Skip to Content Subscribe Our Offers My Account Manage My Subscriptions FAQ Newsletters Canada Canadian True Crime Canadian Politics Health World Israel & Middle East Financial Post NP Comment Longreads Puzzmo Diversions Comics NP News Quiz New York Times Crossword Horoscopes Life Eating & Drinking Style Sponsored Play for Ontario Travel Travel Canada Travel USA Travel International Cruises Travel Essentials Culture Books Celebrity Movies Music Theatre Television Business Essentials Advice Lives Told Tails Told Shopping Buy Canadian Home Living Outdoor Living Kitchen & Dining Tech Style & Beauty Personal Care Entertainment & Hobbies Gift Guide Travel Guide Amazon Prime Day Deals Savings National Post Store More Sports Hockey Baseball Basketball Football Soccer Golf Tennis Driving Vehicle Research Reviews News Gear Guide Obituaries Place an Obituary Place an In Memoriam Classifieds Place an Ad Celebrations Working Business Ads Archives Healthing Epaper Manage Print Subscription Profile Settings My Subscriptions Saved Articles My Offers Newsletters Customer Service FAQ Newsletters Canada World Financial Post NP Comment Longreads Puzzmo Diversions Life Shopping Epaper Manage Print Subscription HomeNewsCanadaFrank Stronach's lawyers seek mistrial after victim's lawyer allegedly tried to 'extract money'Stronach's lawyer said there is a risk of a miscarriage of justice because the narrative from the complainant's lawyer was different than her testimonyLast updated 3 minutes ago You can save this article by registering for free here. Or sign-in if you have an account.Canadian businessman Frank Stronach leaves the Ontario Superior Court of Justice after being found guilty of sexual assault on June 19, 2026. Photo by Nick Kozak /PostmedaiWe independently select everything we recommend. Buying through us may earn us a commission, which supports our work.Lawyers for autoparts billionaire Frank Stronach are in Ontario Superior Court this morning seeking a mistrial in his ongoing sexual assault trial, in which he has already been found guilty in relation to historical crimes against two women.Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events.Unlimited online access to National Post.National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.Support local journalism.Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events.Unlimited online access to National Post.National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword.Support local journalism.Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.Access articles from across Canada with one account.Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments.Enjoy additional articles per month.Get email updates from your favourite authors.Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.Access articles from across Canada with one accountShare your thoughts and join the conversation in the commentsEnjoy additional articles per monthGet email updates from your favourite authorsSign In or Create an Accountor“These are unusual circumstances,” said Judge Anne Molloy, who found Stronach guilty last month.At issue is a shocking new claim that a lawyer for one of the victims contacted Stronach’s lawyer Leora Shemesh two weeks after the verdicts to, as she told Molloy this morning, “extract money,” without going through the formal process of litigation. He even sketched out the details of what he would accept, nearly a million dollars based on $275,000 damages, $25,000 in legal fees, and interest since the early 1980s.Shemesh said there is a risk of a miscarriage of justice in the case because the narrative of the crime provided by this lawyer, Shale Wagman, is different than what the complainant A.S. testified in court. Judge Molloy said she agreed with this concern about risk, and that there are significant inconsistencies.Get a dash of perspective along with the trending news of the day in a very readable format.By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.The next issue of NP Posted will soon be in your inbox.We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again“Wouldn’t he have read my decision?” Molloy said, rhetorically, and discussed potentially calling Wagman as a witness to see whether he was actually operating under his client’s instructions, and whether A.S. actually told him the details of the crime that he related to Shemesh, which contradict her evidence earlier this year. Molloy called the situation “bizarre.”“I agree, it’s quite unusual, because as your honour knows, she could have waited until October (to discuss a financial settlement), because there’s no statute of limitations (on sexual assault),” Shemesh said.In her reasons, Molloy wrote about finding A.S. to be “a compelling, believable, and truthful witness,” who exhibited an “extreme fairness,” sometimes seeming to be “cross-examining herself, wondering if she was giving ‘mixed messages.’” But she also described misgivings about her reliability, but decided they were “explained to my satisfaction. They do not shake my confidence that the event she described did happen, just the way she described it.”A.S. was a waitress who had been fired from a bar Stronach owned. The sexual assault for which Molloy has already found him guilty was a groping in his apartment after a dinner meeting to discuss her employment. It was among the more minor of the crimes initially alleged.“I’m reluctant to declare a mistrial without hearing from her,” Molloy said today. But she was clear that if the witness told her lawyer one thing, and the court another, and Molloy relied on her testimony to find Stronach guilty, then a mistrial would have to follow.The hearing continues.Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here. Join the Conversation This website uses cookies to personalize your content (including ads), and allows us to analyze our traffic. Read more about cookies here. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.