TORONTO — The trial of billionaire businessman Frank Stronach hit another hurdle Thursday as one of his accusers repeatedly referred to her preparatory meetings with the prosecution while testifying about what she described as a “degrading” and horrifying sexual assault in the early 1980s.
The woman, who is the fourth complainant to take the stand at Stronach’s Toronto trial, was giving her account of what happened after she went to the auto parts tycoon’s harbourfront condo when the issue first emerged.
The complainant noted that she previously told police she couldn’t remember how she went from the living room window to the bedroom, and that the Crown currently examining her had characterized that as a possible “omission” during a preparatory meeting.
Court took an hour-long break to allow lawyers to confer on the matter, but the issue resurfaced almost immediately after the woman resumed her testimony.
The woman mentioned the Crown told her she had given “inconsistent statements” on her demeanour during the incident, prompting the defence to object and the judge to call for another break.
During cross-examination later, defence lawyer Leora Shemesh pressed the complainant on the discussions she had with Crown attorney Jelena Vlacic during the meeting and whether she was given advice on how to phrase her evidence.
“At no point did she ever tell me how I should put things,” the woman said.
Shemesh has previously indicated she would seek a stay of proceedings over allegations some of the complainants may have been coached by prosecutors in preparation for the trial.
Concerns arose after the defence received a voluminous quantity of materials “at the 11th hour,” including new statements from the complainants, she said at the time. Shemesh asked for time to deal with the materials, and the start of the trial was delayed by more than a week.
Stronach, who is 93, has pleaded not guilty to 12 charges related to seven complainants. The charges, which include rape and forcible confinement, stem from alleged incidents dating back as far as the 1970s.
On the stand Thursday, the woman said she briefly worked at Magna International, the company Stronach founded, in 1983. At the end of the summer, Stronach invited her to dinner, she said.
“I was a bit nervous because I didn’t know him very well but I saw it as a sort of … friendly thing to do at the end of the summer,” she said.
Though not a big drinker, the woman said she had gin and tonics with dinner, enough to get her drunk but not to the point of stumbling. She couldn’t recall if Stronach drank or what was discussed but said there was nothing that “gave off red flags.”
At some point, Stronach asked if she wanted to see the view from his apartment, which made her “quite uncomfortable,” she said. Still, she couldn’t think of a legitimate reason to refuse, so they took the elevator to the apartment, which was above the restaurant, she said.
The woman said she went to the window to look at the view, since that was ostensibly the reason for coming to the unit.
Stronach disappeared briefly, then suddenly he was behind her with his arms around her, fondling her breasts, she said. She was “horrified,” she said.
“This was someone who I trusted … I just thought this can’t be real,” she told the court.
Neither of them said anything, she testified.
She ended up in the bedroom, face down on the bed, the woman said. She has no recollection of how she got there, something she attributed to the pain of knowing she had done nothing to save herself and had gone along “like a lamb to the slaughter.”
The woman couldn’t see Stronach but she could feel his penis penetrating her, she said. He had pulled down her trousers to some degree and must have pulled down her underwear as well, she said.
“I just felt powerless, it was degrading,” she said.
The woman noted that’s what she eventually told police when she gave a statement in June 2024, but she sent them a message days later saying that she was crying.
The proceeding was paused for a second time when the woman mentioned that the Crown later told her she had given inconsistent statements on this point.
When the hearing resumed mid-afternoon, the woman said she hadn’t meant that she was sobbing, but rather that her eyes had welled up with tears.
The sexual assault lasted a few minutes, she said, and ended when Stronach withdrew.
The complainant told police in 2024 that Stronach ejaculated, presumably on her back, but said Thursday that was just an assumption she made while trying to answer the investigators’ questions. In fact, she said, she didn’t know if he ejaculated.
Stronach then drove her home, the woman said, recalling that she felt “numb” and relieved to be leaving the apartment.
During the ride, the businessman suggested he would go see her at university, which struck her as “absurd,” she said.
“I thought, is he trying to make it seem like what he’s just done is OK?” she said. “I never wanted to see him again.”
She reached out to police in 2024 after reading about his arrest, she said. The woman said she’d had no contact with any complainants but acknowledged under cross-examination that she had read an op-ed written by a woman suing Stronach on allegations that he sexually assaulted her in the 1980s.
Questioning by the defence initially focused on the woman’s preparations for trial and whether they might have influenced her testimony.
In her statement to police, the woman repeatedly said she “would have” done something, but didn’t use that expression on the stand Thursday, Shemesh suggested at one point.
The woman said she had used that turn of phrase once in her testimony, adding that she noticed it because it had been raised in a January meeting with the Crown.
“My understanding … is through the preparatory meeting, you learned that that is not the best phrase to utilize in the court proceeding,” Shemesh suggested.
“No, she did not say it wasn’t the best. She said something like … it was an interesting wording,” the woman said.
She later added that saying “would have” has the effect of keeping the speaker “at a distance from what happened,” and while she hadn’t consciously avoided it in her testimony, she’d had more time to process her emotions after speaking to police.
The woman also faced questions about the kind of alcohol she drank when out with Stronach and whether they’d had dinner or just drinks — two points on which she had previously been unsure, the defence suggested.
Her uncertainty stemmed from the fact that she couldn’t remember eating a meal, only having drinks, the woman said. As for the type of alcohol, the woman said she’d briefly doubted her own recollection in January, but later reaffirmed her initial memory of drinking gin and tonic.
Cross-examination is set to continue Friday.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 19, 2026.
Paola Loriggio, The Canadian Press
