Blog
Céline Dostaler
The Hockey Canada Sexual Assault Trial: Legal Implications of Judge-Only Proceedings
The high-profile sexual assault trial involving five former members of Canada’s 2018 World Junior hockey team—Michael McLeod, Dillon Dubé, Carter Hart, Cal Foote, and Alex Formenton—has taken a significant turn. Ontario Superior Court Justice Maria Carroccia dismissed the jury after allegations surfaced that defense attorneys were mocking jurors, leading to concerns about impartiality. As a result, the trial will proceed as a judge-alone proceeding.
This development raises important questions about the legal framework governing judge-only trials in Canada, the criteria for transitioning from a jury trial, and the potential impact on trial outcomes.
Background of the Case
In June 2018, during a Hockey Canada gala in London, Ontario, a woman—referred to as “E.M.” due to a publication ban—alleged that she was sexually assaulted by multiple members of the national junior team in a hotel room. Initially, the London Police Service closed the investigation without pressing charges. However, in 2022, following public scrutiny and revelations that Hockey Canada had settled a lawsuit related to the incident using funds partially sourced from player registration fees, the case was reopened.
By January 2024, five players—Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Dillon Dubé, Cal Foote, and Alex Formenton—were charged with sexual assault. McLeod faces an additional charge of being a party to the offense. All have pleaded not guilty.
Legal Proceedings
The trial commenced in April 2025 at the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in London. Initially, a jury was selected to hear the case. However, the trial has faced significant disruptions:
First Mistrial: A mistrial was declared after it was revealed that a juror had inappropriate contact with defense attorneys during a lunch break, compromising the jury’s impartiality.
Second Jury Dismissal: A second jury was dismissed when a juror accused defense attorneys of making inappropriate comments about jurors’ appearances, leading to concerns about potential bias .
Following these events, the trial is proceeding as a judge-alone trial under Justice Maria Carroccia.
Legal Context in Canada
Under Section 271 of the Canadian Criminal Code, sexual assault is defined as any non-consensual sexual contact, ranging from unwanted touching to forced sexual acts. Consent must be voluntary, informed, and can be withdrawn at any time. The law emphasizes that consent cannot be obtained through coercion, manipulation, or when the complainant is incapable of consenting due to factors like intoxication.
Penalties for sexual assault vary depending on the severity and circumstances but can include imprisonment for up to 10 years. If the complainant is under 16 years of age, the maximum penalty increases to 14 years, with a minimum of one year.
Canada’s legal system also includes “rape shield” provisions, which limit the admissibility of a complainant’s past sexual history in court, aiming to protect their dignity and privacy during the trial process.
Understanding Judge-Only Trials in Canada
In the Canadian criminal justice system, serious offences like sexual assault are typically tried before a judge and jury. However, the Criminal Code allows for judge-alone trials under certain circumstances. Section 11(f) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the right to a jury trial for offences punishable by five years or more, but this right can be waived by the accused or altered by the court in specific situations.
Criteria for Dismissing a Jury
A judge may dismiss a jury if there’s a reasonable concern that the jury’s impartiality has been compromised. In this case, a juror reported that defense attorneys were laughing at jurors, leading to perceptions of bias. Although the attorneys denied the allegations, Justice Carroccia concluded that the jurors’ belief in being mocked could affect their impartiality, warranting the dismissal of the jury.
This was not the first disruption in the trial. Earlier, a mistrial was declared after a juror reported being approached by a defense attorney during a lunch break, raising concerns about improper contact.
Legal Framework for Judge-Alone Trials
The Criminal Code provides mechanisms for transitioning to a judge-alone trial. Section 632 allows a judge to excuse jurors for reasons such as personal interest or hardship. Additionally, Section 645 permits a judge to continue a trial without a jury if the jury is discharged and the accused consents.
In the Hockey Canada trial, both the Crown and defense agreed to proceed with a judge-alone trial after the jury’s dismissal.
Implications of Judge-Only Proceedings
Efficiency and Continuity
Judge-alone trials can be more efficient, avoiding delays associated with jury selection and instructions. In this case, transitioning to a judge-alone trial prevented further delays and allowed the trial to continue without restarting.
Legal Expertise
Judges are trained to focus solely on legal evidence, potentially reducing the influence of emotional appeals or biases that might affect a jury. This can be particularly relevant in complex cases involving sensitive testimony.
Public Perception
While judge-alone trials can be more efficient, they may raise concerns about transparency and public confidence in the judicial process. The absence of a jury removes a layer of community participation in the justice system.
Challenges in Sexual Assault Trials
Sexual assault trials often involve complex issues, including consent, victim testimony, and societal biases. Studies have shown that myths and stereotypes about sexual assault can influence trial outcomes.
In judge-alone trials, the judge’s ability to set aside biases and focus on legal standards is crucial. However, the lack of a jury also means that community perspectives are not directly represented in the verdict.
Conclusion
The transition to a judge-alone trial in the Hockey Canada sexual assault case underscores the legal system’s flexibility in addressing issues that may compromise the fairness of a trial. While judge-only proceedings can offer efficiency and legal precision, they also highlight the delicate balance between legal processes and public perception.
Facing criminal charges, especially those as serious as sexual assault, can be overwhelming and life-altering. If you or someone you know is charged with a criminal offense in Ottawa or elsewhere in Ontario, it’s crucial to seek experienced legal representation immediately.
I am dedicated to providing comprehensive legal support, ensuring that your rights are protected throughout the legal process. Contact me today for a confidential consultation to discuss your case and explore your legal options.
