Updated September 27, 2024 @ 2:00pm
The emotional cross-examination of the woman accusing Jacob Hoggard of sexual assault continued at his trial Friday, as the Canadian musician's defence lawyer sought to highlight possible issues with the complainant's memory.
The woman, whose identity is protected by a publication ban, alleges Hoggard raped, choked, slapped and urinated on her in his hotel room after she attended his band's concert and a bonfire after-party in Kirkland Lake, Ont., eight years ago.
Her testimony at the court in Haileybury, a community in northeastern Ontario, has spanned most of the week.
Hoggard, the lead singer of the band Hedley, pleaded not guilty to a charge of sexual assault when the trial began on Monday.
The defence and Crown agree that a sexual encounter between Hoggard and his accuser took place. Prosecutors are seeking to prove that the complainant gave no consent.
The woman broke down in sobs and requested a break about 20 minutes into the day while under intense questioning from defence lawyer Megan Savard on Friday about her memories of the alleged assault.
The woman had testified earlier this week that Hoggard took out a guitar when they entered his hotel room, and that she expected him to play music, but that he put it down immediately and started removing her clothing despite her protests that she felt uncomfortable.
Savard suggested that what actually happened was that Hoggard played some songs for her, which the woman denied.
"You're skipping over that fact for the jury because you think that hurts your case," Savard said.
"No," said the woman.
"It sounds pretty romantic," the defence lawyer said.
"No," repeated the complainant.
"And you don’t want to admit to the jury that you were in a romantic situation with this —"
"No," the woman interrupted forcefully.
"— with this man when you had a boyfriend," Savard continued.
"I thought of my boyfriend," the complainant said, beginning to cry. "But nothing of it was romantic or anything that I wanted. I didn't ask for this to happen to me."
Savard went on to ask for specifics about how the complainant's clothes were removed. The complainant had previously said she didn't remember how exactly it happened.
On Friday morning, she suggested her skirt had been pulled down, but under questioning from Savard the woman later agreed that the method of removal was just a "guess," and that her memories of that part of the night are "blurry."
"I'm suggesting to you that the clothes that you have no memory of him taking off were clothes that you assisted in removing," Savard said.
The complainant denied the suggestion.
As Savard continued to push on whether the woman's testimony was based on emotions rather than recall, the complainant collapsed into tears and requested some time away from the courtroom.
Later, Savard revisited the lead-up to the alleged assault and suggested that several elements of it had been consensual — the removal of clothing, Hoggard taking a photo of her with his guitar and then filming her as he asked for her age.
The complainant maintained that it was not consensual but said she couldn't remember certain details for sure, such as whether she provided her age or not.
She cried throughout questioning about her body positioning during the alleged rape and the length of time she was pinned down on the bed.
Over the course of a cross-examination that began on Wednesday afternoon, Savard returned repeatedly to the notion that the witness was basing many of her answers in testimony on assumptions rather than on vivid, concrete memories.
The complainant agreed several times that some of her answers were based on what she thought, felt or assumed happened rather than on images she could easily conjure in her mind.
On Friday, Savard showed the accuser and the jury a photograph of two men and identified one of them as the person who had let the complainant into the backstage area of the concert where a van was waiting to take Hedley fans to that night's after-party.
At first, the complainant denied he could have been the person who let her in, saying she didn't recognize his face. After a belaboured exchange during which the complainant did not always seem to follow the line of questioning, she ultimately conceded that it was possible.
"And it just took about two minutes to get you to give that answer, because you understand how serious it is to give a wrong answer under oath, right?" Savard said.
"I don't want to lie," the complainant said.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 27, 2024.
