Reminder of evidence that WAS included in the trial:
- EM's weight at the time
- Texts between EM and her colleague where she didn't disclose anything (used to suggest she's lying)
- Suggestions by the defense team that EM wasn't actually drunk, that she lied about falling outside the bathroom at Jack's, that Foote was wearing pants when he did a "fun party trick" over her body (not face) and that she wasn't hit but rather playfully and consensually "tapped" on the butt.
Reminder of evidence that was EXCLUDED from trial:
- The 2022 Hockey Canada investigation interviews with the players, which included statements that Foote was naked from the waist down when he did the splits over EM's face and that EM fell outside the bathroom at Jack's
- Text from a witness immediately after the event that said "[Dube] was smacking that girl's ass so hard. It look like it hurt so bad."
And yet, during the Hockey Canada trial, we saw rape myths on full display across five teams of defense lawyers. At no point did the judge correct such myths.
The judge DID make sure to remind the jury that they were to disregard signs outside that said "Justice for survivors", though.
Interesting what counts as biasing. Or rather, WHO counts.
PLUS! Due to a precedent setting ruling from the Ontario Superior Court in 2024, expert witnesses in trauma are no longer allowed to be called by the Crown in sexual assault trials.
The Court decided that expert testimony in that area is "unnecessary and confusing" and that "instruction against the myth-based reasoning is sufficient".
Thanks to the Ontario Coalition of Rape Crisis Centres for synthesizing exactly why the Hockey Canada trial set EM up to fail.