Hockey Canada sexual assault trial verdict expected: What to know

Warning: This story contains graphical details

Five players in the Canadian ice hockey will learn accused of sexual assault on a woman their fate on Thursday in a case that acquired the country.

The accused men, all of them are the former players of the World Junior Hockey team in Canada, that they were not guilty of assaulting women in a hotel room in 2018 in London, Ontario, where they were attending the hockey party in Canada.

At the heart of the trial, the woman, who was twenty years old, agreed to this Every sexual act It was revealed for several hours in that hotel room.

The case also raised questions about whether the toxic culture is present in the favorite sport in Canada.

Judge Maria Karukia, who heads the case, will receive her ruling Thursday morning in a courtroom in London.

Before the trialand The case was forced at an account inside Haki Canada – which is largely seen as Canada’s voice of hockey on the ice on the international stage – after it appeared that the sports body had reached a quiet settlement with the alleged victim in 2022, and hit a box to settle similar allegations.

Hockey lost the main sponsors, faced a parliamentary investigation and its federal financing was frozen in the wake of this. It later announced a plan to address “regular issues” in the ice hockey culture.

The complainant, a woman publicly known as EM, claims that a standard publishing ban, claims that a group of hockey players participate in her sexual activity with her without her consent.

The accused are Michael McCloid, Delon Dobby, Calfot, Alex Formon and Carter Hart. All of them were players in the National Hockey League (NHL) when these allegations appeared, although one was playing in Europe.

Over the course of nine days of the graphic certificate sometimes during the experiment, EM described how standing one night turned with mcleod into a collective sexual assault.

EM said she went to the Mcleod hotel room after meeting him in a local bar, and they had a sexual contact. But she claims that he called on his other colleagues to the room, leaving her shock and insult while participating in sexual activity with her, she said she did not agree with her.

Over the course of the trial, the judge heard that the players had made a variety of sexual acts on it, including orally, communication, and slapping the buttocks for women.

Lawyers tell the players a different story, and this agreed to these actions.

They argue that she gave men the impression that she wanted to spend a “wild night” and that she discussed with McLEOD his friends’ invitation “to get some fun.”

The players claim that the woman asked them to have sex with her, and that she agreed to what happened in that evening in London.

There have been many legal transformations and turns since the trial began on April 23, including announcing an early trial and the jury rejected the middle of the road, after the members accused some defense lawyers of ridicule them.

The case will now be determined by the judge.

In the opening arguments, the crown lawyer, Heather Dunker, warned the jury that the case will be unconventional and may challenge prior concepts about approval and assault.

She said that it will not be about whether the woman “removed herself from an unwanted situation,” but if she voluntarily agreed to engage in every sexual act that happened. “

Evidence included texts from the McLED phone, which showed him the invitation of other players to his room for “3 methods” and asked EM to conduct police investigations at night “move away”.

The court also witnessed a collective chat from June 2018 between the players who seemed to discuss control of the damage after they reported that there would be an internal investigation into Canada in the accident.

A text on the chat collection wrote from the McLED phone: “We all need to say the same if we are interviewed [by Hockey Canada]You cannot have different stories or configure anything. “

“No children, just as you do not need to form anything. No one did any mistake. We went to that room to eat. The girl came. She wanted to have sex with us all,” another teammate answered.

The court also shown two video clip of the woman wrapped in a towel after the accident, where she could hear, “It was everything by mutual consent.”

Over the days of martyrdom, m She said that she was “uncomfortable” and put a “automatic pilot” position where men demanded sexual work from her, and that they discussed the golf balls and a golf club in her vagina.

The woman told the court that she adopted a “porn star” as a mechanism for adaptation. A lawyer for one of the players faced that her actions made men believe that she agreed.

Defense lawyers also used text messages sent to her friend the next day, noting that she discussed the accident, but she did not say that she was sexually assaulted.

“I will suggest to you that if you have – in any way, shape or shape – you felt that you had sexually violated or used to that night, and you would have said that to your best friend,” said Lisa Carnellos, defense lawyer.

Only one of the accused players, Carter Hart, witnessed his defense.

In response to the crown request why the woman was asked to be photographed for approval, he answered that it was a common practices for professional athletes.

The case was reopened by the London Police after its initial investigation in 2018 and early 2019 ended without charges. Official fees were later placed in early 2024.

The five players were forced to put their professions for hockey while waiting during the case. All of them were NHL contracts when they were asked to surrender to the police in January 2024, forcing them to take leave from their teams.

NHL contracts have ended since then.

Just two days after the trial began on April 23, Judge Carroccia announced a wrong trial after an interaction between a jury member and a defense lawyer.

Then a new experience was requested with a new jury from 14 members.

then May 16, the jury was rejected when one of the members complained to Judge Karukia that the defense lawyer himself laughed at them and mocked their backs.

While the judge said she did not witness bad behavior, the accusation had led to the prosecution of the trial.

Instead of restarting the trial again, the lawyers agreed to both sides that the case will be decided by the judge alone.

The issue has topped the headlines throughout the country.

Caroline Connerone, a criminal lawyer from London, Ontario, told the BBC that the courtroom had been crammed in the early days – especially during the EM certificate.

He attracted attention to the national attention and the esteemed place of the ice hockey in national awareness.

“It is an extraordinary issue from a legal and social perspective,” said Dafni Gilbert, a law professor at Ottawa University, pointing to “zigzag” and “extraordinary”, as well as the impact of allegations on hockey Canada as an institution.

Legally, Professor Gilbert said that there is an interest in how the issue is reinterpreted how approval is explained in Canada.

It was established under Canadian law that approval is not the absence of “no”, but rather a “yes” confirmation of words or behavior. Approval cannot be obtained before or after sexual act.

Professor Gilbert said the case raises important questions about how to explain approval in a situation in which the victim says they felt had no choice.

There was criticism of some measures, especially from the support groups of victims of sexual assault.

The Ontario Alliance for Rape Crisis Centers, a network of more than 30 social assault centers in Ontario, said that the lawyer’s procedure is harmful to “myths” on sexual assault.

“During the past few weeks and five interrogation operations in court, EM faced almost all the legend of harmful sexual assault and the victim,” they said in a statement.

Professor Gilbert said that the big question would be if it was good at the end to pass EM with this experience, “regardless of the result.

She said, “There will be talks about how we deal with the complainants of sexual assault and what we ask in these cases,” with some question most likely: “Is it worth it?”

The NHL Gary Bettman Commissioner did not mention whether the players will be allowed to return to play in the league if they are acquitted.

Mr. Peteman said earlier this year: “We have constantly said that we are not making any comments during the judicial process. We respect that,” said Mr. Peteman earlier this year.

“I want to be clear. What has been claimed is hateful and disgusting and should not be allowed,” he added.