The five Hockey Canada players on trial for sexual assault were Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dube, and Cal Foote.Each player was found not guilty on all charges against them.Justice Carroccia delivered a decisive ruling Thursday in the case of five hockey players accused of sex assault in London, stating she does not find the accuser's testimony credible or reliable. “I do not find the evidence of E.M. to be either credible or reliable,” said Carroccia.The judge determined that consent was not compromised by fear in the case. Family members of the accused players wept openly as the verdict was announced in court..MAGA supporting Christian artist Sean Feucht faces more cancelled concerts across Canada.Carroccia continues reviewing the events that took place in the hotel room and the evidence presented at trial. She specifically notes that E.M. admitted it was possible her behaviour towards the players could have been seen as "flirty." E.M. told the court she was not thinking clearly because she was drunk. She stated that if she had been sober, she could have left the situation. E.M. described herself as acting on "auto-pilot" during the incident. Justice Carroccia also mentioned E.M.'s statement about feeling like her mind and body separated once the players came into the room..Carroccia said that E.M. confirmed defence lawyer Megan Savard's suggestion regarding her limited recollection of statements made within the hotel room. Savard represented Carter Hart.The complainant acknowledged having minimal memory of her verbal exchanges during the incident.E.M. testified that she felt compelled to participate in the sexual activities, saying she felt no choice in the matter. The judge documented E.M.'s testimony indicating she may have assumed what she characterized as "the persona of a porn star" during the encounter. According to her testimony, this behaviour stemmed from her belief that such conduct aligned with the expectations of the men present.The court record showed E.M.'s acknowledgment that this adopted persona represented her perception of what the accused individuals desired from the interaction. Carroccia pointed out these statements as part of the complainant's testimony regarding her experience and decision making during the alleged incident..The judge pointed out that E.M. admitted during questioning by David Humphrey, who represents Michael McLeod, that McLeod had asked if she was comfortable with what was happening. She told him she was okay with things, and this exchange was recorded on video. When pressed about this statement in court, E.M. responded by asking what else she could have said in that situation.Carroccia then reviewed the consent videos that Michael McLeod had recorded during the incident. The first video lasted six seconds and showed E.M. from the neck up. McLeod can be heard asking if she was okay with what was happening, and E.M. replied that she was..A second video clip ran for 12 seconds. E.M. is in this recording while covering herself with a towel. She asks if McLeod is recording her, then continues speaking. She states that everything was consensual and calls McLeod paranoid. E.M. says she enjoyed what happened and that it was fine. She repeats that everything was consensual and mentions being sober, adding that this was why she could not continue at that moment.However, E.M. testified in court that her statements in the video did not reflect her true feelings at the time. She alleged that while she said everything was consensual, this was not actually how she felt during the incident..In an interview with the Western Standard, Edmonton defence lawyer, Tom Engel, expressed no surprise at the acquittal of the five players, asserting that justice was served through a fair trial with proper application of the law."I expect that Hockey Canada and other sporting organizations have already changed the rules and have probably educated their players about how to avoid problems like this. And so, this should never have happened. Obviously, it's a black mark on Hockey Canada about what had happened. They weren't crimes, but obviously the behavior that occurred, I would think that most people in society would disapprove of it," Engel said."So, Hockey Canada, I'm sure they have a suite of rules, and I'm sure that they've trained their players in terms of how to avoid problems like this and what the law is on consent."Engel criticized the Crown Prosecution Service for pursuing a weak case, suggesting it did a disservice to the complainant and the players.
