Since the beginning of the week, ex-players of the national junior team have multiplied their outings on social networks in order to distance themselves from the sordid story of gang rape which allegedly took place at the Hockey Canada foundation banquet in 2018. However, these pleas have no real legal significance, confirm three law professors. It also seems unlikely that the case will go to criminal trial.
Posted at 8:33 p.m.
Very discreet since the scandal came to light at the end of May, most of the team members have come out of their silence in the past few days, either directly or through their agent. .
Recall that in June 2018, after a drunken party in a bar in London, Ontario, eight hockey players allegedly sexually assaulted a young woman in a hotel room. The identities of the suspects and the alleged victim are still unknown. The suspects were all players playing in Canadian junior hockey at the time, but not necessarily members of the national team. The victim filed a civil lawsuit last April against Hockey Canada, the suspects and the Canadian Hockey League. Hockey Canada quickly reached an amicable settlement and has since come under fire for its handling of the file.
Three members of the national team say today that they were completely absent from the Hockey Canada banquet. Others wrote that they had nothing to do with the alleged assault. Others, again, claim to have “done nothing wrong”. Five of the 22 players did not provide any justification, either to the media who tried to obtain their version of the facts or on their personal page.
With the exception of cases where players presented real verifiable alibis – Victor Mete, for example, was on vacation in Jamaica at the time of the events – none of these pleas moved the lawyers consulted by The Press. Remaining silent is not an admission of guilt; likewise, declaring oneself not guilty is no guarantee of innocence.
“Clearly, in criminal law, it is worth nothing, explains Simon Roy, professor of law at the University of Sherbrooke. It’s called pre-constituted evidence. It’s a public relations operation. »
Even in a trial, pleading not guilty does not prevent a guilty verdict, he recalls.
“It has no value in the eyes of the judges,” confirms Rachel Chagnon, professor in the department of legal sciences at UQAM.
“Prisons are full of innocent people,” she quips.
Mme Chagnon, however, brings a nuance: in the opposite case, that of a person who incriminates himself publicly, his statements could be taken into account in a possible trial. And again, it would then be necessary to prove that the remarks in question were made with full knowledge of the possible consequences.
David Pavot, assistant director at the School of Management at the University of Sherbrooke and specialist in sports law, strictly recognizes a “marketing value” in the exercise.
“Some players feel that [ça chauffe] and want to demonstrate their good faith, he believes. A professional hockey player is a commercial object in itself. If some of them get caught up in a scandal like that, their sponsors will turn away from them. »
Unlikely trial
On Twitter, Internet users are having a field day. As statements are released, names are crossed off the list of potential culprits every day.
We try to cross-check with the rare information formulated in the civil lawsuit. The birth years of the suspects, for example: six of them were born in 1998, and the other two in 1999. As the exact number of national team players in the group is not known, it cannot be however, unambiguously prove the identity of a culprit.
Two investigations are underway, one led by a firm mandated by Hockey Canada, the other by the NHL.
London police, wrote the Globe and Mail earlier this week conducted an eight-month investigation in 2018 and 2019 that concluded without charges being laid. A review of the investigation process will be carried out. However, we do not know the nature of the complainant’s involvement (or not) in this new stage – we do know, however, that she will participate in the Hockey Canada investigation.
According to our experts, the chances of the case crossing the doors of a courtroom are low. Ontario justice could lay charges even without a formal complaint from the victim. However, this scenario is unlikely, emphasizes Simon Roy, while, still according to the Globe and Mailattorneys hired by suspects are seriously questioning the lack of victim consent.
“Without another witness [que la victime], the Crown’s evidence falls apart, says the researcher. He’s not one of the guys who’s going to testify against himself…”
The fact that the complainant has reached an out-of-court agreement also tends to lessen the chances of a criminal prosecution – although, even if she had signed a civil confidentiality agreement, she would not be bound by it in a criminal framework.
According to Rachel Chagnon, “it is very unlikely to happen”. The one who specializes in the judicialization of sexual violence notes, in the light of what she has seen in recent years, “that it is rare that victims, in situations like this, are enthusiastic to go before courts “.
A reservation possibly fueled by the acquittal, in 2018, of two University of Ottawa Gee-Gees hockey players accused of sexually assaulting a young woman. At the time, the judge’s very critical remarks about the victim caused a stir across the country.
In the case of Hockey Canada, the amicable agreement, perceived by the public and elected officials as an admission of guilt, could turn against the victim, further believes Ms.me Chagnon. “At first glance, you might think it’s a gift for a Crown prosecutor, because it confirms that something happened, but on the other hand, the defense will plead: ‘It shouldn’t have been so serious as that, since you signed.” There is a real risk that the victim will be harmed because of the agreement. »
As for the bad quarter of an hour that all the players of the 2018 Canadian junior team spend on social networks, Rachel Chagnon sees it as a “paradigm reversal”; after “centuries” of “passing the victim through the wringer”, “the population identifies more with the victims than with the potential aggressors”.
“It’s unfortunate for these young people, especially those who are not close to the events, who […] will pay the price for years of complacency towards people who have committed sexual misconduct,” she said.
However, his benevolence does not extend to the eight culprits.
“I’m sorry, but my sympathy ends there. »