Analyzing the Hockey Canada trial [4]

[Part 4 of 5] We continue to unpack the confusing timeline of Room 209 - including the controversy around crown witness Brett Howden and the alleged slap and “splits” incidents, leading up to the verdicts and how the country reacted to them. At the end, Kristi shares her personal opinion about what likely happened in that hotel room — and why the verdicts would have remained the same anyway. The difference is in how the judge got there. We’ll also be looking at: Why the court zeroed in on E.M.’s level of intoxication Her supposed motive to fabricate evidenceThe reasons for the judge’s ultimate conclusion that E.M.’s evidence was “not credible or reliable”Why - despite saying rape myths and stereotypes would be avoided, the judge’s written decision reads like the oppositePublic speculation about why this case went to trial at allThe damaging impact of this trial Content Warning: Graphic details of sexual acts.Please note: this series does not dispute the judge’s not guilty verdicts.Our position is that the framing of the evidence in the written decision was unnecessary and damaging, with impact that extends far beyond the trial.More information and resources:WATCH: Team Canada World Junior Trial Verdict w/ Katie Strang | The Steve Dangle Podcast, Youtube, July 29 2025READ: The Hockey Canada trial could have been a reckoning. It was something else - by Dan Robson and Katie Strang, The Athletic, July 24 2025.LISTEN: The Trial of Jacob Hoggard (JB’s story) and Kelly Favro’s StoryIf you or anyone you know is experiencing sexual violence and abuse, help is available at REES Community or Ending Violence Canada - Sexual Assault Centres, Crisis Lines and Support ServicesBeyond The Verdict: www.beyondtheverdict.caLet us know what you think! Follow Canadian True Crime on Facebook and InstagramFull list of resources, information sources, and more: www.canadiantruecrime.ca/episodes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.