(Ottawa) An Ottawa judge on Monday found former Vice-Admiral Haydn Edmundson not guilty of sexual assault and indecent act.
Mr. Edmundson was chief of military personnel in 2021 when he was accused of sexually assaulting a female Navy subordinate during a sea deployment in 1991.
Justice Matthew Webber concluded Monday morning that the Crown had failed to prove the accused’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The magistrate noted in particular his concerns about the complainant’s recollection of what happened more than 30 years ago and the Crown’s lack of evidence to corroborate her version of events.
“There are just too many problems, and I’m not here to […] “to state what happened. That’s not my job, you know: my job is simply to decide whether or not guilt has been proven to the required standard, and it hasn’t,” Judge Webber said.
The trial was held in February, but the verdict was postponed twice, including last month when Judge Webber said his decision was not final.
The complainant, Stephanie Viau, testified at trial that she was 19 and the lowest rank in the Navy when the alleged assault occurred, while the older Edmundson was an officer. The complainant’s identity was protected during the trial, but the publication ban has since been lifted.
The vice admiral pleaded not guilty and testified at trial that he never had sexual contact with M.me Viau. As he left court Monday, attorney Brian Greenspan said his client was pleased with the “clear and decisive confirmation of his unwavering position that he was not guilty of these false charges.”
Indecent action
During the trial, Mr.me Viau testified that one of her responsibilities on board the ship was to wake the officers for their watch and other night duties, something she had done regularly with Mr. Edmundson during that 1991 deployment.
The court heard conflicting evidence about this task of waking up officers in their cabins.me Viau estimated she woke Mr Edmundson every two or three nights, and she told the court the officer’s behaviour progressively worsened during that deployment.
She said Mr Edmundson began sleeping naked and one night she found him completely undressed, over the sheets. The complainant claimed she then went “crazy”, yelling at him and turning on the lights to wake the other officer who was sleeping in the top bunk. This event formed the basis of the indecent act charge.
However, Justice Webber concluded that he did not believe that Mr.me Viau could have caused such a ruckus on board a Navy ship at night without other people noticing.
“I conclude that the overall testimony [de Mme Viau] on the allegation that Mr Edmundson gradually exposed himself to her is far too compromised to come close to proving the allegations she made,” the magistrate concluded.
Sexual assault
Mme Viau further alleged that the sexual assault occurred a few days after she screamed at him. She testified at trial that the officer stopped her in the hallway and called her into his cabin to talk. The complainant alleged that Mr. Edmundson then prevented her from leaving the room and sexually assaulted her.
When Mr Edmundson testified in his own defence, he denied having any physical or sexual contact with Msme Viau.
During his testimony, he also stated that the complainant did not regularly wake him up during this deployment, because his role as a navigator required him to work mainly during the day.
Me Greenspan targeted a Crown witness during cross-examination. The woman, whose identity is protected by a court publication ban, was a friend of Ms.me Viau on board the ship.
She testified that she remembered the night of the assault because she and the complainant were getting ready for a night out during a port stopover and she had misplaced her reading glasses. She stated that Mme Viau had offered to go and look for them in another part of the ship, but she never came back. So she went looking for her.
Under cross-examination, the woman explained that she had told all this to a CBC reporter in early 2021. However, Ms.e Greenspan produced a transcript of that interview that he said suggested the reporter had revealed key details of M’s story to him.me Viau before asking her questions. The accused’s lawyer then argued that the journalist had provided information to the witness and that she could not otherwise have corroborated the complainant’s story.
In his decision, Justice Webber concluded that the woman’s evidence “could not in any way be relied upon to corroborate the complainant’s evidence, as it is clearly a tainted memory, which does not represent a true memory.”
Other affairs in the army
Edmundson was among a string of senior military leaders to be accused of sexual misconduct in 2021. He resigned as chief of military personnel when the allegations became public in 2021. Charges were laid months later, in December 2021.
Mr. Edmundson testified that in February 2022, the Chief of the Defence Staff ordered him to retire from the Armed Forces.
As he left court on Monday, Mr Edmundson declined to say whether he planned to sue the government or the military.
The crisis within the military prompted the government to call for an external review, which was led by former Supreme Court Justice Louise Arbour. In her report, tabled in May 2022, she called for sweeping changes to reform the toxic culture within the Armed Forces.
The army’s new defence chief, General Jennie Carignan, was then promoted to the newly created position of “chief of professional conduct and culture” with the aim of implementing the recommendations of the Arbour report.