Key Inconsistencies Found in Testimony of Witness in Hockey Players’ Sexual Assault Case

WARNING: This post contains graphic details.

During the trial of two hockey players accused of sexual assault, Assistant Crown attorney Meaghan Cunnigham pointed out several inconsistencies in the testimony of witness Howden. However, Judge Carroccia ruled that there were only four significant inconsistencies.

The first inconsistency identified by Carroccia revolved around Howden’s account of witnessing E.M., the complainant, taking one of the defendants, Alex Formenton, into a hotel room bathroom.

Howden claimed he saw the woman taking Formenton into the bathroom during his testimony. However, in a previous statement to Hockey Canada investigators in 2018, Howden stated that he did not watch her as she walked to the bathroom.

Another discrepancy involved Howden’s interaction with Formenton before he entered the bathroom.

In court, Howden testified that Formenton asked him if he should proceed with the act. However, in his 2018 statement, Howden provided more specific details of Formenton’s inquiries, including concerns about potential consequences.

A third inconsistency pertained to Howden’s response to Formenton as he and the woman headed to the bathroom.

While Howden claimed he couldn’t recall his exact response, Cunnigham stated that in 2018, Howden had given a more detailed account of his encouragement to Formenton, indicating that as long as the woman consented, it was up to him to decide.

The final inconsistency related to Howden’s reaction to an alleged incident where Dillon Dubé reportedly slapped E.M. on the buttocks.

Howden initially testified that he did not remember his feelings at the time. However, in subsequent interviews with Hockey Canada investigators in 2022 and London police in 2023, he described feeling uncomfortable and compelled to leave after witnessing the slap.