What E.M. told the jury over 9 days of testimony in the Hockey Canada
sexual assault trial
Kate Dubinski,
Rhianna Schmunk | CBC News | Posted: May 17, 2025 8:00 AM |
Last Updated: May 17
Complainant grilled by defence in London, Ont., trial that's
now before a judge alone
Image | E.M. Hockey Canada trial
Caption: E.M., the complainant, is seen testifying at the
sexual assault trial for five former players with Canada's
world junior hockey team in Ontario Superior Court in London.
(Alexandra Newbould/CBC)
(BUTTON) Load Image
Open Image in New Tab
WARNING: This story includes graphic details of alleged sexual
assault and might affect those who have experienced sexual
violence or know someone who's been impacted by it.
The woman at the centre of the sexual assault trial for five
former players with Canada's world junior hockey team finished
a marathon nine days of testimony this week in London, Ont. —
before a sudden turn in the proceedings.
The accused men are Dillon Dubé, Cal Foote, Alex Formenton,
Carter Hart and Michael McLeod, who've all pleaded not guilty.
E.M., whose identity is protected under a standard publication
ban, gave her account of the alleged assaults and answered
hundreds of questions from the men's lawyers.
On Thursday, however, after E.M. had concluded her testimony a
day earlier, proceedings stalled due to discussions between
Justice Maria Carroccia and the lawyers.
Carroccia discharged the jury on Friday and ruled the
proceedings would continue by judge alone.
As a result, the proceedings are continuing where they left
off, with Tyler Steenbergen, a former teammate of the men on
trial, testifying remotely from Alberta to questions from the
Crown. (Steenbergen is a witness and hasn't been charged with
anything.)
Image | Hockey Canada trial composite May 8
Caption: The five former world junior hockey players on trial
in London are Dillon Dubé, Alex Formenton, Carter Hart, Cal
Foote and Michael McLeod, left to right. (Geoff Robbins/The
Canadian Press)
(BUTTON) Load Image
Open Image in New Tab
In the meantime, we can report what E.M. said during her
gruelling testimony.
Here's a look at what she said to the jury.
The hotel room
E.M.'s time in Ontario Superior Court began with what was at
times graphic detail of alleged assaults in a London hotel on a
Monday in June 2018. She recalled to the Crown that the night
began awkwardly with drinks with co-workers at Jack's bar, less
than a kilometre from the courtroom where she sat seven years
later.
Five lawyers representing the five accused then questioned E.M.
about her evidence over seven days — such questioning is
standard in the trial process, allowing the defence lawyers to
ask questions of a witness to support their cases.
E.M. ended testifying after a re-examination by the Crown —
which is an opportunity for prosecutors to have the complainant
clarify anything said during cross-examination before the trial
moves on to other witnesses.
WATCH | WARNING: Video contains disturbing details: E.M. shares
details of alleged sexual assault:
Media Video | The National : E.M. details alleged abuse by
ex-world juniors players: ‘Just a joke to them’
Caption: WARNING: Video contains distressing details | The
complainant, known as E.M., shared details of her alleged
sexual assault at the trial of five former Canadian world
junior hockey players and said she felt as if she had left her
body as the defendants laughed. ‘It was all just a joke to
them,’ she said.
Open Full Embed in New Tab Loading external pages may require
significantly more data usage than loading CBC Lite story
pages.
E.M. appeared virtually through closed-circuit television
(CCTV) for the full nine days she spoke, with a glass of water
and a tissue box on the table beside her. The five accused men
listened from the courtroom, each seated at a table with their
respective defence teams.
Outside, a crowd of supporters grew from a handful on E.M.'s
first day of testimony to dozens of people who later heckled
the men and the lawyers.
E.M.'s evidence
To start her testimony, E.M. answered questions from Crown
prosecutor Meaghan Cunningham, who asked the woman to take her
through the night in question and part of the aftermath.
E.M. said she went to Jack's bar on June 18, 2018, for a night
out with co-workers — some she knew better than others. She
said she ended up drinking too much to overcome some
awkwardness she felt around colleagues she didn't know well.
Some members of the world junior hockey team went to the same
bar with their teammates after a gala in London to celebrate
their win at the world junior championships that January.
E.M. said someone introduced her to a man at the bar named
"Mikey," who she later learned to be McLeod. Later that
evening, she said, an older man who appeared to be McLeod's
"wing man" was talking up the fact the team member was rich and
an elite hockey player.
* Judge to decide fate of ex-world junior players in sex
assault trial after jury discharged
* What the jury didn't hear — and other things we can now
report — in world junior hockey sex assault trial
She described feeling uncomfortable and confused when other men
gathered around her as she and McLeod were on the dance floor,
but went along with what was going on because she was drunk and
trying to enjoy the evening.
E.M. said she and McLeod left the bar in an Uber and went back
to his room at the Delta Armouries hotel. E.M. said they had
consensual sex, though she doesn't think she would have gone
home with McLeod had she been sober.
After sex, E.M. said, she was surprised to find McLeod dressed
and using his phone while she was still naked. She said she had
assumed she'd be spending the night in the hotel room.
She said the surprise and confusion continued when more men
came into the room — No. 209. The sexual activity that followed
was not consensual, she testified.
WATCH | WARNING: Video contains graphic details: E.M.
questioned over her account of alleged sex assaults:
Media Video | The National : E.M. defends her account of sexual
assault after world juniors during cross-examination
Caption: WARNING: Video contains distressing details |
Complainant E.M. defended her account of alleged sexual assault
during gruelling cross-examination in the trial of five former
Canadian world junior hockey players. She denied suggestions
she wanted a ‘wild night’ with multiple men.
Open Full Embed in New Tab Loading external pages may require
significantly more data usage than loading CBC Lite story
pages.
E.M. testified the men put a bed sheet on the hotel floor and
asked her to lie down and masturbate while they watched.
During cross-examination, some of the lawyers quizzed E.M.
about who put the bed sheet on the floor. Initially, she told
investigators one of the first two men in the room put the
sheet down. But those two men — who don't face any charges in
this case and were in the room briefly — testified as Crown
witnesses that they didn't do so and the woman was on the bed
when they arrived.
The men also talked about "putting golf balls" in her vagina or
wondering whether she could "take" the whole golf club, she
testified. She said they spat on her and smacked her buttocks.
The 'consent videos'
E.M. said she performed oral sex on several men.
After oral sex, she said, Foote did the splits over her body so
that his genitals were in her face. She said she then made her
way to the bathroom, where another man — allegedly, Formenton —
had sex with her and received oral sex.
She said the men did not physically force her into the sexual
activity and told the court she did not say "no" out loud,
other than to tell them to stop slapping her buttocks because
she was in pain.
She told the court she was "numb" and "on autopilot, feeling
"outnumbered" and "intimidated" by multiple men she did not
know towering over her while she was naked on the bed sheet.
E.M. described her mind separating from her body, and said she
felt herself watching what was going on in the room as if it
was happening to someone else. She said the men should have
known she was too drunk to consent, even if she did not say as
much out loud.
Image | Meaghan Cunningham E.M. testimony hockey canada
Caption: Crown prosecutor Meaghan Cunningham, left, questions
E.M., who was testifying via CCTV from another room. (Alexandra
Newbould/CBC)
(BUTTON) Load Image
Open Image in New Tab
During the proceedings, jurors watched two "consent videos"
McLeod filmed that night — one showing E.M. on the hotel floor
and another after the other men had left.
In the first video, a voice off-camera asks whether E.M. is "OK
with this." She smiles and says: "I'm OK with this."
The second video was taken an hour after the first.
"Are you recording me? OK, good, it was all consensual," E.M.
says, holding a hotel towel in front of her naked body. "You
are so paranoid, holy. I enjoyed it. It was fine. It was all
consensual. I am so sober, that's why I can't do this right
now."
In court, E.M. said she doesn't remember making the videos and
first learned they existed during police questioning. She said
her comments don't reflect her true feelings and believes
McLeod was telling her to say, on record, that she consented to
the sex to protect himself in the event of an allegation like
the one he faces.
Calling the police
E.M. testified she left the hotel in an Uber and got home just
after 5 a.m. ET, waking her parents. E.M. said her mother
called police after finding her distraught daughter, crying in
the shower.
That week, McLeod messaged E.M. and asked her to "figure out
how to make this go away" with the police. Screenshots dated
June 20, 2018, show the woman apologizing for what she
described at the time as a "misunderstanding," and explaining
it was her mother who had phoned police and she did not want to
pursue the matter further.
WATCH | WARNING: Video contains disturbing details: E.M.
pressed on her memory:
Media Video | The National : Defence presses complainant on
memory, drinking at jr. hockey sexual assault trial
Caption: WARNING: Video contains disturbing details | Tensions
flared outside court as cross-examination continued in the
Hockey Canada sexual assault trial. The complainant faced more
questions about her memory and how much she drank the night of
the alleged assault.
Open Full Embed in New Tab Loading external pages may require
significantly more data usage than loading CBC Lite story
pages.
E.M. testified she was just trying to deal with McLeod by
telling him what she thought he wanted to hear.
In the messages, McLeod wrote back he appreciated E.M. "telling
the truth" and wished her "all the best."
E.M. did ultimately speak to the police herself. She initially
opted not to pursue charges, instead asking that police have a
conversation with the men to prevent something similar from
happening to someone else. The complainant said she changed her
mind after she found out the police could only talk to the men
if they agreed to a conversation — something she didn't believe
they'd do.
The 'fun' alter ego
Each defence lawyer focused on E.M.'s behaviour that night.
They called into question her recollection of how much she
drank, who bought her drinks, where and how she met the men
that night, who she spoke to and how she danced. They
questioned her about her interactions with police, health-care
professionals and friends.
Several suggested their client could not have known she didn't
consent to the sex on account of the way she was acting.
David Humphrey, McLeod's lawyer, suggested it was her idea to
have McLeod invite the other men into the hotel room and that
she was the one who demanded sex.
Image | david humphrey e.m. hockey canada
Caption: Defence lawyer David Humphrey, right, cross-examines
E.M. as she appears via video. (Alexandra Newbould/CBC)
(BUTTON) Load Image
Open Image in New Tab
"I'm going to suggest you said something to him along the lines
of, 'Get some of those guys back here, I want to have a wild
night,'" Humphrey said to E.M.
Once the hotel room was crowded with men, Humphrey suggested,
the woman was saying to them: "'Come on, you've got a girl
here. Someone have sex with me. You guys are pussies.'"
E.M. said that was not true and does not sound like the way
she'd speak.
Megan Savard, a lawyer for Hart, also suggested E.M. made up
the assault allegations because she'd cheated on her then
boyfriend, who is now her fiancé — a theory E.M. denied.
Image | E.M. supporters London courthouse Hockey Canada trial
Caption: Supporters of E.M. hold signs and taunt the men on
trial as they enter the courthouse in London. (Kate
Dubinski/CBC)
(BUTTON) Load Image
Open Image in New Tab
Savard grilled E.M. about having told police and the Crown
during trial preparation this year that she took on a "porn
star … persona" during the alleged assault as a coping
mechanism. Savard implied the men could not have known she did
not consent.
"I am going to suggest to you that regardless of what you were
feeling in your head, you were acting in a way that would make
the men in the room think you were consenting," Savard said to
the complainant.
E.M. told Savard she was laughing it off and, outwardly, it
might have looked like she was OK, but that's not how she was
feeling.
Daniel Brown, lawyer for Formenton, also suggested E.M. was
"egging on" the players after adopting a "fun" alter ego. He
relied heavily on surveillance footage from Jack's bar, which
he said contradicted her recollection of the night out. Brown
said she did not consume as much alcohol as she thought because
the bar's Jägerbomb shot glasses only hold half an ounce — a
point he made by bringing real shot glasses from the same bar
into the courtroom to show the jury.
Texting her friends
Dubé's lawyer, Lisa Carnelos, questioned why E.M. didn't
immediately tell her friends about the assault when they were
texting in the days afterward.
Julianna Greenspan, representing Foote, suggested the
complainant deliberately changed her language over time to
start referring to the accused as "men" instead of "boys" to
further the "clear agenda" she brought to the trial.
The complainant said that was not true.
Several lawyers suggested E.M. exaggerated how much she'd had
to drink, in part pointing to her ability to walk steadily in
high heels on surveillance tape.
Image | Julianna Greenspan Hockey Canada trial Cal Foote lawyer
Caption: Defence lawyer Julianna Greenspan questions E.M. about
the shoes she was wearing the night of the alleged sexual
assaults in June 2018. (Alexandra Newbould/CBC)
(BUTTON) Load Image
Open Image in New Tab
More than one defence lawyer seized on inconsistencies between
various statements E.M. made in the years since the alleged
assault — including a statement to police in 2018 and documents
included in her civil lawsuit that was settled with Hockey
Canada in 2022.
That settlement led to the revelation that Hockey Canada had
used a fund, fed partly by registration fees, to settle various
sexual assault lawsuits over the years. The news led to a
reckoning for the organization, including lost sponsorships and
parliamentary hearings. It also prompted London police to
reopen the investigation into E.M.'s case and later charge the
five men currently on trial.
Tense moments during cross-exams
E.M. largely maintained her composure during her testimony,
though some moments grew tense as she pushed back or when the
Crown objected.
There was a brief back-and-forth between E.M. and Brown,
Formenton's lawyer. E.M. said one defence lawyer was designing
his questions deliberately to discredit her.
She grew frustrated when, at another point, Brown told her she
had only been testifying as long as she had because she wasn't
answering questions directly.
"I feel this is also my time to stand up for myself when I
couldn't that night," the woman responded. "So I'd like to
respond how I'd like to respond, if that's all right."
"Well, in fact, it's not all right — you're here to respond to
my questions," Brown replied.
* Woman's testimony ends after 9 gruelling days of questions
at world juniors sex assault trial
* What goes into preparing a complainant for
cross-examination
After the cross-examination finished, the Crown had the
opportunity to run the re-examination of the witness, asking
questions so the witness can explain or clarify answers that
came up during cross-examination. During a re-examination,
lawyers can't cover new ground or bring up new evidence.
E.M. was dismissed around 2 p.m. ET. on Wednesday.
"You have completed giving your evidence, so you are free to
go," Carroccia said.
E.M. thanked the justice, stood up and walked out of the room.
__________________________________________________________
If you're in immediate danger or fear for your safety or that
of others around you, please call 911. For support in your
area, you can look for crisis lines and local services via the
Ending Violence Association of Canada database.
More Stories Like This
The related links below are generated automatically based on
the story you’ve just read.
Loading...
CBC Lite is a low-bandwidth website. To see what's new, check
out our release notes. For high quality images, media,
comments, and other additional features visit the full version
of this story.
We and select advertising partners use trackers to collect some
of your data in order to enhance your experience and to deliver
personalized content and advertising. If you are not
comfortable with the use of this information, please review
your device and browser privacy settings before continuing your
visit. Learn more about Online Tracking and Privacy Choices.
* Corrections and Clarifications
* Terms of Use
* Reuse & Permission
* Privacy
* Accessibility
* Contact a Newsroom
* Submit Feedback
* Lite Help Centre
* Jobs
* RSS
