Crown prosecutors delivered their final arguments on Wednesday in the sexual assault trial involving five former members of Canada’s 2018 World Juniors hockey team, urging the judge to reject claims that the complainant consented to a series of alleged group sexual acts in a London, Ontario, hotel room.
Prosecutor Meaghan Cunningham argued that hockey player Michael McLeod set the events in motion by inviting his teammates to his room with the suggestion of group sex, without the woman’s knowledge or consent. According to Cunningham, some players were already expecting sex with the woman before meeting her or even knowing her name, based on a group text McLeod sent offering a “three-way quick.”
“This is the context in which everything else takes place that night,” Cunningham said, calling it the lens through which the court must assess the testimony of all involved. She urged Ontario Superior Court Justice Maria Carroccia to reject the defence’s narrative that the woman had initiated or welcomed the group activity, pointing to her repeated expressions of shock and distress during the night in question.
The trial centers on whether the woman consented to sexual acts that followed her initial encounter with McLeod, who left a downtown bar with her after a Hockey Canada event in June 2018. Their initial sexual encounter is not part of the charges, which relate only to what happened afterward in McLeod’s hotel room.
McLeod is charged with sexual assault and an additional count of being a party to the offence. Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dube, and Callan Foote are also facing sexual assault charges. The Crown alleges the woman, who was drunk and naked, became frightened as more men entered the room, and felt pressured to comply, describing her actions as being on “autopilot.”
Text messages presented in court show McLeod offering a group sexual opportunity to his teammates. Hart responded he was “in,” and several players reportedly came to the room shortly after. The complainant testified that the unexpected arrival of multiple men left her scared and confused, and she felt trapped in a scenario where she had no real choice.
The woman also testified that she assumed a “porn star persona” during the encounter as a psychological coping mechanism to endure what was happening, believing that playing into the expected script would help end the situation faster.
The defence, however, argued that the sexual acts were consensual. Lawyers for McLeod, Hart, Formenton, and Dube claimed their clients either reasonably believed the woman consented or that she actively participated in and initiated the activity.
Callan Foote’s lawyer, Julianna Greenspan, said her client did not engage in any sexual activity, citing testimony from Hart, who said Foote did the splits over the woman while fully clothed as a joke, without making contact. Greenspan argued the incident was momentary, non-sexual, and accompanied by laughter—including from the complainant.
The Crown dismissed the idea that the woman welcomed or encouraged the group encounter, highlighting the absence of any evidence supporting that version of events. Cunningham asked the judge to focus on the woman’s shock and the fact that the players did not take adequate steps to confirm consent.
The trial heard from nine witnesses, including the complainant and Hart, the only accused to testify in his own defence. The case now awaits Justice Carroccia’s ruling, which is expected on July 24.