ArriveCAN ticket case dismissed, but Charter rights remain in limbo

News release from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

The Justice Centre is pleased to announce that the charge against Scott Bennett for not using the ArriveCAN app has been dismissed. An officer for the Public Health Agency of Canada, who was to be a witness at trial, failed to appear at the Ontario Court of Justice. So, on January 16, 2024, the public prosecutor withdrew all charges.Returning from a trip abroad on July 12, 2022, Mr. Bennett was issued a ticket at the Pearson International Airport for not using the controversial ArriveCAN app to disclose his Covid vaccination status. He filled in the back of the ticket, requesting an early resolution meeting with the prosecutor. Legal counsel, supported by the Justice Centre, attended that meeting and informed the prosecutor that they intended to raise Charter issues to defend Mr. Bennett against the prosecution. In particular, Charter section 8 prohibits unjustified search and seizure, and Charter section 9 prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention. The defence was prepared to argue that being forced to disclose vaccination status violates Charter section 8, and that the quarantine mandate violates Charter section 9.Mr. Bennett then received a trial notice that his case was to be heard at the Mississauga Provincial Offenses Court – usually reserved for traffic tickets with fines of less that $1,000. That court set the trial date without input from the defense. If that trial had proceeded, Mr. Bennett would have had only a few minutes to present his Charter arguments. His counsel filed a Notice of Constitutional Question on December 20, 2023, restating their intention to raise section 8 and 9 Charter issues, and then filed a motion to adjourn to trial. This would have allowed the defense enough time to fully argue the Charter issues. The January 2024 court date was then set.But when that day came, there was no witness for the prosecution. As a result, the charge against Mr. Bennett was dismissed. In 2022, Mr. Bennett was one of 11 applicants requesting a judicial review, supported by the Justice Centre, that challenged the constitutionality of the ArriveCAN app in Yates v. Attorney General of Canada. The federal policy of requiring Canadians to use the ArriveCAN app when returning to Canada was discontinued on September 30, 2022. The Federal Government then brought a motion to dismiss the case for mootness (irrelevance), which the court granted. The decision to dismiss the challenge to ArriveCAN for mootness was affirmed by the Federal Court of Appeal in July 2023, although the Court also ruled that Canadians could still pursue constitutional challenges when fighting their ArriveCAN tickets. That’s what Mr. Bennett had hoped to do, but the prosecution witness failed to appear.Chris Fleury, counsel for Mr. Bennett, stated, “Mr. Bennett is obviously thrilled with this outcome, which is very positive for him personally. At the same time, we are both disappointed that the constitutionality of the Federal Government’s decision to detain citizens based on their vaccination status may never see judicial scrutiny. Tomorrow morning, the Federal Government could make it mandatory for all returning Canadians to use ArriveCAN, and there would be no court ruling on the books about whether this mandatory requirement complies with the Charter.”

Up Next

Free speech victory: Charges against nurse who opposed vaccine mandates defeated

Don't Miss

College drops charges against Alberta doctor who granted Covid vaccine exemptions

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Marco Rubio says US could soon ‘move on’ from Ukraine conflict: ‘This is not our war’

COVID-19 / 3 hours ago

RFK Jr. Launches Long-Awaited Offensive Against COVID-19 mRNA Shots

Business / 4 hours ago

Trump considers $5K bonus for moms to increase birthrate

COVID-19

RFK Jr. Launches Long-Awaited Offensive Against COVID-19 mRNA Shots

Published on April 23, 2025

Todayville

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

As millions of Americans anxiously await action from the new HHS leadership against the COVID-19 mRNA injections—injected into over 9 million children this year—Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has finally gone publicly on the offensive:

Let’s go over each key point made by RFK Jr.:

The recommendation for children was always dubious. It was dubious because kids had almost no risk for COVID-19. Certain kids that had very profound morbidities may have a slight risk. Most kids don’t.

In the largest review to date on myocarditis following SARS-CoV-2 infection vs. COVID-19 vaccination, Mead et al found that vaccine-induced myocarditis is not only significantly more common but also more severe—particularly in children and young males. Our findings make clear that the risks of the shots overwhelmingly outweigh any theoretical benefit:

The OpenSAFELY study included more than 1 million adolescents and children and found that myocarditis was documented ONLY in COVID-19 vaccinated groups and NOT after COVID-19 infection. There were NO COVID-19-related deaths in any group. A&E attendance and unplanned hospitalization were higher after first vaccination compared to unvaccinated groups:

So why are we giving this to tens of millions of kids when the vaccine itself does have profound risk? We’ve seen huge associations of myocarditis and pericarditis with strokes, with other injuries, with neurological injuries.

The two largest COVID-19 vaccine safety studies ever conducted, involving 99 million (Faksova et al) and 85 million people (Raheleh et al), confirm RFK Jr.’s concerns, documenting significantly increased risks of serious adverse events following vaccination, including:

Myocarditis (+510% after second dose)
Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis (+278% after first dose)
Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis (+223% after first dose)
Guillain-Barré Syndrome (+149% after first dose)
Heart Attack (+286% after second dose)
Stroke (+240% after first dose)
Coronary Artery Disease (+244% after second dose)
Cardiac Arrhythmia (+199% after first dose)

And this was clear even in the clinical data that came out of Pfizer. There were actually more deaths. There were about 23% more deaths in the vaccine group than the placebo group. We need to ask questions and we need to consult with parents.

Actually, according to the Pfizer’s clinical trial data, there were 43% more deaths in the vaccine group compared to the placebo group when post-unblinding deaths are included:

We need to give people informed consent, and we shouldn’t be making recommendations that are not good for the population.

Public acknowledgment of the grave harms of COVID-19 vaccines signals that real action is right around the corner. However, we must hope that action is taken for ALL age groups, as no one is spared from their life-reducing effects:

Alessandria et al (n=290,727, age > 10 years): People vaccinated with 2 doses lost 37% of life expectancy compared to the unvaccinated population during follow-up.

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation

www.mcculloughfnd.org

Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.

Subscribe to Focal Points

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

COVID-19

Nearly Half of “COVID-19 Deaths” Were Not Due to COVID-19 – Scientific Reports Journal

Published on April 22, 2025

Todayville

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

45.3% of “COVID-19 deaths” in Greece had no symptoms — exposing the coordinated PSYOP deployed to maximize fear and enforce mass compliance with draconian control measures.

The study titled “Deaths “due to” COVID-19 and deaths “with” COVID-19 during the Omicron variant surge, among hospitalized patients in seven tertiary-care hospitals, Athens, Greece” was just published in the journal Scientific Reports:

Abstract

In Greek hospitals, all deaths with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test are counted as COVID-19 deaths. Our aim was to investigate whether COVID-19 was the primary cause of death, a contributing cause of death or not-related to death amongst patients who died in hospitals during the Omicron surge and were registered as COVID-19 deaths. Additionally, we aimed to analyze the factors associated with the classification of these deaths. We retrospectively re-viewed all in-hospital deaths, that were reported as COVID-19 deaths, in 7 hospitals, serving Athens, Greece, from January 1, 2022, until August 31, 2022. We retrieved clinical and laboratory data from patient records. Each death reported as COVID-19 death was characterized as: (A) death “due to” COVID-19, or (B) death “with” COVID-19. We reviewed 530 in-hospital deaths, classified as COVID-19 deaths (52.4% males; mean age 81.7 ± 11.1 years). We categorized 290 (54.7%) deaths as attributable or related to COVID-19 and in 240 (45.3%) deaths unrelated to COVID-19. In multivariable analysis The two groups differed significantly in age (83.6 ± 9.8 vs. 79.9 ± 11.8, p = 0.016), immunosuppression history (11% vs. 18.8%, p = 0.027), history of liver disease (1.4% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.047) and the presence of COVID-19 symptoms (p < 0.001). Hospital stay was greater in persons dying from non-COVID-19 related causes. Among 530 in-hospital deaths, registered as COVID-19 deaths, in seven hospitals in Athens during the Omicron wave, 240 (45.28%) were reassessed as not directly attributable to COVID-19. Accuracy in defining the cause of death during the COVID-19 pandemic is of paramount importance for surveillance and intervention purposes.

Key Findings:

Massive Overcounting of COVID-19 Deaths

Out of 530 hospital deaths registered as COVID-19 deaths, only 290 (54.7%) were actually caused by COVID-19.
240 deaths (45.3%) were found to be completely unrelated to COVID-19 — patients died with a positive PCR test, but showed no symptoms, required no COVID-specific treatment, and died of clearly unrelated causes.

Death Certificate Inaccuracy

Of the 204 certificates listing COVID-19 as the direct cause of death, only 132 (64.7%) were confirmed as such after clinical review.
Of the 324 certificates listing COVID-19 as a contributing factor, only 86 (26.5%) were found to be truly related.

Hospital-Acquired Infections Misclassified

Patients infected during hospitalization were significantly more likely to be misclassified as COVID-19 deaths (OR: 2.3, p = 0.001).

Younger Age and Severe Comorbidities Associated with Misclassification

Patients who died “with” COVID-19 were younger, more likely to be immunosuppressed, have end-stage liver disease, or be admitted for other causes.

Symptoms and Treatments Differed Sharply

Patients who died “due to” COVID-19 were more likely to:

Exhibit classic symptoms: hypoxia (44.1%), shortness of breath, fever, and cough
Require oxygen support (93.4% vs. 66.9%) and receive COVID-specific therapies:
- Remdesivir (5-day course: 61.9% vs. 35.2%)
- Dexamethasone (81.7% vs. 40.7%)

Study Strengths

This study went far beyond death certificate coding, implementing a rigorous, multi-source clinical audit:

Full medical chart reviews: Included physician notes, lab data, imaging, and treatment records.
Attending physician interviews: Structured questionnaires captured real-time clinical insights from those who treated the patients.
Dual independent expert assessments: Two experienced infectious disease specialists (each with >2,500 COVID cases) reviewed each case independently for classification accuracy.

This study found that nearly half of all registered COVID-19 deaths during the Omicron wave in Greece were misclassified, with no clinical evidence linking them to COVID-19 as the true cause. Given that similar death coding practices were employed across Western nations, it is reasonable to conclude that COVID-19 death counts were artificially inflated to a comparable degree elsewhere.

This drastic inflation of death counts aligns with what many now understand to be a coordinated psychological operation (PSYOP)—designed to instill fear and maximize compliance with draconian pandemic measures such as lockdowns, mask mandates, and mass mRNA injection campaigns.

It is this weaponization of fear that has prompted criminal referrals in seven U.S. states, triggering active criminal investigations into top COVID-19 officials for terrorism, murder and racketeering: