Hockey Canada trial explained: Key evidence and arguments that swung decision in favor of 5 accused players

The Hockey Canada trial concluded on Thursday, with the five defendants receiving a not guilty verdict.

The five members of the 2018 Canada World Junior Hockey team had been charged with sexual assault related to a purported incident that occurred in June 2018. The alleged victim, whose identity was withheld for security reasons, claimed she had been sexually assaulted by Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Dillon Dubé, Alex Formenton and Cal Foote.

The charges included sexual assault for all five defendants, with McLeod facing two counts. The charges stemmed from an incident following a ceremony honoring the 2018 World Junior Team's gold medal performance. The incident in question happened in a hotel room later that night involving the complainant, who was 20 at the time.

The woman claimed that she had been forced into non-consensual sexual activity with the five defendants, using footage as evidence of the events.

After a legal process that lasted roughly a year and a half, Justice Carroccia, who presided over the proceedings, said the complainant was “neither credible nor reliable."

“Having found that I cannot rely upon the evidence of E.M. and then considering the evidence in this trial as a whole, I conclude that the Crown cannot meet its onus on any of the counts before me.”

As such, the Crown was unable to meet the burden of proof necessary to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that the woman, identified as E.M., had been pressured into non-consensual sexual acts with the defendants.

The main focus of the trial was two videos recorded by McLeod that showed E.M. had consented to everything that took place. However, in her testimony, E.M. said she had only consented because she was intoxicated and afraid of the defendants.

The most compelling argument from Justice Carroccia came when she announced the not guilty verdict for Carter Hart. As The Athletic noted:

“Carroccia said that by acting in a sexual manner, masturbating and asking men to have sex with her, E.M. established a willingness to engage in sexual activity.”

E.M. had accused Dube of slapping her buttocks while she was engaged in a sexual act with someone else. He had also been accused of obtaining oral sex from the complainant.

“I cannot find beyond a reasonable doubt that this conduct on the part of the complainant was non-consensual,” Carroccia said. "I cannot separate the slap from my broader findings."

The not guilty verdict was reached seven years after initial reports were made to the London, Ontario, police. The Hockey Canada trial moved forward after the defendants voluntarily surrendered to law enforcement.

There is no word yet on whether the Crown will appeal the not guilty ruling at this time.

What the not guilty verdict in Hockey Canada trial means for players involved

The not guilty verdict in the Hockey Canada trial essentially absolves the players involved of criminal liability. The Crown can still appeal the verdict, but a new criminal case cannot be pursued.

However, the players could face a civil suit from the plaintiff. While the grounds for such a suit remain to be seen, E.M. could pursue damages in connection with the incidents.

It also remains to be seen what the NHL decides regarding these players’ futures. The league did not openly ban the players. However, their respective teams did not issue qualifying offers to the players following the end of their entry-level deals. Only Alex Formenton received a qualifying offer, maintaining his RFA status with the Ottawa Senators.

Since the players are now UFAs, they are free to sign with any team that chooses to give them a chance.

It could be an interesting summer for the five players involved in the Hockey Canada trial as they look to get their NHL careers back on track.