CBC calls for compassion towards Humboldt’s killer driver, skepticism for acquitted NHL goalie

VANCOUVER — The Canadian Broadcast Corporation is drawing criticism, yet again, for its editorial decision making — this time for encouraging compassion towards a man ordered deported after he pleaded guilty to killing 16 people, while suggesting a man acquitted of sexual assault should be spared the opportunity of a fresh start..Karen Pauls, a Winnipeg-based CBC national reporter, has produced numerous articles, videos and stories advocating leniency and multiple chances for Jaskirat Singh Sidhu, the semi-truck driver who pleaded guilty to 16 counts of dangerous driving causing death in the April 6, 2018, Humboldt Broncos bus crash. Sidhu ran a stop sign with a flashing yellow light, killing 16 players and staff and injuring more than a dozen others.Pauls has highlighted Sidhu’s appeals for a second chance, including exclusive interviews with him and his family pleading to remain in Canada, coverage of his successful bid to defer deportation, and portrayals emphasizing his remorse and family circumstances..Federal Court Justice Jocelyne Gagné recently granted Sidhu a temporary deferral of deportation pending further humanitarian and compassionate grounds applications several months ago.In contrast, Pauls’ recent article on Vegas Golden Knights goaltender Carter Hart — one of five players acquitted last July in the 2018 Hockey Canada sexual assault trial — features voices arguing Hart does not deserve a fresh start despite the not-guilty verdicts.Pauls’ piece begins by noting boos for Hart during the first game of the Stanley Cup Final, including Carolina Hurricanes fans chanting “no means no.”“It was really nice to see the Canes fans chanting, ‘no means no,’” said Kelly Favro, a sexual assault survivor and advocate quoted in and interviewed the story.It is curious that the CBC offered no correction. The public broadcaster itself has extensively reported that, according to E.M.’s own testimony, she never said “no” during the encounter with Hart — a claim she did not, nor did the Crown prosecutors, even make..Instead, one of the Crown’s positions in the Hockey Canada trial was that E.M. didn't offer what it called “valid consent” because she adopted a “porn star persona” out of alleged fear, which then prompted her to goad men into having sex with her, rather than rejecting them.Pauls’ article and story also references E.M.’s description of being “sexually assaulted for hours,” a description that contrasts wildly with the brief nature of Hart’s specific interaction as detailed in testimony from him, E.M. and multiple witnesses.Court records show Hart received oral sex from E.M. for approximately 30 seconds, during which he was unable to maintain an erection. E.M. reportedly called the players “pussies” afterward.Ontario Superior Court Justice Maria Carroccia ultimately found E.M.’s evidence neither credible nor reliable, citing inconsistencies and contradictions with other testimony and video evidence. “But for some, it's about more than the verdict,” Pauls said in her piece for the CBC, before introducing viewers to the CBC’s legal expert Brandon Trask..Trask, a University of Manitoba law professor, argued that stones were left unturned in the case and questioned aspects of the trial outcome and its implications for sexual assault proceedings. He further suggested considering “morality clauses” in NHL contracts to prevent players like Hart from competing despite being acquitted.This sentiment echoed Favro's earlier comments in the piece, when she decried that “the NHL isn't really holding anyone accountable.”This is, again, factually incorrect.The NHL imposed suspensions on all five players even after their acquittals. The league barred them from playing until December 1, 2025 — resulting in nearly two years out of the league when factoring in time lost during legal proceedings. .This led to significant lost wages and earning potential for the players, including Hart, who later signed a two-year, $4-million contract with the Golden Knights.In a clear breach of the CBC's own guidelines for journalistic standards and practice, the roughly two-minute video piece offers no self-corrections nor any dissenting opinions.CBC’s Journalistic Standards and Practices guideline emphasizes core principles of accuracy, fairness, balance, impartiality, and integrity.In court reporting specifically, the handbook requires rigorous scrutiny of legal proceedings while taking care to report fairly on the evidence and claims of all parties, and respecting the presumption of innocence.“When we cover a legal or disciplinary proceeding, we are aware of the importance of reporting its outcome and we treat the persons concerned with dignity,” the guideline states.“Rigour in coverage requires that we report fairly on the evidence and the claims of the parties involved,” it continues. The glaring double standard comes at a difficult time for the CBC, which is grappling with a notable public trust deficit amid multiple controversies. This includes recent instances where the Liberal majority government used its power to shut down debate in parliamentary committees examining the broadcaster’s declining standards and related concerns.

CBC calls for compassion towards Humboldt’s killer driver, skepticism for acquitted NHL goalie

Related Stories

Setting the record straight on Carter Hart's involvement in the Hockey Canada sex trial

'Brampton' trucker sentenced for killing Olympic figure skater

Ottawa weighs appeal after court halts deportation of Humboldt Broncos crash driver

EXCLUSIVE: CBC archived negative responses to its Humboldt coverage, forwarded them to security specialist