COVID-19
Ontario policeman fights conviction, penalty for donating to the Freedom Convoy
From LifeSiteNews
By Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms
Constable Michael Brisco, a Windsor police officer, has appealed a conviction and penalty for donating $50 to the Ottawa Freedom Convoy in 2022 on freedom of expression grounds
The Ontario Civilian Police Commission heard the appeal of Constable Michael Brisco on Tuesday, who is challenging his conviction and penalty for donating to the Ottawa Freedom Convoy in early 2022. This case raises questions about the Charter’s protection for freedom of expression, the right of police officers to support political causes while off duty, and the privacy rights of all Canadians.
Constable Michael Brisco of the Windsor Police Service is a highly trained and respected police officer with no prior disciplinary record. He made a $50 donation to the peaceful Freedom Convoy protest through the GiveSendGo fundraising platform on February 8, 2022 – one day after an Ontario Superior Court Judge held that people could continue to engage in “peaceful, lawful and safe protest” in Ottawa so long as honking ceased. When making his donation, Brisco did not identify himself as a police officer and did not contribute to the protest in his capacity as a police officer.
Days later, the GiveSendGo donor list was hacked. The Ontario Provincial Police Service acquired the list and forwarded a set of names to the Windsor Police Service, who discovered that Brisco had donated to the protest.
The Windsor Police Service then chose to charge Brisco for “discreditable conduct.”
After a six-day hearing before an Ontario Provincial Police Adjudicator, Brisco was found guilty of discreditable conduct by a Tribunal on March 24, 2023. Two months later, on May 18, 2023, the Tribunal ordered that Brisco should forfeit pay for 80 hours of work as a penalty.
With the support of the Justice Centre, on June 14, 2023, Brisco filed a Notice of Appeal with Ontario Civilian Police Commission, challenging his conviction and the imposed penalty.
Counsel for Brisco argued that the prosecution against him lacks sufficient evidence. The claim that the Freedom Convoy in Ottawa was an unlawful protest rested entirely on claims made in newspaper articles by various officials, including the prime minister and the premier of Ontario. No credible video, photographic, or other evidence on this point was filed against Brisco. Further, counsel for Brisco argued that the evidence against him – a hacked list that ought to have remained private and confidential – was obtained illegally. Counting the donor list as evidence against Brisco amounts to an abuse of process, counsel argue.
Brisco’s legal counsel further argue that his conviction and penalty rested on a claim that Brisco’s donation was a demonstration of support for the Ambassador Bridge blockade in Windsor, Ontario; Brisco argues that there is no evidence of a link between the Ottawa protest and the Windsor blockade, and he denied any support for the blockade during his hearing.
Finally, Brisco argues that the Tribunal’s decisions to convict and discipline him fail to acknowledge or proportionately balance their impact on his Charter–protected right to freedom of expression. While a police officer’s right to free expression is limited during the performance of their duties as officers, Brisco did not donate to the Freedom Convoy in his capacity as a police officer. He also expected the donation to be confidential, and he did not seek to advertise his giving. The expression of off-duty police officers is protected by the Charter to the same degree as the expression of any other citizen.
COVID-19
Canadian judge rejects complaint against maskless workplaces as frivolous
From LifeSiteNews
Federal Court Justice Benoit Duchesne ruled that Elections Canada manager Nicolas Juzda’s complaint of feeling ‘unsafe’ following the end of mask mandates in federal workplaces was unreasonable
A federal judge ruled that complaints that maskless workplaces pose a danger to employees’ health are frivolous, ending the final chapter of COVID regulations.
According to information published on January 15 by Blacklock’s Reporter, Federal Court Justice Benoit Duchesne ruled that Elections Canada manager Nicolas Juzda’s complaint of feeling unsafe following the end of mask mandates in federal workplaces was unreasonable.
“The applicant’s concern about an unsafe workplace was based on his assessment that a significant number of people would return to the workplace under the return-to-work model, that any of these people may have contracted Covid-19 and that the non-mandatory recommendations and precautions relating to Covid-19 fell short of what he believes would be a safe work environment,” wrote the court.
Masks were mandated in federal workplaces from April 20, 2020, to February 14, 2023, under the direction of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. At the same time, millions of Canadians were forced to mask in public settings such as grocery stores or hospitals.
After the mandate had lifted, Juzda, a “fully vaccinated” individual without any particular health issues, complained that he felt unsafe in the Gatineau headquarters.
“I must excuse my right to refuse work that constitutes a danger,” he wrote, referencing the Canada Labor Code that allows federally regulated staff to refuse work “that constitutes a danger to the employee.”
Juzda claimed that masking “reduces the risk of contracting Covid-19 but is of limited effectiveness if not combined with other measures, particularly during prolonged exposure to unmasked infected individuals such as being nearby in an indoor office for an entire day.”
“Covid-19 is a disease that in addition to often being extremely unpleasant during the acute period poses significant risks including death,” he continued.
“Handwashing and workplace cleaning are of minimal use in limiting the spread of Covid-19,” Juzda claimed.
His complaint was quickly dismissed as “frivolous” by executives, a move which Duchesne agreed with, calling Juzda’s concerns unwarranted.
Indeed, LifeSiteNews has reported extensively on overwhelming evidence showing that masks are ineffective in preventing transmission of COVID and that they come with harmful effects.
Back in 2021, 47 studies confirmed the ineffectiveness of masks for COVID, while 32 more confirmed their negative health effects.
According to another 2021 report, more than 170 studies have found that masks have been ineffective at stopping COVID and instead have been harmful, especially to children.
In fact, in 2020, before masks were widely mandated, Canada’s chief public health officer Dr. Theresa Tam admitted that masks were not effective in preventing COVID.
“There is no need to use a mask for well people,” she said in the first few weeks of the pandemic. “It hasn’t been proven really to protect you from getting the virus.”
COVID-19
Canadian parents wary of COVID, flu shots for children
From LifeSiteNews
Government research has found that Canadian parents do not plan to inject their children with COVID or flu shots, pointing to the ineffectiveness of the shots and potential side effects
Canadian parents are remaining wary of COVID and flu shots for children despite ongoing publicity campaigns.
According to in-house research by the Public Health Agency obtained by Blacklock’s Reporter, many Canadian parents do not plan to inject their children with the experimental COVID shots, pointing to the ineffectiveness of the shots and potential side effects.
“Continued monitoring of parental knowledge and views around Covid-19 and influenza are important to adapt public communication and education accordingly,” the report said.
“Monitoring parental attitudes is essential to predict expected vaccine take-up and guide education and awareness efforts to promote vaccination,” it continued.
In Canada, COVID shots are both approved and encouraged for all children over six months of age, despite the fact that the latest Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 shots for children under 12 were only granted emergency use authorization in the U.S.
The research asked parents if they planned to give their children updated COVID shots, to which only 17 percent said they “definitely will”; 26 percent said they “probably won’t”; and 28 percent said they “definitely won’t.”
Those who planned to refuse the reoccurring shots revealed they were “concerned there was not enough research on the vaccine,” questioned the effectiveness of the shots, mistrusted the government information surrounding COVID shots, or their doctor had never mentioned it.
Similarly, 19.5 percent reported being “somewhat hesitant” to give their child the COVID shot, while 21 percent said they were “very hesitant.”
Likewise, parents were hesitant to give their children annual flu shots, over concerns of it being unnecessary and potential side effects.
According to 2021 data, only 17.49 percent of children ages five to 11 in Canada have received at least one dose of the COVID injection. Additionally, of elementary school-age kids who have had both doses of the COVID shots, only 0.6 percent are counted as “fully vaccinated.”
Parents’ hesitancy to jab their young children comes after research has proven that the COVID shots are not only unnecessary but pose serious health risks, especially to children.
Since the start of the COVID crisis, official data shows that the virus has been listed as the cause of death for less than 20 kids in Canada under age 15. This is out of six million children in the age group.
The COVID jabs approved in Canada have also been associated with severe side effects, such as blood clots, rashes, miscarriages, and even heart attacks in young, healthy men.
The mRNA shots have also been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects in children.
A report from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) showed at least 21,000 side effects, with 24 deaths of American children ages 12 to 17 after COVID shots.
-
Business11 hours ago
Trump Talks To China Leader Xi Jinping About Several Topics As President-Elect Readies Himself For White House
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
‘This Is So Disgusting’: Joe Rogan Unloads On Gavin Newsom For ‘Creepy’ Behavior In Front Of Wildfire Wreckage
-
Business2 days ago
Donald Trump appoints Mel Gibson, Sylvester Stallone as special ambassadors to Hollywood
-
Alberta12 hours ago
Before Trudeau Blames Alberta, Perhaps He Should Look in the Mirror
-
Brownstone Institute1 day ago
The Cure for Vaccine Skepticism
-
Brownstone Institute20 hours ago
It’s Time to Retire ‘Misinformation’
-
Daily Caller5 hours ago
Sweeping Deportations to Begin in Chicago Day After Inauguration
-
DEI1 day ago
Biden FBI shut down diversity office before Trump administration could review it