Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

COVID-19

More victories for freedom as ArriveCAN charges dropped and fines reduced

Published

5 minute read

Gheorghe and Carmen Neferu

News release from The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is pleased to announce that it continues to see dropped charges and significantly reduced fines for Canadians who allegedly violated the Quarantine Act or who chose not to use the ArriveCAN app at Canadian borders.

The Justice Centre has provided defence counsel to eight Canadians who chose not to comply with a mandatory ArriveCAN.

Added together, these eight Canadians received a total of 13 tickets, with combined fine amounts totalling $54,815. Defence counsel provided by the Justice Centre negotiated with the Crown to secure admissions that amounted to fines totalling $1,216, not $54,815. All hearings for these cases were scheduled to take place in April at the Ontario Court of Justice in Mississauga, Ontario.

Here are their stories.

Cory Thorn, along with his wife, Guiseppina Lamacchia, their two small children and Guiseppina’s mother Carmela Lamacchia, were returning from a trip to Italy on September 8, 2022, when they were stopped at the Canadian border. They had not downloaded the ArriveCAN app because they did not feel comfortable with the app. They asked if they could submit the required information on paper but were told they could either use the app or face fines. The three adults were given two tickets each, one for $955 and another for $6,255. Together, the family faced a total of $21,630 in fines for violating two sections of the Quarantine Act: section 58, failing to comply with an order prohibiting or subjecting to any condition the entry into Canada and section 15(1), failing to answer a relevant question asked by a screening officer or to provide the officer with any required information or record. Their trials were scheduled for April 15, 2024. Five of the six tickets were dismissed. Carmela pled guilty to one charge and received a reduced fine of $615.

On September 22, 2022, a mother and her adult daughter, who have requested anonymity, were returning from a trip to Italy when they were each fined $6,255 for failing to use the ArriveCAN app. The women felt uneasy providing private health information through the ArriveCAN app. They offered to provide the information orally to border officials. Their offer was refused. Each had trial dates set for April 23, 2024. The daughter’s charge was withdrawn by the Crown, while her mother pled guilty and paid a significantly reduced fine of $300.

Daniel Sauro and his partner, Gina Campoli, traveling with their one-year-old daughter, returned from a family vacation on September 24, 2022, when each adult was issued a ticket for $6,255 under section 58 of the Quarantine Act for not using the ArriveCAN app. They were uneasy about disclosing private medical information and were concerned about the app’s security. Their trial was scheduled for April 18, 2024 -nineteen months after the tickets were issued. The public health officer did not appear at trial, and so the prosecutor was forced to withdraw all charges.

Gheorghe and Carmen Neferu traveled back to Canada from abroad on August 3, 2022, when they were each given two tickets with fines for failing to use the ArriveCAN app, totaling $14,420 They did not want to answer invasive questions regarding their medical status. Their trials were scheduled for April 8, 2024. The charges against Carmen were withdrawn, while Gheorghe had one charge withdrawn. He pled guilty to the other, paying a reduced fine of $300.

A constitutional challenge to the ArriveCAN app requirement continues to proceed in the Ontario Court of Justice.

Chris Fleury, lead counsel on the Charter challenge to the ArriveCan app requirement, says, “Each and every Canadian who refused to provide their vaccination status via ArriveCAN was also subject to a mandatory 14-day quarantine in addition to their ticket. The quarantine had no scientific or public health basis and was a breach of Canadian’s Charter right not to be arbitrarily detained. While we would have preferred that no one was charged in the first place, we are pleased to see the prosecution taking a more reasonable approach to these cases.”

2025 Federal Election

Mark Carney refuses to clarify 2022 remarks accusing the Freedom Convoy of ‘sedition’

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Mark Carney described the Freedom Convoy as an act of ‘sedition’ and advocated for the government to use its power to crush the non-violent protest movement.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney refused to elaborate on comments he made in 2022 referring to the anti-mandate Freedom Convoy protest as an act of “sedition” and advocating for the government to put an end to the movement.

“Well, look, I haven’t been a politician,” Carney said when a reporter in Windsor, Ontario, where a Freedom Convoy-linked border blockade took place in 2022, asked, “What do you say to Canadians who lost trust in the Liberal government back then and do not have trust in you now?”

“I became a politician a little more than two months ago, two and a half months ago,” he said. “I came in because I thought this country needed big change. We needed big change in the economy.”

Carney’s lack of an answer seems to be in stark contrast to the strong opinion he voiced in a February 7, 2022, column published in the Globe & Mail at the time of the convoy titled, “It’s Time To End The Sedition In Ottawa.”

In that piece, Carney wrote that the Freedom Convoy was a movement of “sedition,” adding, “That’s a word I never thought I’d use in Canada. It means incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.”

Carney went on to claim in the piece that if “left unchecked” by government authorities, the Freedom Convoy would “achieve” its “goal of undermining our democracy.”

Carney even targeted “[a]nyone sending money to the Convoy,” accusing them of “funding sedition.”

Internal emails from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) eventually showed that his definition of sedition were not in conformity with the definition under Canada’s Criminal Code, which explicitly lists the “use of force” as a necessary aspect of sedition.

“The key bit is ‘use of force,’” one RCMP officer noted in the emails. “I’m all about a resolution to this and a forceful one with us victorious but, from the facts on the ground, I don’t know we’re there except in a small number of cases.”

The reality is that the Freedom Convoy was a peaceful event of public protest against COVID mandates, and not one protestor was charged with sedition. However, the Liberal government, then under Justin Trudeau, did take an approach similar to the one advocated for by Carney, invoking the Emergencies Act to clear-out protesters. Since then, a federal judge has ruled that such action was “not justified.”

Despite this, the two most prominent leaders of the Freedom Convoy, Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, still face a possible 10-year prison sentence for their role in the non-violent assembly. LifeSiteNews has reported extensively on their trial.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

17-year-old died after taking COVID shot, but Ontario judge denies his family’s liability claim

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

An Ontario judge dismissed a liability claim from a family of a high schooler who died weeks after taking the COVID shot.

According to a published report on March 26 by Blacklock’s Reporter, Ontario Superior Court Justice Sandra Antoniani ruled that the Department of Health had no “duty of care” to a Canadian teenager who died after receiving a COVID vaccine.

“The plaintiff’s tragedy is real, but there is no private law duty of care made out,” Antoniani said.

“There is no private law duty of care to individual members of the public injured by government core policy decisions in the handling of health emergencies which impact the general population,” she continued.

In September 2021, 17-year-old Sean Hartman of Beeton, Ontario, passed away just three weeks after receiving a Pfizer-BioNtech COVID shot.

After his death, his family questioned if health officials had warned Canadians “that a possible side effect of receiving a Covid-19 vaccine was death.” The family took this petition to court but has been denied a hearing.

Antoniani alleged that “the defendants’ actions were aimed at mitigating the health impact of a global pandemic on the Canadian public. The defendants deemed that urgent action was necessary.”

“Imposition of a private duty of care would have a negative impact on the ability of the defendants to prioritize the interests of the entire public, with the distraction of fear over the possibility of harm to individual members of the public, and the risk of litigation and unlimited liability,” she ruled.

As LifeSiteNews previously reported, Dan Hartman, Sean’s father, filed a $35.6 million lawsuit against Pfizer after his son’s death.

However, only 103 claims of 1,859 have been approved to date, “where it has been determined by the Medical Review Board that there is a probable link between the injury and the vaccine, and that the injury is serious and permanent.”

Thus far, VISP has paid over $6 million to those injured by COVID injections, with some 2,000 claims remaining to be settled.

According to studies, post-vaccination heart conditions such as myocarditis are well documented in those, especially young males who have received the Pfizer jab.

Additionally, a recent study done by researchers with Canada-based Correlation Research in the Public Interest showed that 17 countries have found a “definite causal link” between peaks in all-cause mortality and the fast rollouts of the COVID shots as well as boosters.

Continue Reading

Trending

X