Hockey Canada Sexual Assault Trial: Defense Continues To Cross-Examine Complainant

Warning: coverage of the Hockey Canada trial includes graphic details of alleged sexual assault that may be disturbing to readers.

The defense continued its cross-examination of the complainant in the Hockey Canada sexual assault trial on Tuesday, questioning her about events at a London, Ont., bar and hotel room in June 2018.

Advertisement

This continued cross-examination is part of a trial that sees five former members of Canada’s 2018 World Junior Championship team – former NHLers Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dube and Cal Foote – each being charged and pleading not guilty to one count of sexual assault. McLeod also pleaded not guilty to an additional charge of sexual assault as party to the offense.

These charges are connected to a June 2018 incident in which E.M., the complainant whose identity is protected by a publication ban, alleges she was sexually assaulted in a hotel room following a Hockey Canada gala.

One of McLeod’s defense attorneys, David Humphrey, questioned the complainant about her knowledge of the players at Jack’s Bar the night of June 18, 2018. He asked her about something she may have heard regarding McLeod from a man at the bar named Matt Maccarone, previously identified by another Crown witness, London Police detective Tiffany Waque, as “a sponsor but not part of the team.”

“Do you remember Matt Maccarone saying Mr. McLeod was an elite player who might play in the NHL one day?” Humphrey asked.

Advertisement

“No. He said he’s a good guy, take care of him. He made it seem like he was well off, that he (McLeod) had a lot of money.” E.M. replied.

Later in the cross-examination, Humphrey presented previously seen security footage from the dance floor at Jack’s on the night of June 18, specifically picking out three specific frames that appeared to show the complainant placing her hand on McLeod’s crotch area.

E.M. had said in her Crown testimony that “they would move my hand to touch their crotch area.”

She agreed that in the footage shown, she did touch McLeod’s crotch on her own, but she said there were other instances from earlier in the night where some of the team members were moving her hand to their crotch area.

Advertisement

Humphrey questioned E.M. further on videos taken on the dance floor in the bar, suggesting she appeared to be enjoying the attention she was receiving from McLeod and other team members in the video.

“It was confusing for me because I’m not used to that kind of attention at the bar. It was not usual for me,” E.M. said. “They made it seem like it was fine, and with the amount I had to drink, I thought I’d go along with it. I thought maybe I should feel flattered and not question it too much.”

Humphrey questioned why E.M. never just “ditched” McLeod at the bar instead of going with him to the hotel in the early hours of June 19. The complainant, as during her Crown testimony, said she has always had a hard time saying no to people.

“Do you say yes to all kinds of things you just don’t want to do?” Humphrey asked.

Advertisement

“Sometimes, yes,” E.M. replied.

From there, the cross-examination’s topic shifted to the Delta Armouries Hotel, where the complainant and McLeod both went after the bar before engaging in consensual sex. Humphrey suggested that at that point, E.M. was the one who asked McLeod if he could invite his other friends from the bar to the room, despite the complainant saying she believes McLeod was the one who solely came up with the idea and messaged other team members.

“No, I wouldn’t have done that. I would have wanted to go home,” E.M. said in response to Humphrey’s suggestion.

Humphrey continues asking about the events from inside the hotel room, consistently questioning why she hadn’t just left the room or said no to any of the men’s sexual requests.

Advertisement

“You make it seem like you had no choice,” Humphrey said.

“I didn’t feel like I had a choice, no,” E.M. answered.

The questions then focused on a pair of videos filmed in the hotel room at 3:25 a.m. and 4:26 a.m. on June 19. In the videos, which were previously shown during the trial, the complainant says she is “OK” with what is going on and that “this was all consensual.”

Humphrey suggested that McLeod had asked if E.M. was OK with what was happening throughout the night, but E.M. says she only recalled it being during and just before he took the videos.

The cross-examination closed with Humphrey asking about the end of the night after the final video was taken and the “rude” behavior that E.M. referenced in her initial reporting of the incident. The complainant testified that after the video, McLeod hopped into bed and said something like, “Are you leaving anytime soon?”

Advertisement

“I think the whole thing wasn’t respectful, but at the end, he was being rude,” E.M. said.

E.M. agreed with Humphrey on Monday that she had a boyfriend at the time. On Tuesday, Humphrey brought that up again.

“You were upset because you’d gone on your own to the hotel room and cheated on your boyfriend,” Humphrey said.

E.M. replied that she was angry about that and at herself for going to the room in the first place.

Further cross-examination of the complainant by other members of the defense counsel is expected to continue on Wednesday.