English
LONDON, ONTARIO — The complainant at the center of the high-profile sexual assault case involving five former members of Canada’s World Junior hockey team faced a fourth day of intense cross-examination on Wednesday, as defence lawyers scrutinized her past statements for inconsistencies.
Appearing virtually in a London courtroom, the 27-year-old woman, whose identity is protected under a publication ban, was questioned by Carter Hart’s lawyer, Megan Savard, who alleged discrepancies in her past interviews and testimonies. Savard suggested that the complainant demonstrated “different degrees of care” depending on the investigative body — whether London Police or Hockey Canada — and accused her of providing false explanations for contradictions.
The woman, referred to as E.M., stood by her account, stating that at times over the years, she was simply trying to survive the trauma and avoid reliving the events. “I didn’t want to go back there,” she told the court.
Defence Suggests Consent, Complainant Reasserts Coercion
Savard echoed an earlier line of questioning by McLeod’s lawyer, David Humphrey, who on Tuesday characterized the complainant as seeking a “wild night” and implied she willingly engaged in group sex following an initial consensual encounter with McLeod.
Humphrey contended that E.M., who was 20 at the time, was “flirtatious” and voluntarily extended the night’s events. E.M., however, testified that after consensual sex with McLeod, she was subjected to hours of unwanted sexual acts by multiple men — including being slapped, spit on, and degraded — without giving consent.
Under continued questioning, she maintained she was in a state of emotional shock, responding to overwhelming pressure from the group. “It didn’t feel like I had any other option,” she said. “That is how my body responded based on the situation I was in.”
Savard went further, suggesting the complainant “adopted the persona of a porn star” to cope with the trauma, to which E.M. responded that she did what she thought was necessary to survive. “I was on auto-pilot … going through the motions to make sure I could get out of there.”
Motive and Memory in Question
Savard also questioned whether E.M. may have fabricated the allegations due to concerns about her romantic relationship. She implied the complainant feared her boyfriend — now fiancé — would leave her if she admitted to consensual group sex with several hockey players. E.M. denied this, stating she had been transparent with her partner and accepted responsibility for the initial consensual act with McLeod.
The defence’s overarching strategy appears focused on reframing the night’s events as consensual and undermining the complainant’s credibility through perceived memory lapses and contradictions.
Crown Alleges Coordinated Assault
According to Crown prosecutor Heather Donkers, the incident occurred in June 2018 following a Hockey Canada gala celebrating a gold medal win. After meeting McLeod and other players at a downtown bar, the complainant went with McLeod to his hotel room where they had consensual sex. Donkers alleges that McLeod then began inviting teammates into the room, where a series of non-consensual sexual acts followed.
Court was told that the woman was recorded on video during the incident, at one point saying, “It was all consensual.” However, the Crown has stated that it will argue those recordings — allegedly made by McLeod — do not accurately reflect the reality of coercion and the lack of true consent.
What Comes Next
The trial, which has attracted nationwide attention, continues this week with further cross-examinations expected from other defence lawyers. All five accused — Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dube, and Callan Foote — have pleaded not guilty to the charges.
McLeod faces an additional charge of being a party to the offence of sexual assault.
