Warning: This story contains graphic and disturbing content. Viewer discretion is advised.
The young woman at the centre of the sexual assault trial of former Bridgewater police chief John Collyer, fought to hold back tears as she was cross-examined on Friday.
The woman — now 20 — was 17 years old at the time of the alleged sexual assault. Certain details of her testimony are under a publication ban to protect the complainant’s identity.
Collyer is charged with sexual assault and exploitation for interactions he had with the then-teen between April and July 2016. He has pleaded not guilty to both charges.
Defence attorney David Bright pressed the complainant about what details she provided to the investigating officer three years ago and pushed the woman on the statement she gave in Nova Scotia Supreme Court on Thursday.
He wanted to know why the then-teenager hadn’t told Sgt. Gord Vail of Nova Scotia’s Serious Incident Response Team (SIRT) about the actions Collyer is alleged to have done with his fingers after he allegedly sexually assaulted her.
READ MORE: Complainant testifies at sexual assault trial of former Bridgewater police chief
In court on Thursday, the complainant testified that Collyer allegedly “licked his fingers” after he digitally penetrated her, telling her she “tastes sweet.”
On Friday, she told Bright that she didn’t want to provide police with graphic details in August 2016 because she was “afraid and uncomfortable.”
- Posters promoting ‘Steal From Loblaws Day’ are circulating. How did we get here?
- Canadian food banks are on the brink: ‘This is not a sustainable situation’
- Video shows Ontario police sharing Trudeau’s location with protester, investigation launched
- Solar eclipse eye damage: More than 160 cases reported in Ontario, Quebec
She repeatedly told the court that she thought nobody would believe her.
Exchanges during the cross-examination became heated as Bright appeared to get frustrated over the complainant interrupting his questions.
At one point, Justice Mona Lynch told Bright to “watch his tone” when he asked the complainant to answer his questions with either a “yes, or a no.”
Bright declined to comment on the cross-examination but Crown attorney Roland Levesque said he recognizes the emotions involved for the complainant.
“Obviously, she appeared to be quite upset to the point where we had to obviously take a break. So, all in all, I think that the complainant did very well,” Levesque said.
WATCH: New details emerge on deleted messages in John Collyer trial
The allegations against Collyer have not been proven, and in court dates to come, he’s expected to testify in his own defence.
In an emailed statement, the Town of Bridgewater declined to reveal whether it was paying for Collyer’s legal fees, given that he was an employee at the time of the alleged offences.
“The Town cannot comment on personnel matters, including terms of settlement on termination of employment for any employee,” wrote chief administrative officer Tammy Wilson.
Both the woman and her mother testified this week that she had a very “good” relationship with Collyer, who had been in the family’s life for several years.
The woman testified that she cried after the alleged assault took place, and didn’t tell anyone for months out of fear that no one would believe her.
The court heard Wednesday that Collyer and the woman, then a teen, had an active relationship on Facebook, as well.
“I wanted somebody to be charged for that,” the mother testified on Thursday, referring to what she described as “sexual” messages sent from Collyer’s Facebook account to her daughter.
Screenshots of those messages read in court suggest Collyer thought the girl was “hot,” wanted to see her topless, and wanted to send her “dirty limericks.”
Vail testified on Wednesday that hundreds of messages were deleted from the conversation thread between Collyer and the complainant by the time he retrieved the raw data from Facebook.
Of 596 messages, 536 were deleted from Collyer’s thread, and all were deleted from the complainant’s thread.
The complainant later testified that Collyer instructed her to delete them, but she only did so months later, after the investigation against him began and a lawyer told her she could do so.
That data doesn’t provide insight on who deleted the messages and why, but Vail told the court that missing among the 60 messages remaining in Collyer’s thread was all the content that could be considered “sexual in nature” or “inappropriate.”
Bright pushed the complainant about deleted Facebook messages from her account between herself and Collyer.
She told the court that once she knew investigators had taken screenshots of the messages she deleted them because they made her “upset and depressed.”
Court has adjourned until Monday when a post-arrest interview tape with Collyer is expected to be shown.
With files from Alexander Quon and Elizabeth McSheffrey
Comments