A letter sent to the Attorney General of Ontario regarding the harmful impact of this verdict. I greatly encourage everyone to send their own letters to Doug.Downey@ontario.ca

Dear Mr. Downey,

I am writing to raise grave concern regarding the Attorney General’s refusal to comment on, or appeal, the verdict in R. v. McLeod et al., by Justice Carroccia. The reasoning in this decision is not only contrary to Supreme Court of Canada precedent, it has already triggered a dangerous wave of online rhetoric calling for violence against women and girls.

As I stated in a previous email, the verdict relies on myth-based reasoning that SCC jurisprudence, particularly R. v. Ewanchuk, has long rejected. By allowing this verdict to stand without appeal or clarification, the Crown has inadvertently legitimized harmful narratives that brand complainants as liars if a not-guilty verdict is rendered. This is not theoretical: we are already seeing the consequences online.

Following this verdict, Matt Walsh, a YouTuber and podcaster with millions of followers, published a 30-minute video on the complainant. His commentary, citing Justice Carroccia’s reasoning, includes the following:

“This was an open and shut case. You have a woman saying multiple times on video that it was consensual. There is no case. None at all. She lied.”

“This indictment, this 91 pages, was the greatest thing against feminist propaganda and left wing activists opinions that subjective beliefs are more important than observable facts.”

“She cheated on her boyfriend with several hockey players and after that experience she went home and cried in her bathroom and then her mom found her and decided she had been drugged. That’s where this her truth emerged from.”

“When you have random hookups with strangers you can’t expect them to respect you, that’s what you signed up for.”

“This woman had a pornstar fantasy but in practice it turned out to be degrading and awkward and then the regret kicked in. Rather than explain the truth to her family and boyfriend she chose the easy lie.”

“The judge pointed out she could have left and instead she was just sitting there like yeah I want to leave and I would like to not be here, how do I solve this problem? It just never occurred to her to stand up and use her legs and walk to the door.”

“As the judge said, it’s the understatement of the century, if you’re masturbating in front of people, it’s safe to say you’ve consented to sexual activity.”

In response to just this video alone, commenters wrote:

“She should go to prison, the media that amplified her false claims uncritically should all go to prison, the law professor who ignorantly commented on the case should go to prison, the ‘minister of sport’ who propagandized Canadians with ridiculous alarmist slop should go to prison, and so on down the list. Enough is enough. If there are never any consequences for these fools then this type of misandrist abuse will just keep happening.”

“She should get double the combined prison sentence they would have received had they been found guilty.”

“If they were acquitted shouldn’t the girl be charged for lying to the cops? Making a false report? These women who lie about rape just because they are embarrassed about their behavior need to get consequences for their actions.”

“I’m Canadian and I hate our government. This woman should be in jail.”

“I like the idea of a registry for people who make false sexual allegations like that.”
“If you make a false claim, you should pay the price that would’ve been paid by the ones you accused. Period.”

“They need to start giving huge penalties and fines and jail time for false accusations.”
“They got her consent on tape before and after and all her claims proven false this has to qualify as a proven lie. She needs to go to jail.”

“She should do time. She did this maliciously to cover her ass for cheating while trying to make herself seem to be the victim when she was the main protagonist in her ‘rape’ case.”
“Absolutely disgusting to make false allegations. Its also Absolutely disgusting to be with 5 guys a at once. Just a gross person all around.”

“3 words. Lock her up. This needs to be law. If the accusations are proven false the ‘victim’ should do the time she would’ve had her accused do behind bars.”

Matt Walsh has over 3 million subscribers on YouTube and 1 million subscribers on TikTok. There are hundreds more comments just like these across his platforms. But it goes beyond Walsh: other manosphere podcasters are making identical arguments, calling for EM—and by extension, any woman in her position—to be jailed for “lying.”

Statistically, the chances of a false accusation making it to the trial stage in Canada is 0.03%. Regardless, we allow due process to play out as it should, preserving the presumption of innocence. This process often retraumatizes complainants, who must endure gruelling cross-examination. Only 6% of sexual assaults are reported in Canada. Of those, just 22% make it to trial, and less than half result in conviction. These rates are nearly unchanged since the 18th century, when William Blackstone wrote his famous phrase about “ten guilty men.” The skepticism women face is centuries old, and it continues.

Meanwhile, sexual assault is the only violent crime in Canada that has not decreased, according to Statistics Canada. The reasoning in Justice Carroccia’s verdict will ensure this continues, as the chilling effect is already clear: survivors are advising others not to report, saying “it’s not worth it.”

This verdict has walked us back decades to when women had to fight, scream, or run to prove lack of consent. By embracing the discredited “twin myths” of sexual assault, the verdict effectively erases R. v. Ewanchuk from our jurisprudence.

As women call out the legal errors and myth-based reasoning in this case, they are met with the rhetoric you see above. By refusing to comment on or appeal a verdict grounded in rape myths and stereotypes of the “perfect victim,” the Attorney General’s office has left women and girls more vulnerable—not just to online harassment, but to sexual assault itself.

As a historian and scholar, I can promise that this rhetoric will translate into real-world harm. Walsh’s audience of millions already believes that consent cannot be revoked, that “consent videos” equal consent, and that one sexual act means all others are consensual. In their minds, the law now affirms this.

The duty of the Crown is to protect the public interest and ensure public safety. Women are pleading with you now: unless this verdict is addressed, women and girls will continue to face harassment, sexual assault, and systemic denial of justice.

Respectfully,

Nicole

Historian and Scholar of Women’s History