A judge has ruled that Crown prosecutors may continue cross-examining Toronto city councillor Michael Thompson in his sexual assault trial, following a defence concern that a key witness was improperly treated as a complainant during questioning.
The decision came Friday after defence lawyer Leora Shemesh suggested she might seek a mistrial, citing what she described as a new theory advanced by the Crown late in Thursday’s proceedings.
Ontario Court Justice Phillip Brissette said he was satisfied the Crown’s questioning pertained to credibility and not to introducing new allegations. “I’m certainly satisfied with the direction the Crown wants to go,” he said during a virtual hearing.
The dispute arose during Shemesh’s objection to how Crown attorney Mareike Newhouse questioned Thompson about his interactions with a 22-year-old university student who attended the 2022 Canada Day weekend at a cottage on Acton Island in Muskoka, where the alleged assaults took place.
Thompson, 65, has pleaded not guilty to two counts of sexual assault involving two other women who attended the same gathering. The student is a witness, not a complainant. All three women’s identities are protected under a publication ban.
During Thursday’s cross-examination in Barrie, Newhouse repeatedly questioned Thompson about his intentions toward the student, including why he offered her a ride home from Yorkville and later invited her to the cottage. “You had known her for at most five days, right?” Newhouse asked. “Yes,” Thompson replied.
Newhouse also presented text messages in which Thompson described the weekend as a chance to “unwind at the cottage,” and suggested he shifted the narrative after initially inviting the woman under the impression it was a networking event. Thompson denied misleading her and said the trip was intended for relaxation, not career advancement.
The exchange grew more contentious when Newhouse suggested Thompson had a sexual interest in the woman, stating he had been “trying to get in her pants.” She later referred to the student as a “victim” before correcting the term.
Shemesh objected, arguing the Crown had not raised these implications during the student’s testimony earlier in the trial and that the defence had no chance to address them at the time. “She is a witness,” Shemesh said in court. “Not a complainant.”
The judge paused proceedings Thursday afternoon to allow counsel to consider their positions. On Friday, following clarification from Newhouse, Brissette ruled the Crown could proceed with cross-examination.
The trial will resume on May 29.
