Canada Junior team: the crown will not appeal

The crown will not appeal the acquittal of the five former team players Junior accused of sexual assault. In addition, which could strengthen the fears of victims towards the judicial system.

“It ends a glimmer of hope that could remain for certain victims. Similarly, The judgment becomes final, ”says Mr.^e Sophie Gagnon, lawyer and general manager of the Juripop organization.

It reacted to the decision of the Ontario Attorney General’s Office General not to appeal the judgment. Meanwhile, which was confirmed in Journal By the complainant’s lawyer, Karen Bellehumeur.

On July 24. For example, judge Maria Carroccia had acquitted the hockeyers Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex forge, Cal Fote and Dillon Dube in turn to have sexually assaulted the young woman of 20 years in a hotel room in London, Ontario, at the end of a watered canada junior team: crown will new evening in June 2018.

The five players participated that evening in a gala celebrating their victory in the World Junior Hockey Championship. In addition, which occurred a few months ago.

“I can’t find the proof provided by E. M. [la plaignante] Credible. reliable ”, had notably written the Carroccia judge in her river judgment, who had discredited with very harsh words her testimony.

Reinforced fears

M^e Gagnon notes on the ground that the judgment accentuated the fear of the victims of sexual. assault not to be believed.

“This is what happened to the complainant,” she says.

However, it is not surprised by the crown decision.

“Going on appeal would have been a complex file to manage. The courts of appeal show very great deference to the judges of first instance. who chaired the trial and who heard the whole evidence, ”she explains.

Simon Roy, professor of law at the University canada junior team: crown will new of Sherbrooke, abounds in the same direction.

“It is a very detailed judgment based on facts and the court of appeal did not hear the witnesses. […] From the moment the judge does not believe the victim, it ends there, ”he says.

Not a disavowal

M^e Gagnon underlines that one should not see it as a disavowal of the crown towards the testimony of the complainant. but rather an “analysis of her chances of success”.

“We have a lot of work to do to ensure that this judgment does not change the case law. will not predict the fate of other files,” she believes.

The complainant’s consent had been at the heart of this highly publicized trial, which lasted two months.

Judge Carroccia had underlined numerous inconsistencies between the versions given to the police, in Hockey Canada and during the trial.

The trial was held before a judge alone after canada junior team: crown will new the jury was dissolved twice. The second time, some jurors claimed to have felt ridiculed by defense lawyers.

Almost a month after the judgment, the five players remain inadmissible to reintegrate the National Hockey League (NHL).

The Ontario prosecutor’s office had not responded to requests from Journal to comment on the reasons that pushed him. not to appeal the decision of Judge Carroccia.

The newspaper tried to join all the lawyers of the ex-hockey players. but they still had not commented on the situation when writing these lines.

– With the QMI and Antoine Lacroix agency