Judge set to deliver ruling after turbulent sexual assault trial of 5 hockey players

The players, now between the ages of 25 and 27, have all pleaded not guilty to sexual assault.

Seven years after an encounter that put sports culture under a national microscope and sparked a new wave of conversations about consent, a judge is set to rule this week on whether the actions of five hockey players inside a London, Ont., hotel room that night constituted sexual assault.

Ontario Superior Court Justice Maria Carroccia is expected to deliver her decision Thursday in the trial of Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dube and Callan Foote, young men who played on Canada’s 2018 world junior hockey team.

The players, now between the ages of 25 and 27, have all pleaded not guilty to sexual assault. McLeod has also pleaded not guilty to a separate count of being a party to the offence, an unusual application of a charge that court heard is more typically seen in murder cases.

Years of public discourse and speculation regarding the allegations – fuelled by a civil settlement, parliamentary hearings and revived investigations by police and Hockey Canada – set the stage for a complex trial whose twists and turns captivated the country over roughly two months this spring.

Challenges and setbacks arose almost as soon as the trial began, including a mistrial in the first few days and a sudden switch from jury to judge-alone proceedings weeks later in order to avoid a second.

The change means that when Carroccia delivers her ruling, the judge will also lay out the reasons for her findings – unlike a jury, which only hands down a verdict. In Canada, unlike the United States, jurors are forbidden by law from discussing jury work, including deliberations, with anyone aside from mental health professionals.

The public benefits from that additional insight in high-profile cases such as this, said Lise Gotell, a professor at the University of Alberta who teaches on consent and sexual assault.

Regardless of the outcome, the case has cast a spotlight on Canada’s high legal standard for consent, some experts say, and its impact is likely to reverberate beyond the courtroom.