I know this is a ridiculous question. I know that the surviving yellowjackets are 17-18 years old, traumatized up the wazoo, and terrified that "what they did" will ruin their post-rescue lives. I know there's no point really talking about this, because they DO end up hiding the cannibalism, and I'm sure season 4 will deal a lot with this. Just kind of spitballing here.
However, I don't entirely know why they would attempt to hide the cannibalism. I mean, unless they get real crafty real quick, I don't know how they are going to completely dispose of all evidence that they ate people-- bones take really high heat to burn, are generally hard to dispose of, plus oftentimes have evidence of butchering on them after someone has removed the flesh to eat. See James Fitzjames-- we know his remains were consumed because of marks on his jawbone. I don't know where the (maybe so far fan idea? I don't know) idea that the survivors are going to pretend most of the deaths happened during the crash came from, but I feel this is just a complicated lie to keep when the bones perhaps have evidence that they were butchered.
Jackie's death was 100% an accident. Javi's death was caused by the elements, even if the girls made a conscious decision not to intervene. And even Mari's death is complicated-- like, yeah, the group intended to hunt her, but she wasn't deliberately led to the pit, and the circumstances of her death weren't entirely under anyone's control. No one stabbed her or pushed her in. Yes, they had murderous intent, but they themselves did not enact it.
So why wouldn't they admit to at least some form of survival cannibalism while continuing to conceal the hunts?
Look at the Andes crash. The survivors received a lot of sympathy from the public, and even the Catholic church was understanding of their actions given the survival circumstances. I'm not saying the Yellowjackets' situation is exactly the same. They developed a system in which they hunted people for food and then sport. That's obviously a very different situation from the Andes survivors'.
But I do think admitting to survival cannibalism could give the Yellowjackets a lot of, like, plausible deniability? They could explain how they survived the winter without revealing the hunts or the full extent of what happened out there. And if they insist they survived through other means, wouldn't that just invite even more questions about how they managed to stay alive? There was no game out there. Yes, they hunted Nat down that first winter, but it was technically for survival. They were starving to death.
I'm not saying they should confess to the hunts. I'm just wondering why they'd need to conceal the cannibalism itself when admitting to it might actually make their story more believable, if that makes sense.
But I guess the deaths of Coach Ben, Hannah, Kodiak, and Edwin are pretty complex to explain. Uhh.