As of now, it seems that the lawyer for Michael McLeod has suggested that EM wanted to participate in a gangbang and provoked the other guys on. I'm sure he has to have corroborative evidence for that? Otherwise it's not really evidence? Someone let me know how that works.
Link:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/londo...=1746559933556
"Different views on what was ‘crazy’"