Connect with us

News

ASIRT Investigation Clears Officer Of Wrongdoing In Use Of Force Arrest Near Blackfalds

Published

9 years ago

4 minute read

By Sheldon Spackman

An investigation by the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team into a use of force arrest near Blackfalds almost two years ago has cleared the officer involved of any wrongdoing.

In a release, ASIRT officials say the December 31st, 2014 incident started with RCMP receiving a complaint of a red Dodge truck with a stolen license plate on it near Blackfalds. The truck was spotted traveling south on Range Road 28-4, with the first officer on scene driving north from the other direction getting out of his cruiser to pull it over by waving it down.

However, the truck did not stop but struck the officer in the arm as it drove by. This led to a pursuit which also involved a second cruiser. As the chase continued, the investigation determined the occupants of the truck could be seen throwing beer cans out of the back cab window. The truck eventually drove through a T-Intersection at Range Road 28-4 and Aspelund Road where it also drove through a road sign and into the south ditch.

The truck’s three passengers including a 47 year old man and two women, then fled out the side door, while the driver who was later found to be intoxicated remained in the vehicle. The officer involved ordered the suspects to get on the ground, with the two women complying and the 47 year old man failing to follow directions but coming towards the officer swearing.

The officer stated he struck the man in the head with his service pistol when the man got too close. The man fell to the ground but refused to stay down as directed. The officer indicated he then kicked the man in the torso two to three times in an effort to gain control, at which point the man stayed on the ground and was handcuffed.

The investigation determined that the driver of the truck was unable to provide any evidence related to this incident as he had remained in the vehicle and had not seen the situation unfold. The two women were witnesses and through their statements felt the use of force was unnecessary but their version of events differed slightly from each other. The 47 year old man’s version of events was inconsistent and irreconcilable with all other statements.

Immediately after the incident, the man complained of pain. He was charged, released, then treated and transported by emergency medical services to the Lacombe Hospital and Care Centre where he was assessed and released. Five days later, upon his condition worsening, he attended the Three Hills Health Centre where he was diagnosed with broken ribs and a collapsed lung. He was subsequently transferred to Red Deer Regional Hospital for admission and care.

ASIRT executive director, Ms. Susan D. Hughson, Q.C., received the completed investigative file. The evidence gathered from the four witnesses, including the officer and the man, was conflicting and contained inconsistences. The report indicates that it should also be noted that although the most reasonable inference is that the injuries were sustained as a result of the force used, the possibility that the injuries could have been caused by the single vehicle leaving the roadway, going through a sign and then into a ditch cannot be unequivocally eliminated.

After a careful review of all the evidence, Ms. Hughson confirmed that “there is no clear evidence that could provide reasonable grounds to believe the officer committed an offence.”

Related Topics:

Follow Author

More from this author
Business / 3 hours ago

103 Conflicts and Counting Unprecedented Ethics Web of Prime Minister Mark Carney

Daily Caller / 7 hours ago

Blackouts Coming If America Continues With Biden-Era Green Frenzy, Trump Admin Warns

Business / 8 hours ago

Most Canadians say retaliatory tariffs on American goods contribute to raising the price of essential goods at home

Media

CBC journalist quits, accuses outlet of anti-Conservative bias and censorship

Published on July 10, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Travis Dhanraj accused CBC of pushing a ‘radical political agenda,’ and his lawyer said that the network opposed him hosting ‘Conservative voices’ on his show.

CBC journalist Travis Dhanraj has resigned from his position, while accusing the outlet of anti-Conservative bias and ”performative diversity.”

In a July 7 letter sent to colleagues and obtained by various media outlets, Travis Dhanraj announced his departure from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) due to concerns over censorship.

“I am stepping down not by choice, but because the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has made it impossible for me to continue my work with integrity,” he wrote.

“After years of service — most recently as the host of Canada Tonight: With Travis Dhanraj — I have been systematically sidelined, retaliated against, and denied the editorial access and institutional support necessary to fulfill my public service role,” he declared.

Dhanraj, who worked as a CBC host and reporter for nearly a decade, revealed that the outlet perpetuated a toxic work environment, where speaking out against the approved narrative led to severe consequences.

Dhanraj accused CBC of having a “radical political agenda” that stifled fair reporting. Additionally, his lawyer, Kathryn Marshall, revealed that CBC disapproved of him booking “Conservative voices” on his show.

While CBC hails itself as a leader in “diversity” and supporting minority groups, according to Dhanraj, it’s all a facade.

“What happens behind the scenes at CBC too often contradicts what’s shown to the public,” he revealed.

In April 2024, Dhanraj, then host of CBC’s Canada Tonight, posted on X that his show had requested an interview with then-CBC President Catherine Tait to discuss new federal budget funding for the public broadcaster, but she declined.

“Internal booking and editorial protocols were weaponized to create structural barriers for some while empowering others—particularly a small circle of senior Ottawa-based journalists,” he explained.

According to Marshall, CBC launched an investigation into the X post, viewing it as critical of Tait’s decision to defend executive bonuses while the broadcaster was cutting frontline jobs. Dhanraj was also taken off air for a time.

Dhanraj revealed that in July 2024 he was “presented with (a non-disclosure agreement) tied to an investigation about a tweet about then CBC President Catherine Tait. It was designed not to protect privacy, but to sign away my voice. When I refused, I was further marginalized.”

Following the release of his letter, Dhanraj published a link on X to a Google form to gather support from Canadians.

“When the time is right, I’ll pull the curtain back,” he wrote on the form. “I’ll share everything…. I’ll tell you what is really happening inside the walls of your CBC.”

CBC has issued a statement denying Dhanraj’s claims, with CBC spokesperson Kerry Kelly stating that the Crown corporation “categorically rejects” his statement.

This is hardly the first time that CBC has been accused of editorial bias. Notably, the outlet receives the vast majority of its funding from the Liberal government.

This January, the watchdog for the CBC ruled that the state-funded outlet expressed a “blatant lack of balance” in its covering of a Catholic school trustee who opposed the LGBT agenda being foisted on children.

There have also been multiple instances of the outlet pushing what appears to be ideological content, including the creation of pro-LGBT material for kids, tacitly endorsing the gender mutilation of children, promoting euthanasia, and even seeming to justify the burning of mostly Catholic churches throughout the country.

Continue Reading

International

CBS settles with Trump over doctored 60 Minutes Harris interview

Published on July 6, 2025

By

MXM logo MxM News

CBS will pay Donald Trump more than $30 million to settle a lawsuit over a 2024 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris. The deal also includes a new rule requiring unedited transcripts of future candidate interviews.

Key Details:

  • Trump will receive $16 million immediately to cover legal costs, with remaining funds earmarked for pro-conservative messaging and future causes, including his presidential library.
  • CBS agreed to release full, unedited transcripts of all future presidential candidate interviews—a policy insiders are calling the “Trump Rule.”
  • Trump’s lawsuit accused CBS of deceptively editing a 60 Minutes interview with Harris in 2024 to protect her ahead of the election; the FCC later obtained the full transcript after a complaint was filed.

Diving Deeper:

CBS and Paramount Global have agreed to pay President Donald Trump more than $30 million to settle a lawsuit over a 2024 60 Minutes interview with then–Vice President Kamala Harris, Fox News Digital reported Tuesday. Trump accused the network of election interference, saying CBS selectively edited Harris to shield her from backlash in the final stretch of the campaign.

The settlement includes a $16 million upfront payment to cover legal expenses and other discretionary uses, including funding for Trump’s future presidential library. Additional funds—expected to push the total package well above $30 million—will support conservative-aligned messaging such as advertisements and public service announcements.

As part of the deal, CBS also agreed to a new editorial policy mandating the public release of full, unedited transcripts of any future interviews with presidential candidates. The internal nickname for the new rule is reportedly the “Trump Rule.”

Trump initially sought $20 billion in damages, citing a Face the Nation preview that aired Harris’s rambling response to a question about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. That portion of the interview was widely mocked. A more polished answer was aired separately during a primetime 60 Minutes special, prompting allegations that CBS intentionally split Harris’s answer to minimize political fallout.

The FCC later ordered CBS to release the full transcript and raw footage after a complaint was filed. The materials confirmed that both versions came from the same response—cut in half across different broadcasts.

CBS denied wrongdoing but the fallout rocked the network. 60 Minutes executive producer Bill Owens resigned in April after losing control over editorial decisions. CBS News President Wendy McMahon also stepped down in May, saying the company’s direction no longer aligned with her own.

Several CBS veterans strongly opposed any settlement. “The unanimous view at 60 Minutes is that there should be no settlement, and no money paid, because the lawsuit is complete bulls***,” one producer told Fox News Digital. Correspondent Scott Pelley had warned that settling would be “very damaging” to the network’s reputation.

The final agreement includes no admission of guilt and no direct personal payment to Trump—but it locks in a substantial cash payout and forces a new standard for transparency in how networks handle presidential interviews.

Continue Reading

Trending

X