(Photo Credit: @mayorNHL on X/Twitter)
Carter Hart’s suspension is over. He’s officially allowed back into the NHL, and he appears set to start in the first game he’s eligible, tomorrow night vs. Chicago.
In an effort to cover this situation equitably, from the moment it became clear the Golden Knights were the destination for Hart, I dug in. I read the 91-page verdict. I reviewed news stories from before, during, and after the trial. I examined the petition against the signing. I read as many related social media posts as I could stomach. If someone wrote, said, or otherwise conveyed something about the trial, I’ve probably consumed it.
So far, we’ve heard from Hart, many of his new teammates, and the head coach. The organization released a statement regarding his addition, and the league issued reasons for his reinstatement following the mandated suspension. He spoke again today, mostly about his experiences playing in Henderson.
Moving forward, we will cover his play on the ice, his involvement in the community, his interaction with teammates, fan reaction, both positive and negative, and if the general manager ever speaks on the topic at a press conference, his thoughts as well.
Before all of this happens, though, I want to present the thoughts of another source I believe adds an immense amount of knowledge and weight to this trial and the broader issues surrounding high-profile sexual assault cases.
Over the summer, top Canadian indie podcast Canadian True Crime produced a five-part series dissecting the Hockey Canada trial in detail, opening my eyes to angles on this I never could have even fathomed.
Host Kristi Lee connected me to two sexual assault survivors, Kelly Favro and Jessica Baker, who were consulted extensively for the series and are hockey fans themselves. Baker testified against high-profile musician and former Canadian Idol finalist Jacob Hoggard in 2022. Hoggard happened to be represented by the same defense attorney as Carter Hart. He was found guilty and sentenced to five years in prison.
As “J.B.” in the Jacob Hoggard case, I went through years of court proceedings, public testimony, delays, appeals, and the public reaction that comes with all of it. That experience changed how I understand these situations. -Jessica Baker
She acknowledged that topics like this can be uncomfortable for hockey fans.
Most people follow the sport to enjoy it, not to get pulled into legal or ethical debates. I’m not here to shame anyone for that -Baker
I asked Baker and Favro what they would most want people to know about the Hockey Canada case and other sexual assault trials. In coordination with podcaster Kristi Lee, they shared six points for “fans who want context without feeling attacked.”
1) An acquittal is only a legal conclusion, not a moral one.
In sexual assault cases, a not-guilty verdict is often misunderstood as proof the accused is innocent, the victim lied, or that no harm occurred. In reality, the bar for conviction is extremely high. The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, which is often difficult in sexual assault cases where the body is the crime scene.
Favro notes that the accused has strong legal protections, including the right to silence and full representation, while the victim appears only as a prosecution witness with none of those rights.
The result is that her credibility is scrutinized under a microscope while the accused can sit silently, shielded by legal protections. -Kelly Favro
A not-guilty verdict often reflects the limitations of a justice system that wasn’t built to handle the complexities of sexual violence, power dynamics, or the science behind the impact of trauma.
This is why many trials devolve into accusations using outdated rape myths about how a “real victim” should behave. This is why we often see women being unfairly portrayed as liars, hysterics or vengeful manipulators. -Favro
2) The text message victim-complainant E.M. sent to Michael McLeod the day after the hotel room incident deserves much more attention:
“I was ok with going home with you, it was everyone else afterwards that I wasn’t expecting.”
Favro says the judge, Justice Maria Carrocia, did not acknowledge the weight of this message, the dismissive nature of McLeod’s response, or the complete lack of evidence that E.M. ever requested, anticipated, or even wanted additional players to enter the hotel room that night.
This should have been the line that everyone should have paused a very long time on. People need to understand that E.M. consented to sex with Michael McLeod only. Everything that happened after that was without her knowledge or consent. -Favro
3) The criminal trial is over, but the conversation around “disturbing and unacceptable behaviour” isn’t.
In the NHL statement, Gary Bettman said that the allegations in this case, even if not determined to have been criminal, were very disturbing and the behaviour at issue was unacceptable.
Baker says this isn’t about asking fans to choose sides, because it’s not a simple “he’s completely cleared” or “he’s entirely guilty” situation.
You can support your team and still understand why some people feel uneasy, and why major institutions have recognized the conduct fell below acceptable standards. Those things can coexist. Acknowledging harm doesn’t require turning your back on the sport. -Baker
4. Carter Hart insists he has grown, but real change starts with acknowledging harm and taking accountability. He hasn’t ever done that.
At his recent press conference, Carter Hart said he had learned from the experience and was ready to show his true character. But Kristi Lee notes that this doesn’t match the testimony he gave at the trial just a few months earlier.
Hart testified when he entered that hotel room he wanted to ensure everything was fully consensual and that he would have left if anyone was disrespectful to E.M. Yet even in his own version of events, he took no actual steps to ensure consent — from his excitement at a 2 AM invite to have sex with a woman he didn’t know, to the red flags he ignored that she wasn’t consenting, to his decision to text another player to join without checking with her. -Lee, host of Canadian True Crime
Lee argues that if Hart wants the public to believe he has truly changed and learned something meaningful, he needs to show it through his actions.
Justice doesn’t end with a verdict. He could step forward as a role model and use his public platform to raise awareness and prevent future harm. He could say, ‘I was found not criminally guilty, but that night wasn’t right. We all should have done better, and here’s what I’ve learned.’ -Lee, host of Canadian True Crime
Until he offers real accountability instead of vague statements about growth, Lee says mixed public reactions are inevitable.
5) The trial revealed a serious lack of public awareness around real consent and what it looks like.
We received many questions from men asking how the hockey players were supposed to know E.M.’s behaviour was consistent with submission, compliance and appeasement, not actual consent. It starts with genuine care for the other person’s comfort and agency, instead of focusing on personal satisfaction. -Lee, host of Canadian True Crime
Here are some guidelines she shared:
- Real consent is enthusiastic, ongoing, specific, and freely given.
- Consent to one act or person doesn’t cover another act or person. Everyone needs their own clear, verbal, enthusiastic yes for every act, which often means asking clear questions before anything happens: “Are you sure you want this?” “What about now?” “Are you okay with someone else joining?”
- There is no such thing as advance or retroactive consent, and it can be withdrawn at any time. This is why a “consent” video doesn’t prove it.
- When consent is not present, there will be obvious red flags, including hesitation, silence, stiffness, crying, nervous laughter, over-performing, or signs of heavy drinking. E.M. displayed many of these red flags.
- When there is a clear power imbalance, the responsibility falls on those with power or status to go above and beyond to make sure consent is real, not coerced, and that the person feels free and safe to say no if they want to.
6) What’s missing from the public conversation: survivors of sexual assault don’t get to move on in the same way that the accused does. They live with this forever.
Survivors rebuild themselves with limited support, often paying out of pocket for therapy, medication, and the basic tools that help them get through a day without slipping back into memories they never asked for.
They often have publication bans put on their identities without their knowledge or consent, which is why in Canada, they are often referred to by their initials. The process is supposed to protect the survivor’s identity, but publication bans can also result in the survivor being penalized for identifying themselves or speaking, correcting misinformation, or filling in gaps.
There may be a tendency to perceive Carter Hart’s future success potentially as a loss for victims and survivors, but Favro and Baker push back on that.
Our well-being is not tied to anyone’s career success or failure. -Baker
Favro says survivors never fully heal from the assault, and they never forget what the court process added to that.
Understanding that truth helps everyone see the full picture, not just the part that shows up in a courtroom or on the ice. -Favro
The full verdict from the trial can be found here. Danny Webster of the Las Vegas Review-Journal recently published a comprehensive timeline of events, including further comments from GM Kelly McCrimmon. Hart’s first meeting with the press in Las Vegas is here. Here are the statements from the Golden Knights and the NHL. All episodes of the Canadian True Crime podcast on the Hockey Canada Trial, as well as source material used for the series, are available here.
