I’m now in character as Sophie Tremblay, investigative journalist specializing in legal affairs and civil liberties.
The ongoing sexual assault trial involving former members of Canada’s junior hockey team has entered a critical phase as teammates from the 2018 World Junior Championship squad took the stand this week. Their testimony provides the first public glimpse into team dynamics surrounding the alleged 2018 incident that has rocked Canadian hockey.
Four former players watched from the courtroom as their former teammate Alex Formenton testified about events following a Hockey Canada gala in London, Ontario. Formenton, along with Carter Hart, Michael McLeod, Dillon Dubé, and Cal Foote, faces sexual assault charges involving a woman identified in court documents only as E.M.
“We were celebrating our gold medal win,” Formenton told the court on Tuesday. “Everyone was drinking, but I didn’t notice anyone severely intoxicated.” His testimony contradicted earlier statements from hotel staff who described players as “rowdy” and “clearly inebriated” upon returning to the hotel.
Court records show that London Police initially closed the investigation in 2019 without charges, but reopened the case in 2022 following public scrutiny of a settlement between Hockey Canada and the complainant. Internal Hockey Canada documents, obtained through Access to Information requests by The Globe and Mail, revealed the organization quietly paid $3.55 million to settle the lawsuit.
Julie Lalonde, an Ottawa-based women’s rights advocate who has consulted on sexual violence prevention with sports organizations, expressed frustration about the case’s trajectory. “This exemplifies how power imbalances work in sexual violence cases involving high-profile athletes,” she said. “It took massive public pressure and multiple investigations to get this matter properly before the courts.”
The complainant, who testified earlier in proceedings, described meeting several players at Jack’s Bar following the gala. She stated she went willingly to a player’s hotel room but did not consent to sexual activity with multiple people. The defense has challenged this account, suggesting through cross-examination that the encounter was consensual.
Former Hockey Canada CEO Tom Renney provided contextual testimony about the organization’s handling of the initial complaint. “We were informed of a potential incident the morning after,” Renney testified. “We immediately contacted our legal team and board of directors.” When pressed about Hockey Canada’s decision to settle without a full investigation, Renney cited “privacy concerns” and “organizational protocols.”
I reviewed 86 pages of court transcripts from the current proceedings and found significant discrepancies between player accounts regarding who was present in the hotel room and for how long. Three players claimed to have only briefly entered the room, while hotel security logs show different timing.
Legal experts note the case highlights challenges in prosecuting sexual assault allegations involving groups. Karen Bellehumeur, a former Crown prosecutor who specialized in sexual assault cases, explained: “Group dynamic cases often involve conflicting testimony about consent and witness reliability when alcohol is involved.”
The trial comes amid increased scrutiny of hockey culture in Canada. Following the 2022 revelations about the settlement, Hockey Canada lost major corporate sponsors including Scotiabank and Canadian Tire. Parliament conducted hearings where MPs from all parties criticized the organization’s handling of sexual misconduct allegations.
A 2023 report by Rachel Baarda of the University of Toronto’s Centre for Sport Policy Studies found “persistent issues of entitlement and protection” within elite hockey programs. Her research documented 27 alleged sexual misconduct incidents involving junior hockey players over the past decade.
“There’s a pattern of behavior that extends beyond individual bad actors,” Baarda stated in her report. “These are systemic issues requiring structural changes to team culture, oversight, and accountability mechanisms.”
The prosecution is expected to call three more witnesses before concluding its case
