WARNING: Some readers may find details in this story disturbing. Discretion is advised.
The sex assault trial of former Vancouver Canuck Jake Virtanen continued Monday with closing arguments.
The jury has now started deliberations that continued into Monday evening.
The defence went first in closing, citing two key points.
Lawyers said Virtanen was a “reasonable witness” whose testimony held up under cross-examination.
However, they said the victim’s testimony was filled with inconsistencies that were discovered under cross-examination. They said she changed her story around consent. Under direct questioning, she said she resisted Virtanen’s attempts to kiss her but under cross-examination, she said she did consent to the kissing but drew the line at anything further.
The defence said that should be enough reasonable doubt to reach a verdict of not guilty.
Crown then presented their closing arguments.
The lawyer argued that the victim’s misremembering of details is irrelevant to the case.
He said that just because she misremembered or didn’t remember facts from the night doesn’t mean the sexual assault didn’t happen.
He then called Virtanen an opportunistic witness, concocting details or using other people’s versions of events to make his own answers seem more believable.
The lawyer went on to add there is no legal requirement that the complainant’s allegations are corroborated to make them valid and her testimony alone is enough to convict if her testimony eliminates doubt.
“He is taller than her, stronger than her and had his way with her,” Crown said. “(She) was sexually assaulted. Find Jake Virtanen guilty of sexual assault.”
Virtanen unexpectedly took the stand last Thursday, telling the court he first met the complainant, who cannot be named due to a publication ban, in 2017 at the Calgary Stampede.
He told the court they kept in touch and then later met up in Vancouver, adding that after they arranged to meet, he picked her up and told her they were going to his hotel.
He testified that she didn’t raise any concerns about it.
On Friday, the Crown questioned Virtanen on his intentions the night he picked up the complainant in Vancouver and drove her to the Westin Bayshore.
Virtanen responded that he had not specifically intended for the meeting to be a hookup or for sex. He added that he didn’t know anything was going to happen, but told the court the complainant did not bring up any concerns.
The Crown asked Virtanen if he made an assumption the complainant was there for sex and answered “no,” adding that they didn’t talk about it.
Asked why he took her straight to the hotel room when there were restaurants and bars they could have gone to, Virtanen testified that they never discussed where they might go.
“You felt that you did all this work, and charmed (the complainant) to meet up and you were going to get sex no matter what,” Crown counsel asked.
“Not true,” said Virtanen.
“You felt you were owed it,” Crown counsel said.
“No,” responded Virtanen.
“You decided you were going to get sex even if she said no,” Crown counsel added.
“She didn’t say no… never,” Virtanen told the court.
When asked about the alleged sex assault, Virtanen said the complainant “was active and she was an enthusiastic participant.” He said he “absolutely felt like she was into it. For me, it was obvious she wanted to have sex.”
The complainant has testified she verbally and physically resisted Virtanen.
More to come.
If you or someone you know has been a victim of sexual assault or is involved in an abusive situation, please visit the Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime for help. It is also reachable toll-free at 1-877-232-2610.
Comments