Defense lawyers target victim's credibility in closing statements in Hockey Canada trial.

The trial involving 5 former National Hockey League players in which Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Dillon Dube, Cal Foote, and Alex Formenton all face charges stemming from an incident that occured in a hotel room back in 2018 is coming to a close.

On Monday the attorneys for both the defense and the prosecution will present their closing arguments to Justice Maria Carroccia who will render the verdict in this case after two groups of jurors were dismissed during the course of this trial. Although the closing arguments will come today, Justice Maria Carroccia isn't expected to make a decision right away and such a decision could take weeks and possibly even months before it is announced.

It was attorney David Humphrey who was up first on Monday with Humphrey representing Michael McLeod in this case, and Humphrey wasted no time in attacking the credibility of the alleged victim in this case, identified only as "E.M." Humphrey seemed very confident, judging by his remarks, that his client would be vindicated in this case.

"This is a case where the defence has an embarrassment of riches — a cornucopia of compelling credibility and reliability concerns in E.M.’s testimony," argued Humphrey on Monday as per the CBC.

Humphrey would then go a step further and argued that the entire trial was based on a lie that "E.M." told her mother at the time of the incident, a lie that has since snowballed into something much, much bigger. Humphrey argued that E.M. regretted drinking that night and also regretted cheating on her boyfriend, pointing to those as motivating factors behind what he called a "white lie that snowballed into a criminal investigation."

"She wants people to see her as a victim rather than a person who made personal choices," said Humphrey. "As her drunkenness diminished, she may not have wanted to acknowledge to others or to herself that she had just been sexually adventurous with multiple men in a hotel room that she just met that night."

Humphrey continued to press forward with his narrative, arguing that the private settlement from Hockey Canada had given E.M. a "motive to fabricate" while listing off some reasons why.

"She has an interest to support the narrative she gave her family and she used to secure a settlement from Hockey Canada that is now known by all. It is that background that your honour must weigh her evidence," argued Humphrey.

Humphrey would continue to attack E.M.'s credibility throughout his closing arguments and it remains to be seen if the other defense lawyers in this trial, who will also make their closing arguments today, choose to go down a similar route.

It is important to note that Humphrey is representing the interests of his client here and that this is only one side of this story, with the prosecutors also scheduled to present their closing argument later today.