Cross-examination of Michael Thompson can continue in sex assault case: Judge

Toronto councillor Michael Thompson and his lawyer Leora Shemesh walk outside the courthouse in Barrie, Ont. Thursday, May 8, 2025. (Mike Arsalides/ CTV News Barrie)

A judge has ruled that the Crown can continue its cross examination of Coun. Michael Thompson in his sexual assault trial.

Following some intense debate between Crown attorney Mareike Newhouse and Defence lawyer Leora Shemesh in a virtual court appearance Friday, Judge Phillip Brissette said he’s satisfied that Newhouse can continue her cross-examination.

The debate hinged on whether a woman who is a witness in the case, was being treated more like a complainant by the Crown, and whether questions about her were relevant to the case.

Following hours of questioning Thursday, Newhouse incorrectly referred to the woman as a victim and said that Thompson had been “trying to get in her pants.”

Shemesh said Thursday that there was a strong chance she might bring a mistrial application over the matter.

But after nearly 30 minutes of arguments Friday, that option appeared to have been laid aside.

After Newhouse said she misspoke in referring to the witness as “a victim” and clarified her line of questioning, Brissette said he was satisfied that she should be able to move forward.

“I’m certainly satisfied with the direction the Crown wants to go in terms of using this for general credibility and not linking it to any type of propensity or similar fact allegations,” he said.

Thompson stands accused of sexually assaulting two women at a cottage getaway over the Canada Day long weekend in 2022.

He denies the allegations.

Intent of questioning at issue

The longtime city councillor and former deputy mayor attended the virtual hearing Friday, but did not speak.

He faced multiple questions on the stand Thursday about his relationship with the witness, a young woman he met at a Yorkville gallery in 2022. Many of the questions focused on their age difference and on whether he was trying to have a sexual relationship with the young woman.

In arguments Friday, Shemesh said the Crown advised early in the case that the woman Thompson met at the gallery was being called as a witness to provide contextual information about the goings on at the cottage and what she witnessed.

She called the Crown’s questions around the age difference between the two and Thompson’s interest in her “irrelevant” and “inappropriate.”

The Crown, Shemesh said, was trying to establish in the middle of the trial that Thompson attempted to become sexual with a 22-year-old woman.

“Why does that matter? Why is that relevant? It only becomes relevant if it’s for the purpose of arguing that if that’s the case, then he’s more likely to have committed the charged offences,” Shemesh said.

She added that the Crown never said they intended to use the witness in that way and the defence had therefore not had a chance to defend against that argument when the woman was on the stand.

When she testified, Shemesh noted, the witness never expressed that Thompson was trying to become sexual with her.

For her part, Newhouse clarified that she does not intend to make the argument that Thompson’s alleged interest in the young woman makes him someone who is more likely to have committed the crimes he’s charged with.

Still she said she didn’t want to be precluded from arguing that Thompson had a sexual interest in the young woman, or to be “handcuffed” in terms of the arguments she can put forward in submissions.

She said her questions about the young woman went to Thompson’s credibility, and also that it is factually inaccurate and unfounded to say that she must stay committed to a single theory about what happened throughout the trial.

“I think we’re beyond the mistrial, and Ms. Shemesh is asking you to ask me to be precluded from testing Mr. Thompson’s credibility. That’s all this is about,” Newhouse told the judge.

Brissette said he’s not concerned about the age difference between Thompson and the witness in terms of the moral implications, given his employment in the community for the past 20 years or so regularly required him to interact with younger people.

He said Newhouse can continue her line of questioning as long as it is used for Thompson’s general credibility.

Shemesh did not object further.

The trial will resume on May 29 when the cross examination of Thompson is expected to continue.