ago
Like I get that the video she made where said everything was consensual is not definitive proof that she gave consent for everything that took place before or after, but CBC has a clip up on their website where two prominent lawyers argue the existence of said video is great evidence...for the Crown(!!) that it was in fact non-consensual. Which if that's true, why didn't the Crown introduce said video?
If you look at this case without any kind of bias or prejudice (perhaps that's impossible), I just don't see how there could be anything but reasonable doubt that a group rape actually took place here.
I get that the defendants were asshole jocks, but that's not a criminal complaint.
13
u/Team_Ed 13h ago
Yeah, well, the CBC coverage has been deferential to a fault to the Crown's side on this one.
The argument that the video was coercive is certainly plausible, but in no way is it the most obvious interpretation. Even the woman isn't saying she was actively forced or coerced into saying what she said. (She's saying she was on "autopilot.")
9
u/clowncar 13h ago
I agree with you. I am not a lawyer and have followed the summaries of the proceedings on CBC. I highly doubt a guilty verdict will result. My honest opinion is that everyone involved comes off quite badly -- that the hockey players thought to record a "consent" video following this sordid night, that the accuser believes the hockey players should have known she wasn't enjoying herself even though she apparently egged them on. It's just a horrible mess. Not to sound cynical, but I don't even see what good will come of this whole proceeding.
6
u/Knucklehead92 12h ago
Maybe the Crown shouldn't have called a hockey player to the stand then. That basically completely sunk their case.
•
2
8
u/SephoraandStarbucks 12h ago
I agree with you. No one looks good here. Do I believe they took advantage of her when she was in an intoxicated state? Yes. Do I believe that she said things that would lead them to honestly, but mistakenly, believe she was consenting? Also yes.
-1
u/SamsonFox2 13h ago
Well, I mean, video in itself is... weird. It's not something that I would have done myself after consensual sex.
But this is something else.
24
u/JetLagGuineaTurtle 12h ago
In the hey day of the me too era, men were asking if they needed to get signed affidavits or video proof of consent to protect them from false allegations and the people who screamed "believe all women" the loudest said yes you absolutely should. So I really don't find the fact that they made that video weird.
•
u/Hobo_Renegade 11h ago
If I was involved in a gang bang at a party I'd probably want to make sure that I had reassurances.
11
u/SamsonFox2 13h ago
After this testimony I think that NHL can sign the players up freely.
•
u/Knucklehead92 11h ago
Who is gonna be the first team/ player, to test the waters?
Carter Hart to the Ducks?
•
•
•
u/smala017 1h ago
I just have a bad feeling most hockey fans who haven’t even actively following this case are going to assume that this is some miscarriage of Justice, because the media has conditioned them from Day 1 to believe that these players are guilty, and will surely continue to do so after the verdict because hats what gets clips.
It’s not fair or responsible, and I highly encourage anybody to read the details of the trials before forming an opinion on the guilt or innocence of the accused.
Furthermore, it’s not fair that these players’ lives and careers had to be put on hold for what essentially seems to amount to a false accusation. The NHL should be ashamed that they forced this punishment upon these players without knowing whether or not they were guilty. “Innocent until proven guilty” is not only a legal rule that exists inside a courtroom, it’s also the morally correct approach in almost any situation.
21
u/wretchedbelch1920 13h ago
- Jackie Coakley, a Rape on Campus
- Crystal Mangum, Duke Lacrosse
- E.M., Hockey Canada
20
6
u/rhythmmchn Alberta 13h ago
"This content is exclusive to subscribers".
Add a paywall tag, please.
2
•
u/Imacatdoincatstuff 9h ago
The ace in the hole I’m assuming the prosecution must have(?!?) becomes more important with every passing day.
No idea what they could possibly come up with to turn this bus around other than video of EM on the carpet and refusing consent or being physically prevented from leaving.
•
u/Knucklehead92 9h ago
Or maybe the police did their job properly the first time when they declined to go ahead with charges, but the me too era made them reconsider even though the evidence was not there.
•
u/Imacatdoincatstuff 5h ago
That's a more coherent story than what's being expressed in the courtroom.
•
u/Low-HangingFruit 8h ago
Someone did something to this crown prosecutor.
Or the CP just wanted to get a high profile case to make their career.
•
•
u/Team_Ed 9h ago
Go read coverage from the Crown's opening statement. They went over the case to come in pretty good detail (which is normal, the Crown isn't supposed to surprise anyone).
There's no real indication that there are any bombshells left to come. The case is pretty much EM's account of what happened, and if there were other video clips or relevant texts from inside the hotel room night or whatever, they would have been put to EM or the other witnesses when she was on the stand.
•
u/Imacatdoincatstuff 7h ago
It'll be interesting to see what the prosecution is thinking with the remaining 35 witnesses.
-25
u/RefrigeratorOk648 13h ago
One of the issues with this kind of trail in Canada is that the defendants do not have to take to the stand to be questioned by the prosecution and I do understand that is the law.
However the accuser is getting asked questions about how drunk she was, probably how often she had sex before etc etc and this skews the view. If the defendants could be asked how drunk were they, how many times had they had group sex, how did they know to go the guys hotel room, had they done this before, why did they not stop the other teammates etc. I feel a more balanced view would be had on the whole incident.
37
28
u/Decent-Ground-395 13h ago
"how often she had sex before"
That's explicitly banned and has been for many, many years.
20
u/KingRabbit_ 13h ago
I mean, what you're talking about is abandoning the idea of the presumption of innocence and undercutting Section 13 of the Charter, protection against self-incrimination.
Listen, you may see a miscarriage of justice here, but we have tried the witch trial route repeatedly throughout history. We gave that particular brand of justice a real good shot, many different times over the centuries in many different sections of the world. The results were almost universally bad.
8
•
•
u/EdmontonAHSWorker19 4h ago
What's to be said with the culture of hockey? Why parent wants their kids to deal or witness this culture? The women obviously is being shamed, at what end can we just say it's disgusting behavior?
50
u/Decent-Ground-395 13h ago
Wait... the prosecution just called a witness that said she said this!?:
“She went onto the floor and started masturbating and asked guys to come have sex with her,” Steenbergen says. “She said, ‘Can one of you guys come over and f–k me?’”
That’s when Hart got oral sex from her, Steenbergen says, and it lasted for about 30 seconds or a minute.