Woman who alleges sex assault by retired vice-admiral Edmundson 'steadfast' in recounting details: Crown

WARNING: This story contains details of an alleged sexual assault

The evidence heard in an Ottawa courtroom from a woman who claims she was sexually assaulted by Haydn Edmundson more than 30 years ago should be rejected and lead to an acquittal, the lawyer for the retired vice-admiral said Thursday during closing arguments.

Stéphanie Viau's "evidence is far too fraught and dangerous to be accepted on its own as constituting proof beyond a reasonable doubt," Edmundson's lawyer, Brian Greenspan, said.

But Juliana Martel, assistant Crown attorney, disputed Greenspan's assertion, stressing that Viau never wavered in her evidence.

Viau "did not contradict herself whatsoever," Martel said. "She was not vague, but rather very detailed in the manner in which Mr. Edmundson proceeded to sexually assault her."

During an eight-day trial that began on Feb. 5, the Ontario Court of Justice heard allegations from Viau that Edmundson sexually assaulted her while they were on deployment on a naval ship. She said the attack happened inside his cabin while the ship was docked at a U.S. navy base on Nov. 8, 1991.

She told court that she froze and feared for her life as Edmundson approached her, kissed her, unbuttoned her shirt and bra, pulled down her shorts and underwear and kissed her vagina.

Viau said Edmundson then grabbed her by the hips, turned her around and "proceeded raping me." Her identity had been protected under a publication ban, but that was lifted by Justice Matthew C. Webber on Thursday, as requested by Viau.

Edmundson, 60, was charged in December 2021 with one count of sexual assault and one count of committing indecent acts. He has pleaded not guilty. The case is being tried by a judge alone.

Edmundson also took the witness box during the trial, denying the allegations that he sexually assaulted or had any physical or sexual contact with Viau. At the time of the alleged assault, Edmundson was a lieutenant-commander, the navigator of the ship.

Edmundson answered questions 'directly,' lawyer says

Greenspan said in contrast to the evidence given by Viau, Edmundson was not argumentative and had answered questions "directly in an appropriate fashion, conceded what ought to have been conceded and stood his ground on those things where he was challenged in terms of specific details."

"You should find Mr. Edmundson's evidence credible, reliable, believable. You should accept his evidence and acceptance of his evidence necessarily leads to acquittals."

Greenspan said the Crown declined to challenge Edmundson on some of the essential facts of the case, including the alleged sexual assault.

Viau, whose duties included waking up officers for night duty, told court that a couple of days before the alleged sexual assault, she had an outburst when she went to wake Edmundson for his night shift and found him lying in the bed naked. The woman said she lost her composure, yelled and turned on the lights, in part to wake up Edmundson's bunkmate so he could witness the behaviour she had to deal with.

Edmundson had previously testified that none of this ever happened. He also denied he had a bunkmate at the time.

Greenspan argued that the Crown offered no evidence and failed to challenge Edmundson about his claim that he had no bunkmate. Greenspan also said that Viau had identified two people she thought to have been his roommate, but that this was later found out to be inaccurate.

"She is an unreliable historian," Greenspan said. "Her account of the [outburst] is not only improbable, it's simply incredible."

He added that such an outburst would have been heard by others on the ship.

"Nobody heard it because it didn't happen. Plain and simple," he said.

The judge also questioned Martel about the alleged outburst, saying there is "no evidence of anyone hearing this event."

"I have to consider all that," Webber said.

While corroboration isn't needed, "sometimes you just strive to find it," he said.

Martel suggested that people were sleeping at the time, which could explain the lack of corroborating witnesses, but that anything more would be speculative.

Crown insists Edmundson had roommate

Yet she stressed that Viau gave a very detailed account about what happened that night and rejected the defence's insistence that Edmundson did not have a roommate at the time.

"[Viau] was very detailed. There was someone there. He was on the top bunk," Martel said. "She was able to make eye contact with him."

Martel acknowledged that Viau was mistaken about the roommate's identity but that it was a very minimal mistake, "considering the range of the body of evidence we have on this person."

Both Greenspan and Martel also referred to the testimony given by a friend of Viau who had been on the ship at the time.

The now-retired service member, whose identity is protected by a publication ban, backed up Viau's testimony that she had gone to search for Viau on that vessel that same evening, more than 30 years ago, while Viau was in Edmundson's quarters.

WATCH |  Edmundson testifies in his own defence: 

Both testified that, when the ship docked, they were planning to go to a bar on land. The witness said before they departed, Viau had agreed to go get the witness's reading glasses. She said that after some time, when Viau didn't return, she searched for her on the vessel, calling out her name.

The witness testified that she then had another colleague join the search. When neither could find Viau, they assumed she had already left the ship and was already at the bar, the witness testified, so they went there. Viau testified that, while in Edmundson's quarters, she heard her friend calling out for her.

'Fraught with tainting issues'

But Greenspan said that evidence from the woman was "fraught with tainting issues" because the details she had related were not from her own recollection. He said they were fed to her by CBC News reporter Ashley Burke, who had interviewed the witness back in March 2021, and who had provided her with many of the details about what happened that particular day.

"The Crown is attempting to rely on confirmatory evidence, the evidence of a witness who was prompted, who was lead was directed to attempt to reconstruct a recollection that she didn't have, and that she subsequently attempts to conform to what her fried Ms. Viau  suggests occurred," Greenspan said.

Martel disagreed, saying that the woman came to court and provided sworn testimony of her own recollection.

"If she did not remember she easily could have said so, but she did not say that. It is clear in her head today that she had gone to look for Ms Viau... aboard the ship and she described the manner in which she did it.".

Martel said the woman's evidence was "extremely compelling, and it is one that would be quite difficult for the court to reject."

With closing arguments completed, the next stage in the case is for Webber to set a date for the release of his decision.