By Katie Strang and Dan Robson
All five defense teams were given the chance to put forth final reply submissions and focused on a variety of aspects of the case.
David Humphrey, attorney for McLeod, argued that the Crown was manipulating evidence, distorting the timeline and jettisoning arguments that were inconsistent with their arguments.
Riaz Sayani, Hart’s attorney, largely focused on what he argued was the Crown’s misapplications of law, including invoking trauma principles for circular reasoning and “bootstrapping” information to augment their case.
Hilary Dudding, attorney for Formenton, argued that myth-based stereotypes should not be applied to defense arguments, nor for Crown positions. She cautioned the judge against accepting false binary propositions and to instead allow for the possibility that a woman could be enthusiastic and consenting within the environment the defense describes without it being characterized as “bizarre” or “odd.”
Lisa Carnelos, attorney for Dubé, addressed the contact her client had with E.M.’s buttocks, calling it “playful” and arguing that the “Crown has not disproved that she was consenting.”
“It was playful, possibly foreplay,” Carnelos said. “And in no way looked to be harmful or with the intention to be abusive.”
Julianna Greenspan, who represents Foote, took aim at the Crown, criticizing what she said was an earlier suggestion that further evidence exists that was not permitted to be considered in court. Without a jury, those documents are available to the public. “That was a factually wrong and unfair comment to make,” Greenspan said.
She also took issue with a slide shown earlier in the day that indicated there was “no evidence from Callan Foote.” Had this still been a jury trial, Greenspan said, she would have called for mistrial, even at this late stage — calling the slide “illegal.”
“It runs contrary to the Canada Evidence Act, which states failure of the accused to testify shall not be made the subject of comment by counsel for the prosecution,” Greenspan said.
She further suggested that the slide was purposefully included to influence the media.
“Everyone in this courtroom knows the attention in this case has garnered from the media and public,” Greenspan said. ”The Crown, I submit, has throughout this trial been preoccupied with litigating the public opinion through the media. This is an upsetting final example on behalf of my client.”