Advertisement 1

All five hockey players have been acquitted in sexual assault trial

Article content

LONDON — The high-profile sexual assault trial of five former members of Canada’s world junior hockey team ended Thursday with their acquittals, hailed by the defence as vindication and decried by the complainant’s lawyer as “devastating.”

Advertisement 2
Story continues below
Article content

Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dube and Callan Foote walked out of the packed London, Ont., courtroom surrounded by their family members after Ontario Superior Court Justice Maria Carroccia delivered her decision.

Article content
Article content

McLeod was also acquitted of a separate charge of being a party to the offence of sexual assault.

The ruling capped off a complex trial that captured national attention this spring and renewed conversations about consent and hockey culture.

Carroccia began by saying that she did not find the complainant’s testimony to be “either credible or reliable.”

“Considering the evidence in this trial as a whole, I conclude that the Crown cannot meet its onus on any of the counts,” she said.

Advertisement 3
Story continues below
Article content

Over the next several hours, the judge recapped the evidence in the case and detailed her reasons for finding the men not guilty.

She pointed to what she said were multiple inconsistencies in the complainant’s testimony, and how some of her statements differed from what she’d said to police and in a civil claim against Hockey Canada that was settled before the players were criminally charged.

Carroccia said the complainant tended to blame others for inconsistencies in her story and made references to “her truth,” which “seemingly blurs the line” between what she believes to be true and what is actually true.

The complainant’s was “very disappointed” with the ruling, her lawyer Karen Bellehumeur told reporters outside of court.

Article content
Advertisement 4
Story continues below
Article content

“She’s really never experienced not being believed like this before,” she said.

“She agreed to do everything asked of her by the criminal justice system. She spoke to the police whenever requested, she reviewed her evidence, she prepared her testimony, she answered every question, she spoke with intelligence and from her heart, yet it was not enough.”

Prosecutor Meaghan Cunningham thanked the complainant for coming forward, adding that her team will “carefully review” the judge’s decision while it’s still within the 30-day appeal period.

The players’ defence lawyers applauded the ruling outside of court, with McLeod’s counsel David Humphrey saying it represents a “resounding vindication.”

Supporters for 'E.M' gather outside a London Courthouse, in London, Ont., on July 24, 2025.
Supporters for ‘E.M’ gather outside a London Courthouse, in London, Ont., on July 24, 2025. Photo by Cole Burston /Getty Images

Megan Savard, a lawyer for Carter Hart, criticized Crown prosecutors for bringing the case forward and subjecting the defendants, complainant and public to what she said was a “distressing and unnecessary” trial.

Advertisement 5
Story continues below
Article content

The case centred on an encounter that took place in the early hours of June 19, 2018, as many members of that year’s national junior team were in town for a series of events celebrating their gold-medal performance.

Court heard the complainant had sex with McLeod, who she had met at a downtown bar earlier that night, in his hotel room — an encounter that was not part of the trial.

The charges related to what happened after several other players came into the room, with consent a central issue in the case.

Prosecutors alleged McLeod orchestrated a “campaign” to bring his friends into the room to engage in sexual acts with the woman without her knowledge or consent — a charge the judge rejected in her ruling.

The woman did not voluntarily consent to the sexual acts that took place in the room, the Crown argued, and the players did not take reasonable steps to confirm that she did despite circumstances that would call for additional caution.

Advertisement 6
Story continues below
Article content

The defence argued the woman actively participated in the sexual activity and was egging the men on at times, but later made up a false narrative to absolve herself of responsibility. They argued she came to court with an agenda and exaggerated her level of drunkenness that night to support her account and explain inconsistencies in it.

McLeod, Hart and Dube were accused of getting oral sex from the woman without her consent, and Dube was also accused of slapping her buttocks while she was engaged in a sexual act with someone else.

Formenton was alleged to have had vaginal sex with the complainant in the bathroom without her consent, and Foote was accused of doing the splits over her face and “grazing” his genitals on it without her consent.

Advertisement 7
Story continues below
Article content

Court heard McLeod sent a text to a team group chat shortly after 2 a.m. asking if anyone wanted a “three-way” and listing his room number. Hart replied he was “in,” according to screenshots shown at trial.

The woman was naked and drunk when men she didn’t know started coming into the room, she told the court during more than a week of testimony.

The men seemed to be laughing at her as they discussed sexual acts they wanted her to perform, she said, and she felt her mind “shut down” as her body moved on “autopilot.”

Two teammates who were called as Crown witnesses, Brett Howden and Tyler Steenbergen, testified the woman asked the group if anyone would have sex with her, as did Hart, the only accused player to take the stand in his own defence.

Advertisement 8
Story continues below
Article content

When that was put to her in cross-examination, the woman said she didn’t remember saying such things, but that if she did, it was because she was drunk and had taken on the persona of a “porn star” as a coping mechanism.

Carroccia said in her ruling that several people had testified that the woman was the one who was initiating or encouraging sexual activity in the room and that the complainant’s testimony about her state of mind was not credible.

“In my view, the complainant exaggerated her intoxication,” she said.

Carroccia also said the woman did not appear to be intoxicated in two short videos recorded that night, in which she said she was “OK” with what was happening and that “it was all consensual.”

The trial began in late April and was initially heard by a jury, but Carroccia twice discharged the panel and eventually the trial was switched to a judge alone to avoid having to start over a second time.

Nine witnesses testified, most of them remotely — including the complainant, who testified via CCTV from another room in the courthouse.

Protesters gathered the London courthouse on Thursday, holding signs that signalled support for the complainant. Others gathered in support of the hockey players.

Article content
Page was generated in 2.7986118793488