Warning: coverage of the Hockey Canada trial includes details of alleged sexual assault that may be disturbing to readers.

A defense lawyer for one of five former players on Canada’s 2018 world junior team facing sexual assault charges suggested the complainant made up the story of sexual assault as a way to save her relationship with her boyfriend.

The cross-examination is part of a trial that sees five former members of Canada’s 2018 World Junior Championship team – former NHLers Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dube and Cal Foote – each pleading not guilty to one count of sexual assault. McLeod also pleaded not guilty to an additional charge of sexual assault as party to the offense.

These charges are connected to an incident from June 2018 in which E.M., the complainant whose identity is protected by a publication ban, alleges she was sexually assaulted in a hotel room following a Hockey Canada gala.

On Wednesday, Hart’s defense lawyer, Megan Savard, cross-examined the complainant after McLeod’s lawyer, David Humphrey, concluded his questions on Tuesday. 

In part of her cross-examination, Savard continued a line of questioning Humphrey introduced, regarding the boyfriend of three months the complainant had at the time of the alleged incident.

Savard took this a step further, though, confirming with E.M. that she and that same boyfriend are currently engaged to be married and also suggesting the complainant fabricated the sexual assault aspect of her story as a way to avoid her boyfriend ending their relationship.

“I am suggesting that part of why you’re so resistant this week to some of (Humphrey’s) suggestions that you actively participated (in the sexual activity) is because you know that story actually could have been a relationship-ender,” Savard said.

E.M. said she did not believe herself to be an active participant in the alleged acts. She said she felt “out of my body,” a sentiment she has repeated throughout her Crown testimony and cross-examination to explain part of why she went along with the alleged acts.

E.M. also said she did consider initially leaving Jack’s Bar with McLeod and having consensual sex with him at the Delta Armouries Hotel as “sort of cheating” on her boyfriend, but what happened afterward, while multiple men were in the room, was not consensual and not cheating.

She also said her fiance has not been keeping an eye on the trial, saying he is “staying really far removed from it” and that she hasn’t shared details of the alleged sexual assault with him. 

“Unless he asked for details or wanted to know, it was mutually agreed we didn’t need to get into that,” she said.

Much of the beginning of Savard’s questioning centered around a statement of claim E.M. provided to Hockey Canada on July 20, 2022. 

E.M. said that some portions of this statement are incorrect, particularly compared to the statements the complainant provided to London police in 2018. 

E.M. said the 2022 statement was prepared for her by her lawyers at the time and that she did not refer to her 2018 transcripts when reviewing and signing off on it, as she believed the 2022 investigation was just for Hockey Canada and had no criminal implications. 

Savard pressed the complainant further on the inconsistencies of the 2022 statement, as well as her reasoning given on Tuesday.

“I'm going to suggest that every word of your explanation to Mr. Humphrey for why these inaccuracies existed is false,” Savard said.

E.M. didn’t agree with the suggestion, but Savard went on to suggest that on the morning of July 20, 2022, London police detective Lindsay Ryan met with the complainant at her home to tell her the police were re-opening their investigation. Savard suggested it was later that day that E.M. signed her statement to Hockey Canada, before letting Ryan know that her statement of claim could be obtained through her lawyers.

The complainant said she didn’t know the exact dates. 

“I truly believe that when I signed this (statement of claim to Hockey Canada), that I didn't know that it was being reopened yet,” E.M. said. “I thought this was for a separate investigation. I didn’t know it was all going together eventually.”

Hockey Canada Sexual Assault Trial: Defense Continues To Cross-Examine Complainant Warning: coverage of the Hockey Canada trial includes graphic details of alleged sexual assault that may be disturbing to readers.

Savard eventually shifted to the alleged incident in the hotel room, citing a meeting that E.M. had on March 26, 2025 – just under a month before the trial began – in which the complainant claimed that during the alleged assault, she “took on the persona of a porn star.” Savard used this mention of “persona” in her line of questioning, asking if E.M. was acting like a “porn star.”

“Yes, I felt that was the thing they (the men in the hotel room) wanted. They were trying to recreate a porn scene,” E.M. said.

Through the discussion of what occurred in the hotel room, E.M. also said she was on “autopilot” and that her body was having an “automatic reaction” while in the hotel room. She also expressed this in her Crown testimony on Monday.

The questioning then returned to the topic of the complainant’s 2022 statement to Hockey Canada, pointing out that E.M. had misidentified two men, current Dallas Stars center Sam Steel and Florida Panthers left winger Jonah Gadjovich, as part of the group of players that allegedly sexually assaulted her. Steel and Gadjovich have not been criminally charged in this case.

Savard suggested the complainant didn’t take great care with who she was naming, to which E.M. replied she “wasn’t intentionally trying to do that.”

Savard continued pressing on these inaccuracies, with E.M. attempting to explain that it was her lawyers, not her, who wrote the statement. Eventually, the complainant began to cry, at which point the presiding judge, Justice Maria Carroccia, ended the proceedings for the day.

Savard’s cross-examination of E.M. is expected to continue on Thursday.