COVID-19
Ontario judge rules in favor of woman who refused COVID nasal swab test
From LifeSiteNews
‘I do decide that the nasal swab test, which the screening officer in this case required or demanded Ms. Fernando submit to, was an unlawful requirement or demand,’ wrote Ontario Court Justice Paul Monahan in his June 26 ruling.
An Ontario court has ruled in favor of a woman who was charged and convicted for refusing to submit to a COVID nasal swab test upon returning home to Canada in 2022.
In a June 26 ruling, Ontario Court Justice Paul Monahan decided in favor of Canadian woman Meththa Fernando, who was charged in 2022 for refusing a COVID nasal swab test when returning to Canada from abroad and subsequently found guilty. Monahan concluded that in Fernando’s case, requiring her to submit to such an invasive test was unlawful and ordered her conviction be overturned.
“I do decide that the nasal swab test, which the screening officer in this case required or demanded Ms. Fernando submit to, was an unlawful requirement or demand,” wrote Monahan in his ruling.
“Ms. Fernando’s refusal to comply with the requirement or demand was lawful on her part,” he continued. “Because the requirement or demand made of her by the screening officer was not lawful, Ms. Fernando should not have been found guilty by the Justice of the Peace.”
Fernando began her legal journey in 2022 when she refused a nasal swab at Pearson International Airport in Toronto, Ontario. Upon her return home to nearby Mississauga, a screening officer from the Canadian Public Health Agency randomly selected her to undergo the nasal test.
However, Fernando, who told the officer she was already vaccinated against COVID, refused the test. She was charged and later convicted of failing to comply with an order under Section 58 of the Quarantine Act and fined a total of $6,255.
Canada’s Quarantine Act was used by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government to enact severe draconian COVID travel rules on all returning travelers to the country.
Fernando chose to take her case to an appeal court following conviction, arguing that the Quarantine Act did not “authorize a screening officer to use a screening test which involved the entry into the traveller’s body of an instrument or other foreign body.”
During the hearing, Monahan admitted that this argument had “merit” since Section 14 of the Quarantine Act states, “Any qualified person authorized by the Minister may, to determine whether a traveller has a communicable disease or symptoms of one, use any screening technology authorized by the Minister that does not involve the entry into the traveller’s body of any instrument or other foreign body.”
As LifeSiteNews previously reported there have been several instances of injuries after receiving the swabs, including leaking brain fluid due to the test puncturing the brain tissue.
“The prosecution raised the point that perhaps the insertion into the nasal cavity did not involve the entry into the body,” Monahan stated. “I disagree. The insertion of a nasal swab into the nasal cavity is most definitely an insertion into the body.”
“I am reversing the Justice of the Peace’s decision and entering a finding of not guilty,” he concluded. “Those are my reasons.”
Besides potential brain tissue damage, COVID-19 nasal tests have been flagged for seriously questionable accuracy rates. One study authored by British and American scientists last year found that PCR nasal swab testing has only around 63% sensitivity.
Several other studies, as well as federal guidelines, have identified major accuracy issues with PCR tests and other means of testing for coronavirus. The most common PCR testing protocol for COVID-19 also has come under fire in December, when a coalition of scientists called for the retraction of the original article detailing the method, due to a lack of a properly peer-reviewed report.
Pro-freedom lawyer Daniel Freiheit celebrated the decision, telling LifeSiteNews, “This ruling is a stark reminder that many laws may have been broken during COVID. I think this was caused by a collective fear of the unknown and a kind of mass panic.”
“In times like that, it’s utmost to rely on first principles: basic freedoms that I had always been taught would act as checks and balances: freedom to speak, freedom to associate, freedom to deny novel medical treatment, right to retain counsel,” he continued.
He explained that the ruling will give Canadians a sense of vindication since many knew the tests were invasive and unjust but complied out of fear.
“Many people knew it was wrong and unlawful at the time but had no choice except to comply,” he said.
“It was either that or face detainment at the border, harassment, fines, threats of more fines, threats of quarantine, etc,” Freiheit explained. “Submitting to this unlawful treatment was the easiest way out, especially for people coming into the country with medical conditions, tired children or frustrated travel partners.”
This ruling is not the first time actions taken by the Trudeau government during COVID were found to be unlawful.
In January, the Trudeau government’s use of the Emergencies Act to end the Freedom Convoy protest against COVID mandates was ruled to have violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by Federal Court Justice Richard Mosley.
According to the January ruling, the EA is meant to be reserved as a last resort if all other means fail. In Mosley’s judgement, this threshold was not met and thus, the Trudeau government violated the rights of Canadians.
Shortly after the ruling, Trudeau announced that the government was appealing to the Federal Court of Appeal, a court where he has appointed 10 of the 15 judges.
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:
BREAKING – The Pandemic Justice Phase Begins as Criminal Investigations Commence |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
||||||
|
By Nicolas Hulscher, MPH
|
||||||
|
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal account on X (formerly Twitter) for further content.
From the World Council for Health Canada
The health of Canadians has been compromised by government-mandated COVID-19 injections. The upcoming federal election is an opportunity to demand change and accountability. As you decide which candidate or party is most committed to defending the health of yourself and your family, please consider the following:
The Injections Were Never What They Claimed
The Canadian government successfully mandated the COVID-19 injections by labeling them “safe and effective vaccines.” These products are still being promoted and administered across the country. However, the truth is:
- They are not vaccines: Click Here
- They are not safe: Click Here
- They do not prevent infection or transmission.
- Evidence shows they increase the risk of COVID-19 disease and death: Click Here
These Products Contain Multiple Mechanisms of Harm
- They cause injury through multiple biological mechanisms: Click Here
- They have surpassed all vaccines in recorded history—for all infections, for all of the past thirty years combined—in causing deaths and injuries: Click Here
- They are chemically contaminated and adulterated with DNA: Click Here
- In Pfizer’s case, fraud is evident: the DNA contamination includes genetic engineering tools derived from the SV40 virus, associated with cancer risks: Click Here
This Election, We Must Demand Accountability
Insist that to have your vote, candidates must:
- Denounce the COVID-19 “vaccines.”
- Support a full halt to their manufacturing and administration.
- Uphold informed consent, scientific integrity, and bodily autonomy.
Your voice is important. Use it to reject censorship, harm, and medical coercion.
Province to expand services provided by Alberta Sheriffs: New policing option for municipalities
Is HNIC Ready For The Winnipeg Jets To Be Canada’s Heroes?
Made in Alberta! Province makes it easier to support local products with Buy Local program
CSIS Warned Beijing Would Brand Conservatives as Trumpian. Now Carney’s Campaign Is Doing It.
-
2025 Federal Election1 day agoOttawa Confirms China interfering with 2025 federal election: Beijing Seeks to Block Joe Tay’s Election
-
Energy2 days agoIndigenous-led Projects Hold Key To Canada’s Energy Future
-
Energy2 days agoMany Canadians—and many Albertans—live in energy poverty
-
Business2 days agoCanada Urgently Needs A Watchdog For Government Waste
-
2025 Federal Election23 hours agoHow Canada’s Mainstream Media Lost the Public Trust
-
2025 Federal Election13 hours agoBREAKING: THE FEDERAL BRIEF THAT SHOULD SINK CARNEY
-
2025 Federal Election24 hours agoReal Homes vs. Modular Shoeboxes: The Housing Battle Between Poilievre and Carney
-
2025 Federal Election14 hours agoCHINESE ELECTION THREAT WARNING: Conservative Candidate Joe Tay Paused Public Campaign