Ronald Rogers

Carter Hart is about to play in the Stanley Cup Final. He was acquitted of sexual assault charges this past summer, but there is a lot more to the story. With the brightest lights now shining on him, it is important to understand the nuance of the controversial case. “We Believe E.M” does not mean we believe every detail of her testimony. It does not mean we believe she did not make any mistakes that night. It simply means we believe she was sexually assaulted. And the evidence supports that belief. I will leave you with some facts. This is all available if you research (tw // sa): - There is ZERO evidence or testimony that EM ever asked Michael McLeod to invite additional men to that hotel room. McLeod never testified, and all we have is a video interview with police where he never made that claim, meanwhile LYING when he denied sending a text invite to ALL his teammates. On the otherhand, there is text evidence the following day of EM telling McLeod she did not expect more partners, and it was not disputed by McLeod. - There is ZERO evidence or testimony that EM ever asked (or was asked) for Cal Foote to do the splits over her. Even if you believe the men’s story that she was saying “have sex with me”, she never said “teabag me”. The judge actually agreed in her report there was no consent, instead she dismissed it saying it was non-sexual based on Carter Hart’s testimony that Foote was not naked. - In 2022, Alex Formenton & Dillon Dube BOTH CONFESSED to Hockey Canada that Cal Foote was naked during the splits. This was ruled inadmissible on a technicality. Other than Hart, no other witness dared to say Foote was clothed; they all pretended to not remember. With this information, at the very least, McLeod and Foote are guilty: - Foote performed a sexual act without consent. It does not make him a rapist, but it is a crime - McLeod is an accessory to that sexual assault If these two men were given the guilty verdict I strongly believe they deserved (even if it was a proverbial slap on the wrist; i.e. a 6-month house arrest), it would have been an amazing teaching moment for our nation while setting a modern standard for consent. The conduct of the others, including Hart, may not have been illegal. There was certainly not enough evidence to prove it was. But that does not mean what they did wasn’t morally reprehensible. The NHL and Hockey Canada both agreed. The NHL kept the players out of the league for months PAST the ruling, citing their own private investigation. Hockey Canada stood in the House of Commons and said “harm was caused” after paying out a civil settlement. But what Hart did was more than morally wrong. He lied under oath to protect his teammates. This is actually perjury. The judge by law is not privy to those 2022 confessions, but we as a public are. We are allowed to pass judgement in the court of public opinion. Hart is not a conquering hero who overcame adversity. He is a liar who abused his privilege and legal protection to obstruct justice. He is allowed to continue his career, and we are allowed to remind him of his abhorrent behaviour.