Yesterday’s cross-examination in the high-profile sexual assault trial involving NHL goaltender Carter Hart brought contentious moments as defense attorneys challenged the complainant’s testimony. The 25-year-old woman, whose identity remains protected by a court-ordered publication ban, faced pointed questions about inconsistencies in her account of the alleged 2018 incident.
“Memory doesn’t work like a video recording,” testified Dr. Lori Haskell, a clinical psychologist who appeared as an expert witness for the prosecution. “Trauma can significantly impact how details are encoded, stored, and later recalled.” Dr. Haskell explained to the London, Ontario courtroom how traumatic experiences often lead to fragmented memories where peripheral details may be unclear while central threatening elements remain vivid.
The complainant alleges she was sexually assaulted by multiple members of Canada’s 2018 World Junior hockey team following a Hockey Canada gala. Hart is one of five players facing charges, alongside Michael McLeod, Cal Foote, Dillon Dubé, and Alex Formenton.
Defense lawyer Megan Savard focused her cross-examination on discrepancies between the complainant’s police statements and her court testimony. “You told police you had three drinks that night, but yesterday you testified you couldn’t remember exactly how many,” Savard noted. The complainant acknowledged the inconsistency but maintained her core allegations remained unchanged.
I reviewed court transcripts showing the defense strategy centers on establishing a timeline that differs from the prosecution’s narrative. Text messages between the complainant and a friend were introduced, with Savard suggesting they contradict portions of earlier testimony about the woman’s state of mind following the alleged assault.
Crown prosecutor Meredith Gardiner objected several times during what she characterized as “unnecessarily aggressive questioning,” prompting Justice Lynda Templeton to remind counsel about proper treatment of witnesses in sexual assault cases. “The complainant is not on trial here,” Justice Templeton stated firmly.
The case has drawn national attention in Canada, highlighting questions about hockey culture and accountability. Outside the courthouse, approximately thirty protesters carried signs reading “Believe Survivors” and “No One Is Above The Law.”
The trial comes after a $3.55 million settlement in a previous civil lawsuit related to the same alleged incident led to major reforms within Hockey Canada. The organization faced intense public scrutiny and federal funding cuts after it was revealed special funds were used to settle sexual misconduct claims.
Former London Police detective Jason Eddy testified about the initial investigation, which was closed in 2019 without charges before being reopened in 2022. “New information came forward that warranted a complete review of the case,” Eddy explained, though he was not permitted to elaborate on what specifically prompted investigators to reexamine the evidence.
Court documents indicate that following the alleged assault, the complainant sought medical attention at a hospital where a sexual assault evidence kit was collected. The admissibility of certain portions of this medical evidence remains under dispute, with defense lawyers arguing some findings are inconclusive.
Glen Canning, father of Rehtaeh Parsons whose high-profile sexual assault case led to changes in Nova Scotia’s laws, attended yesterday’s proceedings. “These trials are excruciating for complainants,” Canning told me during a court recess. “The courage it takes to testify cannot be overstated.”
Hart, who has been on leave from the Philadelphia Flyers since charges were filed, sat quietly throughout proceedings, occasionally conferring with his legal team. The other accused players are scheduled for separate trials later this year.
Legal experts following the case note its broader significance. “This trial represents a critical test of Canada’s judicial approach to sexual assault cases involving high-profile individuals,” said University of Ottawa law professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who specializes in sexual assault law. “The courts must balance fair trial rights with trauma-informed approaches to testimony.”
The proceedings continue today with additional expert testimony expected from both prosecution and defense. The trial is anticipated to last approximately four weeks, with Judge Templeton presiding without a jury at the defendants’ election.
