A high-profile Canadian case involving five ex world junior hockey players ended on July 24th when all players were acquitted of criminal charges. The case revolved around a group sex episode, seven years prior, that occurred after a Hockey Canada Foundation Gala & Golf event the players had attended. A lawyer for one of the accused referenced the sex in question as “regrettable but consensual.” Ontario judge Maria Carroccia seemed to share this general assessment. She also found many inconsistencies in the complainant’s testimony and did not feel that the complainant’s ability to consent to the sex that she participated in – seemingly enthusiastically – was hindered. The evidence presented in trial featured videos of the complainant recorded that night in which she appears to highlight her consent to the group sex, but she later attested that she had not consented and secured a generous civil settlement from Hockey Canada. That prosecutors chose to pursue the matter as a criminal case raises troubling questions around what consent means and whether it can be withdrawn retrospectively. During her testimony the complainant described that from within her fearful and intoxicated state she had switched into “autopilot” because she felt she had no choice, hence the consent videos which undoubtedly played a major role in the verdict.
We are linking you to an article by Laura Misener and Treena Orchard – two Western University professors (Western is located in London, Ontario where the alleged rape took place) – who productively explore the complexities that this case illuminated through a wide social, cultural, and political lens.
