Defence Claims #MeToo Politics Corrupted Stronach Investigation in Closing Arguments
The sexual assault trial of auto parts billionaire Frank Stronach reached its critical final phase this week as defence counsel delivered a blistering closing statement that portrayed the entire case as a fundamental miscarriage of justice. The defence argued that modern political pressures from the #MeToo movement improperly influenced police investigators, leading to what they described as a negligent and reckless investigation that abandoned the presumption of innocence.
Political Imperative Over Constitutional Norms
Defence lawyer Leora Shemesh contended that the contemporary political imperative to "believe all women" had completely inverted the justice system's foundational principles in this case. Shemesh told the court that "the pendulum has swung so far the other way that we've lost our ability to balance our constitutional norms," suggesting that investigators approached the case with predetermined conclusions about Stronach's guilt.
According to the defence, police investigators accepted the complainants' allegations without proper cautioning against false reporting, without questioning their specific details, and without conducting thorough investigations into their claims. Shemesh argued that investigators succumbed to what she called "tunnel vision" and "unconscious filtering of evidence," systematically ignoring any information that contradicted their presumption of Stronach's guilt.
Stronach Forced to Become His Own Investigator
The defence presented a compelling narrative of Stronach being forced to essentially become his own investigator in the case. Shemesh detailed how Stronach himself had to identify inconsistencies and impossibilities in the allegations against him, including one sexual assault that allegedly occurred while he was provably in the United States purchasing horses.
"He was forced really to be the investigator in this case," Shemesh emphasized, pointing to evidence she presented that should have been easily accessible to police investigators. This included litigation records, property documents, and crucial witnesses whose testimony could have clarified the timeline and circumstances of the alleged incidents.
Questioning Complainant Credibility
The defence mounted a comprehensive challenge to the credibility of the four women complainants, whose allegations mostly date back to the early 1980s. Shemesh asserted that the complainants "lied, manipulated and certainly tried to deceive the court" during their testimony, adding that "they all failed quite miserably on credibility and reliability."
According to the defence's analysis, two of the women have fabricated their stories entirely, while the other two did have sexual encounters with Stronach at his Toronto waterfront condo that they later regretted. However, the defence maintains that Stronach had an honest, if mistaken, belief that their consent was given at the time.
Specific Allegations Under Scrutiny
Shemesh provided detailed critiques of individual complainants' testimony, describing one witness as "unhinged" and her story as "absurd" with bizarre details that defy common sense belief. Another witness was characterized as rude and dishonest, with Shemesh suggesting her testimony amounted to perjury and that she used the witness box as a "stage" for her "theatrics," adding and subtracting details from her story "on a whim."
The defence particularly highlighted one complainant who presented herself with what Shemesh called a "grandiose flavour," repeatedly mentioning her charitable donations, busy schedule, and status as a "tax-paying citizen" making sacrifices to be present in court. Shemesh noted the woman's use of a luxury Birkin bag on the witness stand as what she termed a "prop" in her performance.
Broader Implications for Justice System
The defence's closing arguments raised significant questions about how political movements might influence criminal investigations and prosecutions. Shemesh argued that by bringing charges on what she characterized as a flimsy basis, Stronach was "labelled a villain" and publicly prosecuted in the media long before he had any opportunity to present his defence.
This case has drawn national attention not only because of Stronach's prominence as a billionaire businessman and founder of Magna International but also because it touches on fundamental questions about how sexual assault allegations are investigated and prosecuted in the post-#MeToo era. The defence's arguments suggest that the very principles meant to protect victims might, in some cases, undermine the rights of the accused.
As the trial approaches its conclusion, the judge must now weigh these competing narratives about what happened decades ago and, more immediately, about how the justice system responded to allegations against one of Canada's most prominent business figures. The outcome may have implications far beyond this single case, potentially influencing how similar allegations are investigated and prosecuted in the future.
