Jacob Hoggard rape trial: What the jury never knew

In Haileybury court, the jury at Jacob Hoggard’s trial was never told that the accused had already been tried for rape in Toronto and had been in prison since the guilty verdict. However, the plaintiff in the second trial spilled the beans last week, when she alluded to the plaintiffs in the first trial in Internet searches that she was not authorized to do.

The singer of the late band Hedley has pleaded not guilty to a charge of sexual assault regarding the meeting he had with the complainant after a concert in Kirkland Lake on June 24, 2016.

Appearance of procedural defect

On the third day of cross-examination by the defense, the complainant, pushed to her limits, admitted that she had done research on the Internet about Jacob Hoggard’s fiancée, but no further research into the women who accused him in the past.

Lawyer Megan Savard immediately stood up to object and prevent the complainant from going too far in her testimony. The jury was then asked to leave.

Me Savard had declared that she had to first consult her client to find out what procedure to follow.

The accused seems to have suggested that he not declare a procedural flaw, since his lawyer instead suggested that the judge give an immediate instruction to the jury to correct the situation.

The Crown had minimized the complainant’s misconduct by recalling that she had in no way mentioned that the accused was in prison for the rape of another woman, but rather affirmed that other women had in the past denounced reprehensible conduct.

Me Savard, however, noted that the complainant had learned of the singer’s past from the journalist of CBC to whom she granted an interview in 2018.

The instruction I suggest must state that it is hearsay evidence, otherwise the damage will be doneshe warned.

The judge nevertheless reminded Me Savard that it was easy to foresee that such an incident would occur during the trial.

You’ve put so much emphasis on the research she did on the internet that if you continue down this path I would have serious concernshe warned.

The judge ordered the complainant not to mention the accused’s past until the end of her testimony.

When the jurors returned, he ordered them to ignore the woman’s last answer, because it was irrelevant and the information from CBC at the time did not constitute any evidence.

The difficulties of the second trial

The first trial of Jacob Hoggard represented a thorn in the side of the Crown and its only prosecution witness and the defense continued to keep an eye on this subject to prevent the hearings from being derailed.

The jury had also been the subject of a meticulous selection on September 23 and the candidates who knew the past of the accused had been automatically excluded.

Jacob Hoggard was sentenced in the fall of 2022 to five years in prison for sexual assault causing injury against an Ottawa resident in November 2016 in Toronto.

However, he was acquitted of a similar charge against a teenage girl in Mississauga. He underwent a first and same trial in the spring of 2022 in mainland France.

The 40-year-old singer appealed the guilty verdict, but without success. The Crown did not contest the acquittal.

Jacob Hoggard subsequently asked, in vain, the Ontario Court of Appeal to keep him free on bail, while he was heard or not before the Supreme Court of Canada.

The press was not allowed to mention the first trial to maintain the impartiality of the second trial and the presumption of innocence of the accused.

Objections and corrections

The Crown and the defense had also expressed objections to their respective final arguments, so the judge had to make corrections before communicating them to the jury just before the presentation of his final instructions on Friday.

For example, Me Savard said in his conclusions that the complainant had lied and that lies can ruin lives, break up families and send innocent people to prison.

Prison can be a punishmentshe said without naming her client.

The judge explained to the jurors that their task is not to inflict punishment on a defendant and that he is the only one who will have to decide Jacob Hoggard’s sentence in the event that the singer is found guilty of beyond all reasonable doubt.

The defense also objected to the Crown referring in its arguments to the complainant’s trauma.

Mr. Savard had said in the absence of the jury that no scientific proof of such trauma had been presented by an expert in this trial.

The presence of trauma in rape cases is open to debate, but it cannot be accepted in this trialshe declared.

The Crown had nevertheless specified that the jury is entitled to use its common sense to observe that the complainant is suffering from trauma since her sexual relationship with the star and that her behavior at the trial, her tears and her silences are the very expression of such trauma.

The judge, however, directed the jury not to rule on the complainant’s alleged trauma, but rather to focus on the reasons why the woman said it was a harrowing experience to weigh the credibility of his testimony.

The defense had finally rejected an aspect of the Crown’s final argument which concerned the frequency with which the accused allegedly asked the alleged victim if she was correct during sex and why he was so concerned about her well-being.

Prosecutor Peter Keen suggested the defendant was checking on the complainant because she kept crying, struggling and asking him to stop.

Me Savard, however, explained, in light of case law, that it is normal for an individual to ensure that his partner has pleasure during a sexual relationship.

The magistrate agreed with the defense and asked the jury not to take this observation from the Crown into account during its deliberations.

In his instructions, the judge reminded jurors that every victim of sexual assault reacts differently following rape. She may defend herself, freeze or flee, but it is important not to judge her behavior, no matter how incomprehensible it may be.he explained.

The magistrate was referring to the fact that the complainant mentioned that she had recourse to a therapist after her meeting with the accused.

He nevertheless warned the jurors that this does not mean that she was necessarily assaulted as she claims and that they should only rely on the Crown’s evidence on this subject.