Warning: This story accommodates particulars some readers could discover disturbing. Please learn at your personal discretion.
TORONTO — Defence legal professionals urged Wednesday that an Ottawa girl fabricated rape allegations about Canadian musician Jacob Hoggard as a “type of revenge” after he bodily injured her throughout consensual intercourse and harm her emotions.
Legal professionals for Hoggard questioned the lady, who’s the second complainant within the trial, about her encounter with the Hedley frontman and their communications afterward, which included textual content messages and a cellphone name.
The lady, now in her late 20s, has testified she got here throughout the singer on the relationship app Tinder in November 2016 and, weeks later, agreed to fulfill him in Toronto to have intercourse. However she stated she didn’t consent to what transpired in his lodge room.
She informed the courtroom Hoggard raped her anally, vaginally and orally and at one level choked her so arduous she thought she may die. She was left bleeding and with bruises, she stated.
Hoggard texted her after she left the lodge, and a couple of day later, the lady despatched him a message saying that he had raped her and asking to speak on the cellphone, she stated. She stated the decision happened within the days following the encounter and was very transient — about 30 seconds lengthy.
Throughout cross-examination Wednesday, defence lawyer Megan Savard urged the complainant was upset with Hoggard in the course of the name as a result of he appeared to now not be fascinated with her.
“You’re additionally upset, I’m going to counsel, that he injured you in the midst of consensual intercourse, you thought he was being thoughtless to not verify in with you and it added to the harm emotions you had on account of having been basically dropped by this rock star,” Savard stated.
The complainant was adamant that wasn’t the case and that she wished him to apologize.
At one other level in her cross-examination, Savard urged the lady wished retribution.
“If he wasn’t going to maintain speaking to you, you had been going to make up tales about him as a type of revenge,” the lawyer stated.
“If he wasn’t going to apologize for raping me, I used to be going to inform folks about it,” the complainant replied.
Hoggard has pleaded not responsible to 2 counts of sexual assault inflicting bodily hurt and certainly one of sexual interference, a cost that pertains to the sexual touching of somebody below 16.
An agreed assertion of details says he had a sexual encounter with every of the complainants on separate events within the fall of 2016.
On Wednesday, the complainant sobbed closely on the stand as a recording of her name with Hoggard was performed in courtroom, prompting Ontario Superior Court docket Justice Gillian Roberts to twice counsel suspending cross-examination.
“This was a really traumatizing occasion for me and I spent six years of my life attempting to dam it out,” the complainant stated, including it was troublesome to listen to Hoggard’s voice on the decision.
Within the roughly 15-minute recording, Hoggard spoke calmly and in a soothing tone, saying the lady’s allegation by textual content “got here out of left subject” and that he thought they “had a very nice time collectively.”
The lady, whose voice sounded strained and distraught, stated “not precisely” and added that she skilled critical ache in the course of the encounter and afterward.
One other time, Hoggard stated he had been attentive all through the encounter.
“Between you and I, it was very apparent that I used to be paying shut consideration to the way you felt and wasn’t ignoring the way you felt. Except you’re feeling in any other case however that may utterly shock me,” he stated on the decision.
“I assume I simply have a special opinion than you do,” the lady responded.
At numerous factors, she indicated his phrases sounded rehearsed or coached, and urged he was attempting to guard himself.
Throughout cross-examination, Savard urged the lady had misrepresented the size, context and contents of the decision, denying that Hoggard expressed concern for her and claiming that he’d blocked her afterward, with the intention to win over the jury.
“You tried to consider how a rapist would reply?and informed that story to the jury,” Savard stated.
“No, he’s the one rapist I do know,” the lady stated.
The defence additionally indicated the lady informed Hoggard she wanted stitches in her vagina, which was false, and that she was going to contact a lawyer if he didn’t apologize.
She acknowledged she lied to Hoggard in the course of the name about needing stitches and presumably contacting a lawyer in an effort to get him to apologize.
“I used to be attempting to get him to confess what he did to me” and to acknowledge its severity, she stated.
Court docket has heard that, sooner or later, the lady reached out to Hoggard’s ex-girlfriend, now his spouse, by means of direct message on Instagram and requested if she had an identical expertise with him.
“She informed me that he had accomplished this to different folks, in that dialog,” she informed jurors.
“You’re speaking about his spouse, who’s sitting in courtroom proper now?” Savard requested.
“Completely. After which she informed me that I wanted to go to the police,” and to the physician to get checked for sexually transmitted infections, the lady replied.
Sitting in courtroom, Hoggard’s spouse, Rebekah Asselstine, appeared shocked and stared forward along with her mouth agape.
Savard later confirmed the lady a screenshot of an trade between her and Asselstine and urged Asselstine solely stated she had been contacted by others about Hoggard dishonest on her, however by no means about him hurting anybody.
The lady did an nameless interview with the CBC relating to her allegations in 2018, and later filed a report with police.
The complainant is predicted to return to the stand on Friday.
The opposite complainant, who was 16 on the time, has testified that Hoggard raped her vaginally and orally, and tried to take action anally, on Sept. 30, 2016.
Neither complainant may be recognized below a publication ban.
© 2022 The Canadian Press