logo
Hockey Canada sex assault verdict: Sports culture should have also been on trial

Hockey Canada sex assault verdict: Sports culture should have also been on trial

Canada News.Net2 days ago
Share article
Print article
The verdict is in on the sexual assault trial of five former members of Canada's 2018 world junior hockey team - all five have been acquitted.
Each player was accused of sexually assaulting a woman in a hotel room. Today, Justice Maria Carroccia stated that the Crown did not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
The trial has captured the world's attention and sparked polarized public debates about consent, hockey culture and the role of sport in socializing young men.
Elite athletes often operate within environments where their talent grants them special status and access to resources - monetary and otherwise - that bolster a sense of entitlement. In some instances, sport organizations exacerbate this sentiment by protecting their star performers instead of addressing misconduct, which was reflected in this case.
For example, an abusive national vaulting coach for New Zealand Athletics was finally banned for 10 years, but only after years of unchecked abuse of his female athletes, including "inappropriate sexual references." This highlights how misconduct can go on unrestrained for so long.
As researchers with expertise in sport culture and sexual and gender-based violence, we're reflecting on what the Hockey Canada trial reveals about the institutional and cultural practices within sport.
The formal and informal rules of men's sport validate misogyny and reinforce systemic patterns of sexual entitlement and inadequate accountability. We offer some perspectives on how these troubling patterns of violence in sport can be reformed.
The Hockey Canada sexual assault trial has become a focal point for questioning how elite sporting environments shield athletes from accountability. This may be especially true in hockey.
In their book about toxic hockey culture, authors Evan Moore and Jashmina Shaw argue that hockey operates within "a bubble composed mostly of boys and men who are white, cis-het, straight and upper-class. And those who play often become coaches and teach the same values to the next generation."
This closely knit community thrives on conformity and creates conditions that are ripe for the pervasive misogyny against women and systemic silence around issues of consent. The book _Skating on Thin Ice: Professional Hockey, Rape Culture and Violence against Women _, written by criminal justice scholars and sports reporters, demonstrates how endemic sexism, heavy alcohol use, abusive peers and the sexual objectification of women are buttressed by broader social factors. These factor uphold and reproduce toxic hockey culture, including patriarchal beliefs.
Male-dominated sporting cultures also emphasize a particular type of masculinity that focuses on dominance, physical intimidation and winning at all costs. This can blur the boundaries between acceptable competitive behaviour and problematic aggression.
Within the realm of professional sport, athletes also become commodified and objectified through media coverage, sponsorship deals and public scrutiny. This commodification can contribute to a culture where athletes may internalize the idea that their bodies are public property, further eroding their sense of autonomy and understanding of consent, especially in relation to others beyond the sport context.
Questioning or circumventing institutionally sanctioned behaviours is not easy, and it's well-documented that many elite athletes struggle with mental health issues including depression, anxiety and substance misuse resulting from the pressure to align with the dominant culture.
But what often gets forgotten is how the hyper-masculine culture of sports creates significant barriers to seeking help. Young male athletes are socialized to comply with peer cultures that equate vulnerability with weakness. Yet they face intense pressures around family expectations, sponsorship deals and team success that demands they maintain appearances of strength and control.
This cycle of suppressed vulnerability and untreated distress enables toxic sporting masculinity to flourish, forcing organizations like Hockey Canada to confront their role in perpetuating these harmful dynamics.
Sports organizations have significant financial and reputational investment in athletes. This can create an inherent conflict when misconducts arise, problematically prompting sports organizations to use their power and resources to prioritize damage control over justice.
We saw this in the Hockey Canada sexual assault trial, where each hockey player had his own legal counsel, a stark illustration of institutional power and the extent to which sports organizations will go to shield their members from accountability. The deeply entrenched networks within sport prioritize self-preservation over addressing misconduct
Effectively responding to these issues requires addressing the systemic factors that perpetuate sexual and gender-based violence in sport. The sport ecosystem in Canada needs radical change, including who trains and mentors young men in hockey and how organizations investigate complaints.
It requires going beyond individual accountability, participating in consent workshops or issuing policy documents. These actions alone are insufficient to shift the cultural needle.
In 2022, Hockey Canada released a comprehensive action plan to address systemic issues in hockey that features discussions of accountability, governance, education and training and independent sport safety structures.
Community organizations like the Ontario Coalition of Rape Crisis Centres also issued a series of recommendations in 2022 that remain germane:
In addition to these excellent suggestions, Hockey Canada and other allied hockey organizations must be willing to restructure the current hierarchical structure of power that governs not just hockey, but also the players and all the other agencies involved, including coaches, sponsors, trainers, legal teams, media and PR representatives.
These organizational changes are possible, as evidenced by the efforts of Bayne Pettinger, an agent who has led efforts to create space for queer hockey players in Hockey Canada and the National Hockey League.
However, the cultural norms of power in sport extend beyond the playing field to shape attitudes toward consent and sexual conduct.
Until sport organizations address the foundational cultural elements that enable misconduct - toxic masculinity, institutional protection and erosion of consent culture - meaningful change will remain elusive.
Within hockey environments, in particular, the objectification of women and the institutional silence surrounding sexual violence have become normalized aspects of the sport's culture, creating conditions where misconduct can flourish unchecked.
The events examined in this most recent trial are not isolated incidents but symptoms of deeper systemic failures within elite sport.
Only through comprehensive cultural transformation can we ensure that sport environments are spaces of genuine safety, respect and accountability for all participants.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Lorne Gunter: Cancel culture dealt a blow with Hockey Canada sex assault trial verdict
Lorne Gunter: Cancel culture dealt a blow with Hockey Canada sex assault trial verdict

Edmonton Journal

time2 hours ago

  • Edmonton Journal

Lorne Gunter: Cancel culture dealt a blow with Hockey Canada sex assault trial verdict

'#MeToo changed our culture, but it couldn't change our courts.' 'No justice for the victim.' 'Survivors of sexual assault need our understanding, not courts deaf to their complaints.' Article content Those and many, many other headlines and ledes blared out Friday that, in one form or the other, the woman known only as 'E.M.,' who had alleged five Hockey Canada junior players had gang assaulted her in 2018, had been let down by the justice system or even wronged by it. Article content Article content Article content To be sure, lots of pigs guilty of real crimes got outed — deservedly. Movie producer Harvey Weinstein was one. In 2021 and 2022, Weinstein was found guilty in both New York and Los Angeles of five counts of rape for forcing young starlets to have sex with him in return for roles in his movies. Article content Other abusers, who had gotten away with coerced or non-consensual sexual behaviour for years, saw their reigns of terror ended. Good. Article content Article content And I do think the movement has made men, especially those in positions of power, rethink their behaviour towards female underlings. Another good. Article content Article content But because social media and cancel culture were the juries that decided which men tarred with the MeToo brush were worthy of punishment (indeed the term 'cancel culture' evolved in lockstep with MeToo) a lot of men lost their careers as the result of a tweet (or two million tweets). Article content Actual courts have to concern themselves with little matters such as evidence, due process and reasonable doubt. But not online lynch mobs. Article content While office romances were once common, most large companies now have policies preventing bosses (male or female) from 'fraternizing' with employees. Data company Astronomer has just such a policy that, if followed, would have saved CEO Andy Byron and HR executive Kristin Cabot the humiliation of having their extramarital affair exposed to the world on a kiss cam at a Coldplay concert outside Boston last week.

World juniors case raises consent questions, but appeal unlikely: experts
World juniors case raises consent questions, but appeal unlikely: experts

Global News

time5 hours ago

  • Global News

World juniors case raises consent questions, but appeal unlikely: experts

An appeal by Crown prosecutors of Thursday's acquittal of five hockey players in the high-profile world juniors sexual assault case is unlikely, legal experts say, despite questions about whether consent was properly considered. Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dubé and Cal Foote were found not guilty of all charges after a weeks-long court case that centred on an alleged group sexual encounter in London, Ont., in 2018, in which the players had been accused of non-consensual sex. The Crown has 30 days to decide whether to appeal the decision to a higher court. In her ruling, Ontario Superior Court Justice Maria Carroccia said she did not find the female complainant, known as E.M. in court documents due to standard a publication ban, 'credible or reliable.' She also dismissed the Crown's argument that E.M. had only consented out of fear. Story continues below advertisement 'This case, on its facts, does not raise issues of the reformulation of the legal concept of consent,' she said in her decision. While those statements and others made by Carroccia have been criticized, even legal experts who take issue with them say they may not be sufficient grounds for an appeal. 'I don't agree with the way that the judge came to her decision, but the decision is really well-reasoned,' said Daphne Gilbert, a legal professor who teaches courses on sexual assault law at the University of Ottawa. 'Appeal standards aren't just that you disagree with the result. You have to to show an error in law. And I don't see an error in law in the decision itself.' 3:56 Why the judge acquitted all 5 former Hockey Canada players in sex assault trial How the legal definition of consent factors in Melanie Randall, a Western University law professor whose research includes women's autonomy rights, said Canada's 'extremely progressive statutory definition of consent' in criminal law means 'we're not looking for the 'no,' we're looking for the 'yes.'' Story continues below advertisement In other words, she said, a judge or jury must take into account the female complainant's own mindset behind her decision to consent to a sexual act, and determine if that consent is truly voluntary, which can be a subjective assessment. The court heard during the trial that E.M., who testified she was drunk and not of clear mind, was in the washroom after she had consensual sex with McLeod on the night in question and came out to a group of men in the room allegedly invited by McLeod in a group chat. It was then that the Crown alleged several sexual acts took place without E.M.'s consent. Get breaking National news For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy Defence lawyers suggested E.M. wasn't as drunk as she said she was, wanted a 'wild night' with the players, was 'egging' them on to have sex with her and accused her of having a 'clear agenda' during the court process, which was a judge-only trial. E.M. pushed back against those claims and at points outright rejected them, saying she was coaxed into staying in the room and was disrespected and taken advantage of by the group, who she said 'could see I was out of my mind.' 'E.M. was unwavering in telling the court that she did not consent, she did not want this, she did not provide her voluntary agreement,' Randall said. Story continues below advertisement 'She explained in excruciating detail why it was complex for her to cope in that situation where she felt threatened and unsure of how to respond, and I think used a lot of strategies of appeasement and acquiescence.' 2:36 World junior trial: Players found not guilty in high-profile sex assault case Although Randall agreed that the decision itself was legally sound, she believes Carroccia 'went much further than she needed to' in the analysis of consent by ruling E.M.'s consent was voluntary. 'The judge basically said one of two things: either she knows better than E.M. does what her own subjective state was, or E.M. is a liar,' Randall said. 'I think those are two very unfortunate and damaging consequences of this decision.' Gilbert said a possible appeal could be launched on the allegation the judge was biased against E.M., but called that 'kind of a nuclear option.' Story continues below advertisement 'Usually you wouldn't accuse a judge of bias from what they write in a judgment, because they're actually making explicit the reasons upon which they made their decision,' she added. 'Bias arguments are more likely to come from attitudes in the courtroom or things that were said in the courtroom that then you felt contributed to a wrongful verdict.' She suggested the judge could have done more to rein in the defence lawyers in their cross-examination of E.M., which the complainant's lawyer Karen Bellehumeur said after the verdict Thursday was at times 'insulting, unfair, mocking and disrespectful.' 'A fair trial is one where decisions are made based on the evidence and the law, not on stereotypes and assumptions, and where the trial process respects the security, equality and privacy rights of the victim, as well as the accused persons,' Crown attorney Meaghan Cunningham told reporters outside court Thursday. Toronto lawyer Lorne Honickman told Global News the Crown will likely look 'very, very closely' at the issue of consent in the judge's ruling as it determines its next steps. 'If they believe that there may have been an error there in law, they will take this 30-day appeal period or review period to determine whether or not they want to appeal,' he said. 'Perhaps — and I underline 'perhaps' a hundred times — a higher court will be looking at the issues here and making further determinations.' Story continues below advertisement 2:26 Protestors gather as judge gives ruling in World Junior hockey sexual assault trial Scientific context missing in consent argument In her ruling, Carroccia noted the Crown did not present any scientific evidence or testimony she could consider that would support its claims that E.M.'s had only consented under fear or duress — something scientific experts were also puzzled by. 'I think the complexity of how the complainant responded isn't well understood,' Dr. Lori Haskell, a Toronto-based clinical psychologist who specializes in trauma and abuse and has served as an expert witness in previous trials, told Global News. Story continues below advertisement Haskell cited neuroscientific research that has shown how the brain can shut down parts of the prefrontal cortex that affect decision-making, logic and reasoning in stressful or threatening scenarios. 'They're now in survival brain,' she said of people during situations of real or perceived threats. 'It's easy when you're not in that situation to assume you could (fight or run away), but I think we need to look at, what are similar situations? How do people respond?' She continued: 'I mean, how do men respond to hazing on sports teams? We know young men in universities have been quite traumatized with things done to them.' Without that further context, experts like Gilbert and Randall said the judge's ruling appeared to accept some of the most widely-held myths regarding sexual assault, including arguments made by the defence lawyers that E.M. had 'created a lie' out of regret and embarrassment. 'Although the slogan, 'Believe the victim,' has become popularized as of late, it has no place in a criminal trial,' Carroccia wrote at one point in her decision. 'To approach a trial with the assumption that the complainant is telling the truth is the equivalent of imposing a presumption of guilt on the person accused of sexual assault and then placing the burden on him to prove his innocence.' Story continues below advertisement 0:49 All 5 former World Junior players found not guilty in high-profile sex assault trial London, Ont., defence lawyer Phillip Millar told Global News he felt 'relief' to see that sentiment expressed in the decision. 'I was worried our judicial system has (been) going too far in terms of buying into the 'believe all victims' (idea) before the person has been determined to be a victim by the justice system,' he said. 'What was done is the law of consent was properly applied. You can't redefine consent because it's inconvenient to you, or because you want to retroactively retract it. Just because you're not proud of what you did on a day doesn't give you the ability to redefine what is consent.' Randall and Gilbert noted that acquittals mean the threshold of proving something beyond a reasonable doubt was not met by the Crown, but how Canadians and those in the public realm view the details laid out during the court process may be another question. Story continues below advertisement 'I don't think an appeal is the only strategy here,' Gilbert said. 'I think there's lots of things we can respond to this judgment with that are, you know, powerful things to respond with that aren't necessarily appealing.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store