Canadian musician Jacob Hoggard arrives at the Toronto courthouse on Oct. 20, 2022. Hoggard, the frontman for the band Hedley, has pleaded not guilty to a charge of sexual assault at the trial taking place in the northeastern Ontario community of Haileybury.Tijana Martin/The Canadian Press
A defence lawyer for Jacob Hoggard accused the complainant at his sexual assault trial of trying to disguise that she was hoping to have sex with the musician, a suggestion the woman repeatedly pushed back against during emotional testimony on Thursday.
Cross-examination of the complainant, who cannot be identified, involved Mr. Hoggard’s defence pressing the woman on how much she may have flirted with the singer, her intentions that night and differences in her testimony and the statement she gave to police.
Mr. Hoggard, the frontman for the band Hedley, has pleaded not guilty to a charge of sexual assault at the trial taking place in the northeastern Ontario community of Haileybury.
The complainant has alleged Mr. Hoggard raped, hit, choked and urinated on her in his hotel room after she attended his band’s concert and an after-party in Kirkland Lake, Ont., eight years ago. The defence and Crown agree that a sexual encounter took place, but prosecutors are seeking to prove it was not consensual.
On Thursday, Mr. Hoggard’s lawyer Megan Savard pushed the complainant on the extent to which she and Mr. Hoggard flirted at the party before the alleged assault.
The woman denied she had flirted with Mr. Hoggard; that they exchanged numbers; that he touched her in a suggestive way; that he hugged her; whispered to her; asked her to kiss him on the cheek; invited her to spend the night with him.
Ms. Savard accused the complainant of making up the language she has used so far in her testimony: that Hoggard had said they would have a “casual conversation” and “play some music.”
“You’re changing the wording now because you don’t want the jury to think that you knew or were hoping to have sex with him,” Ms. Savard said.
“No,” the woman said.
“You've been experimenting with the way to tell this particular lie for years now,” the lawyer said.
“False,” the woman said, visibly emotional.
Later, after the complainant said she had been looking to spend “one-on-one” time with Mr. Hoggard, Ms. Savard suggested the woman was after “a one-night stand” with the leader of a band she liked, which the complainant denied.
Ms. Savard also pointed out several differences between the woman’s testimony this week and a statement she gave to police in 2022.
The complainant had told the Crown this week that she was non-confrontational with Mr. Hoggard after the alleged assault, not wanting to “trigger” him because she was afraid.
She described a conversation in which Mr. Hoggard told her that she didn’t have to work about sexually transmitted diseases “because he picks them young,” and that his girlfriend wouldn’t find out about what happened.
Ms. Savard singled out the latter part of the alleged exchange and asked whether the complainant was upset Mr. Hoggard was telling her he had cheated on his girlfriend.
“That’s upsetting, yeah,” she said.
Ms. Savard went on to ask if she had called the singer out on his “bad behaviour,” to which the woman said she hadn’t.
The defence lawyer then read out part of the transcript from the complainant’s interview with police two years ago, in which the woman said she had told Mr. Hoggard something to the effect of, “Aren’t you ashamed of what you’re doing to all these, to me and other girls?”
The complainant said she told the Crown prosecutor earlier this week after reviewing the transcript that she had made a mistake, and “I wanted to correct my mistake.”
“I’m very confident in my reaction that I was scared and didn’t want to confront, didn’t want to add gas to the fire,” she said.
In another exchange, Ms. Savard suggested there was another inconsistency in the way the complainant described her departure from the hotel room.
The woman said this week that she only stayed in the hotel room for about a minute after Mr. Hoggard left, despite his instruction that she wait for at least 30 minutes before leaving, in part because she was worried he could be “buying time to come back and do something horrible.”
In the police interview, she said she listened to Mr. Hoggard and did wait in the room because she didn’t want anybody seeing her.
Ms. Savard pointed out the difference but the complainant pushed back.
“I waited, and then I thought about what was going on. I was afraid that he would come back with things to hurt me further, and I panicked, and I left before the time frame that he gave,” she said.
“Nowhere in that passage ... do you say you waited for a minute,” Ms. Savard said, referring back to the police statement. “Nowhere in this passage do you say that, ’I was afraid he was going to come back and hurt me.’”
Late on Thursday afternoon, Ms. Savard referred back to police interviews that took place in February 2018. The complainant agreed that she elected not to press charges at the time after police incorrectly suggested her name would not be protected by a publication ban.
Ms. Savard referred to police notes from the time that said the complainant told two officers she had anonymously posted an allegation against Mr. Hoggard on social media.
The complainant said she didn’t remember doing so but accepted it was possible.
Ms. Savard produced a three-page document that had been posted online and asked the complainant to review it at the end of the day. She said she was confident she did not write it.
The cross-examination is expected to continue on Friday.