Montrealxxxtase
Montreal Escorts

Hockey Canada sex assault scandal

EagerBeaver

Veteran of Misadventures
Jul 11, 2003
21,101
3,847
113
U.S.A.
Visit site
That's possible but you're speculating. The media is not allowed to report the reason for the mistrial. The only thing that has been reported is that: "...Wednesday afternoon, Carroccia told jurors that something had happened over the lunch hour that she needed to think about and discuss with the lawyers." That implies that something happened outside of the court proceedings, not during the trial.
Well, all we can do is speculate. But since you added that piece of information, what likely happened during the lunch hour is someone overheard an inappropriate conversation with a juror. The only possible "out of the court proceedings" reason for a mistrial would be improper tampering or contact with a juror. And it then got reported to the Judge. Either the Court reporters, clerks or marshals could have been the reporters. They are all advised to report any such transgressions to the Court. Jurors are specifically told not to talk about the case when they are adjourned for the lunch hour.

Most courts have separate special elevators for the jurors so they are segregated from the public so that the chances of having such a conversation or overhearing something they should not overhear are lessened. I am not familiar with these London courts. I don't know how they are set up.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CaptRenault

CaptRenault

A poor corrupt official
Jun 29, 2003
2,253
1,164
113
Casablanca
From an article in Friday’s Toronto Star: “it was all consensual.” It will be hard for the prosecution to get past that statement on video by the complainant.

The complainant said on video that “it was all consensual”
Smiling and wrapping herself in a towel, the woman was recorded in the hotel room on McLeod’s phone around 4:26 a.m. on June 19 saying “it was all consensual,” about 20 minutes before she’s seen on camera leaving the hotel.
“Are you recording me? OK, good, it was all consensual,” says the woman on the video, which was shown to the jury on Wednesday. “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 a shorter video recorded at 3:25 a.m., a voice off-camera asks the woman if she’s “OK with this” and she replies: “I’m OK with this.”
Both recordings were turned over to London police by McLeod in July 2018.
 

Doc Holliday

The Horny Cowboy
Sep 27, 2003
20,456
1,980
113
Canada
From an article in Friday’s Toronto Star: “it was all consensual.” It will be hard for the prosecution to get past that statement on video by the complainant.
Not only do they have it on two videos that she was consenting & even enjoyed it but even the prosecutor said in her opening statement that the jury will hear testimony that she was even asking some guys to have sex with her. I know that some people will be shocked to hear the explicit details of what went on however from what i’ve read & heard what is alleged to have happened isn’t much different than what i’ve seen happen at some sex parties & swingers clubs. I’d even say it’s tamer considering it now looks like only 1 or 2 guys actually had sex with her including the guy she had initially consented to have sex with! It seems like a few guys kept their clothes on & only got a bj…if i’d see this in a sex club i’d say it’s pretty fucking lame! And they seem to want to make a big deal that Cal Foote slapped her ass! I mean geez! I’m not saying that she deserved to have what happened to her is right & that she may have made some bad choices due to her excessive drinking. But who knows if she was really that intoxicated? That will likely never be proven according to what i’ve read. She even said on one of the videos that she was sober. And the guys were drinking also. One guy who plays for the Capitals testified the other day that he barely remembers anything from that night other than briefly stopping by that room to get something & only remembered seeing her sitting or lying on the bed with two guys & doesn’t remember if he spoke with her or if she was dressed or naked. Why? Probably because he was hammered! I dunno. I can’t see how a jury of 12 people will vote to convict any of these guys. Mikie Mcloud may get something but i doubt it. They had consented sex & then he invited other guys to join them. But he’ll likely testify that she’s the one who suggested it or agreed to it. It’ll basically be who you believe & if you believe that she was as drunk as she now claims how can you believe her? Where’s the proof? On top of that i read that she will not be testifying. If true how the hell can you convict any of them if the alleged victim won’t even be testifying?

I’m not taking sides here i’m simply asking questions that i have about the case & the true reasons why they chose to press charges. This only happened after it was found out that Hockey Canada had a secret slush fund to silence accusers in alleged sex crimes by junior hockey players over decades. The real scandal is there. For me it seems that they picked to prosecute this case in order to shock the public & make an example of the players involved. Unfortunately i believe that the alleged victim’s well being was the last thing that concerned the prosecution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nachoy

Nachoy

Active Member
Sep 27, 2023
277
204
43
55
Sounds like she initially consented to have sex with Mikey macloud Then afterwards Mikey, texts “three way” want “gummer” to his team and 10 other dudes show up. Probably can’t control the crowd when that many dudes wanting sex or wanting to see sex.
Three players receive oral sex from her ( Dube, Macloud and Hart)
Two players had vagina sex ( Formenton and Macloud )
Foote didn’t slap her butt, it was Dube.
Foote did graze his genitals by her face doing the splits. Not sure what Foote did was considered sexual assault
There going be more details coming out how she ended up on the bathroom floor and having sex there.
 

Doc Holliday

The Horny Cowboy
Sep 27, 2003
20,456
1,980
113
Canada
Sounds like she initially consented to have sex with Mikey macloud Then afterwards Mikey, texts “three way” want “gummer” to his team and 10 other dudes show up. Probably can’t control the crowd when that many dudes wanting sex or wanting to see sex.
Three players receive oral sex from her ( Dube, Macloud and Hart)
Two players had vagina sex ( Formenton and Macloud )
Foote didn’t slap her butt, it was Dube.
Foote did graze his genitals by her face doing the splits. Not sure what Foote did was considered sexual assault
There going be more details coming out how she ended up on the bathroom floor and having sex there.
That’s her version. But from experience there are always two sides to a story or in this case likely many sides. By the way you’re correct in that it was Dube who slapped her ass & not Foote. Something i’ve enjoyed doing myself during sex when the girl had a great ass but that’s another story. Lol

The girl started testifying today. We didn’t learn much from her testimony that we didn’t already know. My guess is that things won’t get easier for her once the defence attorneys start questioning her. Her entire sexual history is about to be told to the world. How many of her skeletons will he uncovered? Had she ever done threesomes in the past? Was this the first time she was in a gangbang? Does she watch porn? Has she ever watched gangbangs & was it ever a fantasy of hers? Did she ever say no? Did she ever show indications that she felt insecure or that she wasn’t comfortable doing this? So many personal & embarrassing questions will be asked by their lawyers. She will likely be shamed. She will be made to appear like the biggest slut who ever walked the streets in London, Ontario! They may even call to testify several of her former lovers!

Anyways whatever the outcome of the trial i still say it’ll never a case that will be extremely difficult to convict in front of a jury of her peers. It wouldn’t surprise me if by the end of the trial that the players will now be looked upon as victims. I mean is it fair for a player like Carter Hart & Dillon Dube to lose millions & their entire NHL career for getting a blowjob? Especially when they were invited to receive a blowjob & the girl even asked them to have sex with her? We shall see!
 

Cap'tain Fantastic

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2011
4,706
8,876
113
My guess is that things won’t get easier for her once the defence attorneys start questioning her. Her entire sexual history is about to be told to the world. How many of her skeletons will he uncovered?
There are boundaries now when it comes to bringing up a victim’s sexual history during a trial for rape, at least in Canada.

My take is that these kids will all get sentenced, there’s been too many attempts to put a lid on that story, now all the country has their eyes on it. They dont have much for their defense, the cops have phone texting and videos in hand, all legally ceased. To top it all, Hockey Canada has admitted paying the victim a few millions for her silence.

Take into account what Nicolas Daigle et Massimo Siciliano got, respectively 32 and 30 months sentences, and we can say that the table is set for a plea bargain and I dont think they will avoid serving time.
 

Doc Holliday

The Horny Cowboy
Sep 27, 2003
20,456
1,980
113
Canada
The consent issue blurs under these facts. If you consent to sex with one man and then 10 others make an entrance on the scene, perhaps because they were called by the initial man, I can see where consensual sex can go to "WTF is this?"
I totally agree if you believe the prosecution’s version. However there are several eyewitness accounts that she was the one asking the guys if they wanted to have sex with her. Plus she’s on video stating she was consenting, enjoyed it & was sober.

One other thing. It seems that the prosecution team is mostly made up of female lawyers. I’m not sure how this looks to the jury. I would have put at least one or two male prosecutors on the team in order not to make it appear like it’s a me-too movement thing & that women are joining forces to get these big bad jocks who believe they can get away with abusing women & treating them like it’s their property. Some of the players were wise by hiring female lawyers to defend them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CaptRenault

EagerBeaver

Veteran of Misadventures
Jul 11, 2003
21,101
3,847
113
U.S.A.
Visit site
The consent issue blurs under these facts. If you consent to sex with one man and then 10 others make an entrance on the scene, perhaps because they were called by the initial man, I can see where consensual sex can go to "WTF is this?"
This is exactly what the testimony was:
 

CaptRenault

A poor corrupt official
Jun 29, 2003
2,253
1,164
113
Casablanca

CaptRenault

A poor corrupt official
Jun 29, 2003
2,253
1,164
113
Casablanca

One interesting fact that came out is that the girl had a boyfriend at the time of the incident and she admits that she cheated on him.

E.M. has said she tried to ditch McLeod earlier in the night, but when she went to the bathroom, he was standing outside waiting for her so she didn’t end up getting away from him.
McLeod’s lawyer suggests E.M. had plenty of time to ditch him later in the night.
But by then, she says, she was resigned to going home with him.
Humphrey says she could have used her boyfriend as an excuse, for example.
She says she has a hard time saying no.
“Do you say yes to all kinds of things you just don’t want to do?” Humphrey asks.
“Sometimes, yes,” she says.
Humphrey points out she was “rock steady” on her feet that night despite wearing high heels.
She says she wears those shoes often and is able to walk in heels whether she’s drunk or not.
“You made a choice to go to the hotel room with him. It was a mutual choice,” Humphrey says.
E.M. replies: “About going home with one man, yes.”
Prosecutors have alleged the woman and McLeod had sex in his hotel room, an encounter that is not in question at the trial. They allege the sexual assault took place after McLeod then invited several other men into the hotel room.
Humphrey is now going through the consensual sex that McLeod and E.M. had in the hotel room when they arrived.
She agreed to the lawyer’s suggestion that she initiated oral sex before they had sex.
Humphrey reads a portion of a 2022 statement E.M. gave in which she said the sex with McLeod wasn’t “forced” but she felt like she wasn’t “present in the moment.” E.M. agrees now to that statement.
Humphrey: “Are you saying that you were not consenting [to that sex]?”
E.M.: “No, I’m not saying that I am not consenting. I was OK with what I was doing. In terms of not being an active participant. I wasn’t doing it for my own enjoyment. I wasn’t doing it for myself. I was just to go through the motions to satisfy him.”
Humphrey: “Do you agree that you were not too drunk to consent to sexual intercourse with McLeod?”
E.M. “I wouldn’t have made that choice if I was sober, but I did make that choice.”
The defence is questioning E.M. about the initial sex with McLeod as part of his overall line of questioning about intoxication and consent.
The charges against McLeod and his teammates are in connection with the alleged sexual assaults later in the night with multiple men in the room.
E.M. says she has no memory of any conversation after she and McLeod had sex.
Humphrey asks her if she said something along the lines of, “‘Have your friends come back to have some fun.’"
E.M. says she has no memory of saying anything like that.
Humphrey tells E.M. he believes she “suggested” McLeod have his friends come over because she was “interested in having some sexual interactions with them.” The lawyer and complainant started going back and forth:
E.M.: “No, I don’t think that’s something I would have said. I am shy; I don’t think that’s something I would ever suggest.”
Humphrey: “I suggest that at that point you didn’t want to go home. You wanted this party evening to continue and for some of the players to come back to the room.”
E.M.: No, I wouldn’t have done that. I would have wanted to go home.
Humphrey: I suggest you said something like, “‘Get some of those guys back here. I want to have a wild night.’”
E.M. “That doesn’t sound like something I would say and I don’t remember saying those words.”
She says she was really surprised when others walked into the room.
As she told the Crown earlier, E.M. says she thought it was strange that McLeod put his shorts and shirt on right away after sex. She was still naked.
When two men showed up and she was still naked on the bed, she felt uncomfortable. (Those men, Boris Katchouk and Taylor Raddysh, former world junior players who don’t face any charges, testified earlier in the trial.)
E.M. says she may have been smiling or laughing at that point, because of her discomfort.
“Maybe outwardly I was smiling and laughing, but mentally I was nervous. I didn’t know how to handle that.”
Humphrey suggests she was still in bed with no clothes on because she was waiting for others to arrive and she had asked McLeod to get other guys over to the room.
E.M. says that’s not true and she had no idea he was inviting other people over.
“I was shocked when others walked in. It was an uncomfortable, awkward situation.”
...E.M. says the men put a bed sheet on the floor because she didn’t want to lie down on the gross hotel floor. (She also raised this during her testimony before the Crown.)
Humphrey then questions her on whether the men asked her to masturbate.
She says yes.
“I was scared, naked, drunk, vulnerable. The men were towering over me.”
Humphrey points out that in her first statement to police, on June 22, 2018, she said she “liked the attention.”
E.M. explains: “It was something I was confused about. It was a weird thing to have happen to me. There was definitely points when I wasn’t OK with what was happening. It was attention I didn’t ask for and I was handling it the best way I could.”
...E.M. says she went into the bathroom twice, got fully dressed, came back out crying and tried to leave the hotel room.
Both times, the men would make her stay, she tells Humphrey.
“I was fully dressed. They would see that I was crying and try to console me and tell me everything was fine. They would put an arm around me, lead me back to the bed sheet, and I would get undressed,” she says.
“You make it seem like you had no choice!” Humphrey says.
“I didn’t feel like I had a choice, no,” E.M. answers.
Humphrey says she could have just popped out of the bathroom, and out the door and left.
“I wish I had done that,” she says.
...Humphrey questions how scared E.M. actually was that night. He said she described feeling "terror and fear" in her civil lawsuit in 2022, but did not use those words in her first interview with a detective on June 22, 2018.
At that time, he said, she described being “frustrated,” “annoyed,” “upset” and “tired.”
She tells the court her mind was still shut down at that point because it was just a few days after the alleged assault.
E.M. says she hadn’t processed things then and still wanted to kind of “bury” her feelings.
Humphrey says he’s looked at her first statement to police and the words “fear,” “scared” and “afraid” do not appear in the context of her feelings that night.
The only time the word “scared” appeared in her first police statement was when she told a detective that she was scared she would accidentally identify someone who wasn’t in the room, he says.
“I was worried about falsely accusing someone,” she says.
...Humphrey has suggested E.M. was encouraging the men during the night, asking them to have sex with her and calling them “pussies” because they wouldn’t.
She testifies she doesn’t remember that, and it doesn’t sound like something she would say.
She remembers them saying, “This girl is f–king crazy.”
Humphrey says that was because they thought she was “crazy” for inviting them for sex.
She says she no memory of that and it doesn’t sound like something she would say.
“Maybe you did say, ‘Someone have sex with me?’” Humphrey asks.
“I can only tell you what I remember, and I don’t have a memory of speaking like that,” E.M. replies.
Humphrey goes on: “I’m going to suggest you did say that and some guys were saying, ‘This girl is f–king crazy,’ and other people were saying they didn’t want to have sex in front of their buddies.”
E.M. says, “No, they seemed comfortable with each other.”
...Humphrey questions E.M. about the “consent videos,” which we’ve heard about throughout this trial. (These are the two videos McLeod filmed of E.M. after the alleged assault.)
E.M. says she doesn’t remember saying she was fine and that everything was consensual.
She says the first time she saw the videos was Aug. 31, 2018, when she was interviewed by a female detective.
Before the second video, in which she’s seen holding a towel in front of her while wearing no clothes, McLeod sort of “hounded her” to say the night had been consensual, she says.
Humphrey suggests McLeod asked her throughout the night if she was OK.
E.M. says she only recalls him asking her that at the end of the night, before he took the videos.
In one video, she’s heard saying, “You’re so paranoid, holy!” and “I’m so sober, I can’t do this right now.”
E.M. says she doesn’t know why she said she was “so sober.”...
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts