The sexual assault trial of Canadian musician Jacob Hoggard turned on one central issue: consent.

The Hedley frontman was found guilty of one count of sexual assault causing bodily harm against one of two complainants on Sunday, but acquitted of the same charge plus a count of sexual interference related to a teenage fan.

At the crux of the proceedings was a clash about consent, as is often the case in sexual assault trials, say observers.

The Crown alleged Hoggard violently and repeatedly raped a teenage fan and a young Ottawa woman in separate incidents in the fall of 2016, while the defence argued the sexual encounters were consensual.

High-profile cases like Hoggard鈥檚 have the power to shape our understanding of consent, lawyers and advocates say, exposing harmful misconceptions that pervade the courts and society at large.

鈥淚t鈥檚 great to be trying to shine a light on some of these stories and also worrisome,鈥� Toronto criminal and constitutional lawyer Megan Stephens said in an interview ahead of the verdict.

鈥淭hese kinds of cases are the ones that make people wonder whether they should come forward and report what has happened to them.鈥�

Canada has some of the most progressive laws on the books about consent in sexual assault cases, said Stephens. The trouble lies in how the letter of the law is applied, she said.

The Criminal Code requires that consent be affirmatively communicated through a person鈥檚 words or conduct, meaning through signals that indicate 鈥測es,鈥� rather than the absence of a 鈥渘o.鈥� Consent can be withdrawn at any point in a sexual encounter.

Ontario Superior Court Justice Gillian Roberts told the jury deciding Hoggard鈥檚 fate that consent in the context of a sexual assault case is about whether the complainant 鈥渋n her mind wanted the sexual touching to take place,鈥� citing a provincial appeal court ruling.

Stephens, a former Crown lawyer, said this 鈥渟ubjective standard鈥� means many sexual assault cases come down to jurors鈥� assessments of the credibility of the complainant and accused based on the evidence they present.

Jurors typically do their best to stick to the law, she said, but identity can influence their determinations and what and whose evidence is to be believed.

Many observers have noted the perceived gender imbalance on Hoggard鈥檚 jury, which appeared to consist of 10 men and two women.

鈥淲e鈥檝e learned a lot over the last few years about implicit biases and how those can affect our understandings and experiences. And I think the jury system is not immune from that,鈥� said Stephens, who advocates for women鈥檚 rights in the justice system.

鈥淚t is hard for people to sometimes understand the experiences of others when they鈥檝e never been in that place, whether it is a male juror making sense of a female complainant or a white juror making sense of the experiences of a Black woman.鈥�

Canadian courts have been grappling with the 鈥渕yths and stereotypes鈥� that plague the legal process, but even judges are prone to fall prey to them, said Pam Hrick, executive director and general counsel at Women鈥檚 Legal Education and Action Fund.

Canada鈥檚 highest court has issued a number of rulings in recent years finding that lower courts erred in their application of sexual assault law, said Hrick, serving as a course correction in a system that has subjected complainants to unfair scrutiny.

This shows how the social reckoning of the #MeToo movement has reverberated through the courts, but there鈥檚 still work to close the gap between Canadian law and our evolving understanding of consent, said Hrick.

鈥淭here is a lag, I think, sometimes between public understanding the application or development of the law,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e need to be vigilant in continuing to push for change and be continuing to try to safeguard some of the gains that we have made.鈥�

Farrah Khan, manager of Consent Comes First at Toronto Metropolitan University鈥檚 Office of Sexual Violence Support and Education, said the Hoggard trial illustrates how misconceptions about sex and consent persist both in and out of the courtroom.

Defence lawyers alleged the complainants lied about being raped to cover up their embarrassment after being rejected by a 鈥渞ock star.鈥�

The defence narrative fed into familiar tropes, such as the 鈥渏ilted lover鈥� embittered about unreturned affections and groupies who fall under a famous musician鈥檚 sexual thrall, said Khan.

There were power dynamics at play in the case, such as differences in age and social status, that Canada鈥檚 consent laws don鈥檛 account for, but can nonetheless influence how sexual violence survivors process their own experiences, she added.

鈥淚t鈥檚 important for survivors to understand it, because sometimes you can gaslight yourself in these situations,鈥� she said. 鈥淛ust because you wanted to see someone, just because you wanted to kiss someone doesn鈥檛 mean you want to be sexually assaulted.鈥�

The Canadian Women鈥檚 Foundation conducted an online survey of more than 1,500 Canadians in 2018 that found only 28 per cent of respondents fully understood what it means to give consent, a drop from 33 per cent in 2015 before the #MeToo movement emerged.

With so many young people who grew up listening to Hedley keeping track of the Hoggard case, Khan said she鈥檚 concerned the next generation will suffer similar confusion unless we start prioritizing consent and pleasure in sex education.

鈥淭he challenge is that we treat consent like a checkbox,鈥� she said. 鈥淐onsent is about a conversation鈥� And it鈥檚 ongoing, it鈥檚 reversible.鈥�

鈥擜dina Bresge, The Canadian Press