Jurors in Hoggard trial ask questions associated to consent, evaluation extra testimony

Jurors within the sexual assault trial of Canadian musician Jacob Hoggard requested extra questions associated to consent Sunday as deliberations continued for a sixth day.

The jury requested the choose to clarify how a complainant’s phrases and actions may very well be used to attempt to increase an affordable doubt about her proof associated to her way of thinking on the time of the alleged incident with out falling again on stereotypes and assumptions relating to how sexual assault victims ought to behave.

It requested for examples associated to the second complainant, an Ottawa girl who met Hoggard on the relationship app Tinder in November 2016 and travelled to see him in Toronto later that month.

The jury additionally requested for readability on what would symbolize real, slightly than willful, ignorance of a complainant’s lack of consent.

Hoggard, the lead singer for the band Hedley, has pleaded not responsible to 2 counts of sexual assault inflicting bodily hurt and one in every of sexual interference, a cost that refers back to the sexual touching of somebody below 16.

The Crown alleges he groped a teenage fan after a Hedley present in April 2016, after which violently raped her in a Toronto-area resort that September, after she turned 16.

Prosecutors allege he additionally violently raped a younger Ottawa girl in late November 2016 in a downtown Toronto resort.

Each complainants testified they cried and stated no all through the encounters, and have been left bleeding and bruised afterwards.

The defence argues the groping didn’t occur and the sexual encounters have been consensual.

Hoggard testified throughout trial that whereas he doesn’t have an in depth reminiscence of the encounters, he’s assured the complainants consented based mostly on their verbal and non-verbal cues.

In her solutions to jurors Sunday, Ontario Superior Courtroom Justice Gillian Roberts stated she couldn’t present particular examples on assess the second complainant’s proof for worry of interfering with their fact-finding course of, however might remind them of some basic “authorized propositions” on the problem.

Roberts first repeated her directions to not make assumptions based mostly on stereotypes about how an “superb sufferer” ought to act.

“It isn’t an error to reach at a factual conclusion which will logically replicate a stereotype if the factual conclusion just isn’t drawn from a stereotypical inference however as an alternative relies on the proof,” she stated.

She additionally stated jurors might have a look at what the complainant stated and did on the time and ask themselves whether it is potential to attract a “affordable inference that she did consent.”

“Do not forget that an affordable doubt should not be speculative. There have to be one thing the complainant did or stated from which an affordable doubt about consent could also be drawn,” she stated.

As for the query of real or willful ignorance of lack of consent, Roberts informed jurors it doesn’t apply.

It’s agreed that the problem in every case is whether or not the Crown has confirmed past an affordable doubt that the complainant didn’t consent to the sexual exercise, she stated.

If jurors settle for the complainants’ proof about what occurred within the resort room, which means they’ve rejected Hoggard’s proof and settle for he knew the complainants weren’t consenting, the choose stated.

Over the past two days, the jury has requested the court docket to replay the majority of the proof given by the 2 complainants and by Hoggard.

That’s after jurors twice indicated they have been deadlocked on “some” of the counts.