How to understand the jury’s split verdict in the sex assault trial of Hedley’s Jacob Hoggard


Warning: Contains graphic content.

What happened in the jury room where 10 men and two women decided Hedley frontman Jacob Hoggard is guilty of sexually assaulting a young Ottawa woman but not guilty of raping and groping a teenage fan is a secret under Canadian law.

Several lawyers and legal experts who spoke to the Star over the course of the trial say the finding of guilt and the agonizing six-day deliberation — during which the jury twice told the court they were deadlocked on “some counts” — could suggest at least some jurors believed the former fan was telling the truth, even if they ultimately could not be sure beyond a reasonable doubt.

“It seemed to me like they were really internally struggling,” said Dawne Way, a lawyer who often represents sexual assault complainants.

Legally, however, Hoggard must now be presumed innocent in relation to the allegations of the teen complainant, who testified Hoggard groped her after a Hedley show in April 2016 when she was 15 and raped her months later after she turned 16.

“Our courts have always said a finding of not guilty is tantamount to a finding of innocence because we are innocent until we are proven guilty,” said defense lawyer Daniel Brown, who has authored a legal textbook on sexual assault law.

It also means that the teen complainant’s evidence cannot be used in any future court application by the Crown that would argue Hoggard has a pattern of offending, Brown said.

However, the finding of guilt does mean that the Ottawa woman’s testimony could be used at Hoggard’s next trial, for a 2016 charge of sexual assault causing bodily harm that allegedly took place in Kirkland Lake. Hoggard has denied that allegation.

In a statement from his lawyer Monday evening Hoggard said he is “disappointed with the verdict, but grateful that the jury rightfully acquitted him” of the teen complainant’s allegations.

“While the verdict is not what Mr. Hoggard hoped, we thank the jury for its diligence and careful attention, and its recognition of the fact that the evidence on some counts was too frail and dangerous to support a conviction.”

Whatever speculation there might be about what the not guilty finding meant, that cannot factor into the final sentence imposed by Superior Court Justice Gillian Roberts, Brown said.

Roberts has said it is likely Hoggard will face a “significant penitentiary sentence” on the charge of sexual assault causing bodily harm.

At the sentencing hearing, Roberts will also have to make factual findings about what took place in the downtown Toronto hotel room.

The Ottawa woman testified that after meeting him in a downtown Toronto hotel room Hoggard pinned her down and raped her vaginally, anally and orally, and that he slapped her, choked her so hard she thought she was going to die and spat in her mouth. She described bleeding afterwards and believed she had tears in her vagina.

The jurors could have decided the woman did not consent to one, some, or all of the sexual acts causing bodily harm, or had differing views. A finding of bodily harm can mean “any hurt or injury that interfered with the complainant’s health, comfort and psychological well-being in more than a brief or floating way.”

Other legal experts noted the teen complainant’s testimony appeared poised, with little emotion, while the Ottawa woman appeared much more emotional on the stand. While the jury was cautioned not to assume how a “real victim” would behave, they were also able to use the demeanour of the complainants in assessing their credibility — a task even experienced judges can find difficult to balance.

It is always worrying that jurors could rely on harmful stereotypes about how an “ideal victim” would behave, Way said.

She also said it can be a problem when juries or judges hold a complainant’s evidence — especially about events that took place more than a year before they were first reported to police — to an impossibly high standard.

“I do think it is very problematic when we start dissecting evidence on collateral matters from previous years,” she said.

There is always a concern that a jury can sometimes split the difference or come to a compromise after marathon deliberations, but there is no reason to think that happened here because the verdicts are not inconsistent with each other, Brown said.

“This wasn’t a rush to judgment.”/Several experts said the emotional phone call between the Ottawa woman and Hoggard, which was secretly recorded in the days after the sexual assault and revealed to her shortly before she was cross-examined about it in court, he could have played a role in the jury’s decision to find Hoggard guilty.

The defense introduced the call after the complainant said she only recalled a 30-second conversation, and suggested she was lying to the jury to make Hoggard seem like a rapist.

The complainant shook and wept before the jury as the 15-minute call was played, and jurors were told they could consider the complainant’s demeanour and tone of voice in the call in assessing her credibility.

As a regular person, “I would just defer to my common sense at that point and say: how hard is it to fake this?” said defense lawyer Chris Sewrattan.

It is impossible to say whether the skewed gender balance on the jury played any role in their deliberations or even their ability to discuss the graphic sexual allegations.

Sewrattan said there is no constitutional right to a certain composition of a jury — only to a fairly picked jury. Instead, the focus has been on trying to make the pool of potential jurors more representative of the community.

It is expected that Hoggard will appeal the guilty verdict—and it is possible the Crown could cross-appeal the not guilty verdicts. The appeals would have to be based on legal errors, as juries do not give reasons for their decisions.

If you or someone you know is experiencing sexual violence or abuse, you can call the Assaulted Women’s Helpline at 416 863 0511 or 1 866 863 0511 or text #SAFE (#7233) on your Bell, Rogers, Fido or Telus mobile phone.

JOIN THE CONVERSATION

Conversations are opinions of our readers and are subject to the Code of Conduct. The Star does not endorse these opinions.



Leave a Comment