What the Hockey Canada Trial Teaches HR Leaders and Workplace Investigators About Trauma-informed Investigations

What the Hockey Canada Trial Teaches HR Leaders and Workplace Investigators about Trauma-Informed Investigations

The July 2025 criminal court decision, involving five members of the 2018 Canadian World Junior Hockey Team[1]  has stirred national attention. While all accused were acquitted, the case highlights key considerations for HR leaders and workplace investigators navigating trauma-informed investigations.

This post does not address the correctness of the verdict, but does address what the case reveals about the investigative process itself. It explores what the case reveals about how trauma can shape memory, behaviour, and testimony, and why HR professionals and investigators must be equipped to recognize and respond to these dynamics in workplace investigations.

Memory Fragmentation Is Not Evasion

The complainant in this case described her memory as fragmented, recalling moments rather than a continuous narrative. She acknowledged filling in gaps with assumptions and struggled to recall key details. While this raised credibility concerns in court, trauma-informed practice recognizes that fragmented memory is a common response to traumatic events.

Takeaway: Investigators should avoid equating memory gaps with dishonesty. Instead, they should understand that trauma can disrupt memory encoding and retrieval and adapt their interview techniques accordingly.

“Autopilot” and Dissociation Are Real

The complainant testified that she felt disconnected from her body, acting on “autopilot” and adopting a persona she thought others expected. These are classic signs of dissociation, a coping mechanism where individuals mentally detach from overwhelming experiences.

Takeaway: Survivors may appear calm, compliant, or even cheerful during or after traumatic events. This does not mean they consented. Trauma-informed investigations must look beyond surface behaviour and consider internal psychological states.

Consent Is Complex, Especially Under Pressure

The legal standard for consent requires a voluntary agreement at the time of the act. The complainant said she felt she had “no choice” and feared what might happen if she said no. Yet, she also described moments of flirtation and even initiating sexual acts.

Takeaway: Trauma-informed investigations consider how fear, confusion, and social pressure may influence behaviour that complicates assessments of consent.  Investigators must ask nuanced questions and avoid binary thinking about victim behaviour.

Credibility ≠ Consistency

In the Hockey Canada trial, the court scrutinized inconsistencies in the complainant’s statements, some of which were explained as unprocessed trauma or evolving understanding of the events.  In criminal proceedings, the standard of proof is “beyond a reasonable doubt,” meaning the evidence must eliminate reasonable uncertainty about the accused’s guilt. This high threshold reflects the serious consequences of a criminal conviction.

Workplace investigations, however, operate under a different standard: the balance of probabilities.[2]  This means investigators must determine whether it is more likely than not, even just 50.1% likely, that the alleged conduct occurred. While this is a lower threshold than in criminal law, it still requires a thoughtful, evidence-based approach. Investigators must weigh all available information, assess credibility holistically, and ensure procedural fairness.

Takeaway: Trauma-informed investigators should not equate inconsistencies with dishonesty. Instead, they must consider how trauma affects memory and communication and apply the balance of probabilities standard with care and nuance.

Why This Matters for HR leaders and Investigators

Sexual misconduct investigations in the workplace often mirror the challenges seen in this case. Employees may delay reporting, struggle to articulate their experience, or present conflicting accounts.

Whether investigating misconduct in a workplace, school, sports organization, or public institution, trauma-informed approaches help HR professionals and investigators:

•            Build trust with complainants

•            Reduce re-traumatization during interviews

•            Improve the quality and fairness of investigations

•            Support psychological safety across the organization

The Hockey Canada case is a reminder that trauma-informed practice is not just a legal or clinical concept, it’s a leadership imperative. HR professionals and workplace investigators must be equipped to navigate the emotional and psychological dimensions of misconduct investigations with empathy, rigor, and care.

Ultimately, trauma-informed investigations aim to complement traditional approaches by incorporating psychological insights into how trauma may affect memory and behaviour. 

They require us to hold space for complexity, to ask better questions, and to interpret evidence through a lens that acknowledges the psychological impact of trauma.

Call to Action

What is one trauma-informed practice you’ve found helpful in your workplace investigations?

---

[1]   R. v. McLeod et al., 2025 ONSC 4319.

[2] For a deeper exploration of the balance of probabilities standard in workplace investigations, please refer to my blog post entitled “Beyond Reasonable Doubt? Not Here—Understanding Balance of Probabilities at Work”