The London courthouse in London, Ont., is shown on April 30.Nicole Osborne/The Canadian Press
Defence lawyer Megan Savard, who is representing one of the five former members of Canada’s world junior hockey team accused of sexually assaulting a woman in a hotel room in London, Ont., in 2018, sparred with the complainant Thursday over where in the room she said she was crying during the alleged incident.
In the complainant’s fourth day being cross-examined in a London courtroom, Ms. Savard challenged the woman, who is known publicly as E.M., about testimony she has given that she was crying in the hotel room in front of the players, rather than in a bathroom away from the men.
The defence lawyer also challenged E.M. about testimony she has given during the players’ criminal trial, now in its second week, alleging that the players stopped her from leaving after noticing her crying.
These assertions sparked a lengthy and heated exchange between Ms. Savard and the complainant.
Ms. Savard took E.M. through the statement she gave to a London police detective in 2018. In that statement, court heard that E.M. told police the players were coaxing her to stay by saying things like: “Come on, like, don’t leave.”
(E.M. has testified that during the alleged assault, she was crying at times and attempted to leave the hotel room, but when this happened, someone would “put their arm around me and guide me back.”)
E.M. explained on Thursday that if her initial account to police wasn’t perfect, it was only because she was doing her best under difficult circumstances, just three days after the alleged group assault.
“I couldn’t possibly recall every single detail that soon after and being that traumatized still and trying to get all the details out to a stranger in a room,” E.M. said, asserting that her recollection of this part of the night has never changed.
Ms. Savard had a different explanation: “I’m going to further suggest that the version you told the police in 2018 is a lot less criminal sounding than the version you told the jury today. You agree with that?”
E.M. replied: “No, I don’t, because I think my feelings and sentiments about it remain the same regardless of my word choice.”
Next, they debated her previous statements about where in the hotel room she was crying.
Ms. Savard challenged E.M. to find a passage in the transcript of her 2018 police statement that proved her assertion about her crying in the wider room, rather than just away from the players in the bathroom.
“Sorry, where’s the comment between the two − or two or more − defendants? ‘She’s crying, don’t let her leave.’ Where’s that?” Ms. Savard asked.
Defence lawyer in Hockey Canada sexual-assault trial alleges complainant asked for ‘wild night’
E.M. reviewed the transcript and began reading a passage that Ms. Savard had highlighted.
“It’s right there where I say ‘and I could hear them. They’re like, oh, she, she’s crying.’ That’s exactly me speaking on what I heard them say,” E.M. said. “Thank you for finding that.”
Ms. Savard told E.M. that she appreciated she was trying to advocate for her own position, but that she needed to focus on the specific parts of the transcript − such as the section where she describes crying in the bathroom.
To this, E.M. began reading her own words again from the 2018 statement, in which she found a passage that she said supported the version she’s been telling in court: “ ‘I would get up to the bathroom, I would start crying.’ I didn’t say I was in the bathroom yet. I was getting up to go to the bathroom.”
Said Ms. Savard: “Ma’am, I’m not asking you to interpret your transcript.”
“Your honour,” Crown attorney Meaghan Cunningham interjected. “That’s literally what she’s asking.”
Ms. Savard, who is representing Carter Hart, finished her cross-examination shortly after the afternoon break.
Lawyer Daniel Brown, who is representing Alex Formenton, began his questioning late Thursday afternoon.
Two more defence attorneys are left to cross-examine E.M.
Michael McLeod, Mr. Hart, Mr. Formenton, Dillon Dubé and Cal Foote are each accused of sexually assaulting E.M. Mr. McLeod faces a second charge of being a party to sexual assault.
Each has pleaded not guilty.
The Crown has alleged that the five players sexually assaulted E.M. after a Hockey Canada gala in the early morning hours of June 19, 2018. Court has heard that E.M. met the players at a London bar called Jack’s and that after a night of drinking and dancing, she and Mr. McLeod went to his hotel and had consensual sex.
After they finished, Mr. McLeod began texting his teammates inviting them to the room to engage in sexual activity, court heard.
Wednesday’s proceedings ended early after E.M. broke down in tears under questioning from Ms. Savard about a lawsuit she filed in 2022 against Hockey Canada and eight unnamed players.
Hockey Canada complainant tells sexual-assault trial she was afraid, felt she had no choice
Ms. Savard repeatedly pressed E.M. – who has told the jury that she has been careful never to falsely accuse anyone – about why she accused additional players in her lawsuit, who she has now said did not sexually assault her.
E.M. has told the court that her lawyers drafted the document.
The emotional moment capped off the end of a tense day of cross-examination, in which Ms. Savard asserted that on the night in question, E.M. was acting in a way that would have led the players to believe she was a willing participant.
On Thursday, Ontario Superior Court Justice Maria Carroccia addressed the statement of claim with jurors, saying that the untested allegations in the document are not proof of any wrongdoing in the criminal proceedings.
Court has heard evidence that Hockey Canada settled the suit for an undisclosed amount without the knowledge of the players.