COVID-19
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.”
COVID-19
Spy Agencies Cozied Up To Wuhan Virologist Before Lying About Pandemic

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Emily Kopp
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s (ODNI) hub for foreign biological threats dismissed the intelligence pointing to a lab accident in Wuhan as “misinformation” in January 2021, two former government sources who requested anonymity to discuss sensitive internal meetings told the Daily Caller News Foundation. New documents show that intelligence risked implicating ODNI’s own bioengineering advisor — University of North Carolina professor Ralph Baric.
Baric, who engineered novel coronaviruses with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), advised ODNI four times a year on biological threats, according to documents released Oct. 30 by Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers. \
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
Baric did not respond to the DCNF’s requests for comment.
The professor’s ties to American intelligence may run even deeper, the documents reveal, as ODNI facilitated a meeting between the CIA and Baric about a project on coronaviruses in September 2015.
The email exchange with the subject line “Request for Your Expertise” shows an unnamed government official with a CIA-affiliated email address pitching a “possible project” to Baric relating to “[c]oronavirus evolution and possible natural human adaptation.”
The new documents shed a bit of light on a question members of Congress have posed for years: Whether our own intelligence agencies knew more about the likelihood of a lab origin of COVID than they told the public.
“Director Ratcliffe has been on the forefront of this issue since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and has been committed to transparency and accountability on this issue,” a CIA spokesperson said in a statement. “In January – as one of the Director’s first actions at Langley – CIA made public its assessment that a research-related origin of the COVID-19 pandemic is more likely than a natural origin. CIA will continue to evaluate any available credible new intelligence reporting as appropriate.”
Paul is seeking more documents from ODNI on potential ties between U.S. intelligence and the research in Wuhan as part of an ongoing investigation by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and has promised public hearings in the coming months.
Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard disbanded the ODNI biological threats office earlier this year following questions from the DCNF about its suppression of COVID origins intelligence in August. Gabbard and a dedicated working group have also been quietly investigating the origins of COVID.
Protecting Their Own

Baric gave a presentation to the ODNI in January 2020 showing that he advised American intelligence that COVID may have emerged from a lab, the documents also indicate. Baric shared that the WIV had sequenced thousands of SARS-like coronaviruses, including strains capable of epidemics, the slides show.

Baric noted that the Wuhan lab does this work under low biosafety levels despite the ability of some of these viruses to infect and grow in human lung cells.
What Baric omitted: He had submitted a grant application in 2018 with intentions to conduct research to make coronaviruses with the same rare features seen in COVID while concealing the Wuhan lab’s low biosafety level, jotting in the margins of a draft of the grant application that Americans would “freak out” if they knew about the shoddy standards.
One year after Baric’s presentation, ODNI had hardened against the lab leak hypothesis.
When State Department officials pushed to declassify certain intelligence related to a plausible lab leak in January 2021, the ODNI expressed concerns that it would “call out actions that we ourselves are doing.”
Former ODNI National Counterproliferation and Biosecurity Center (NCBC) Director Kathryn Brinsfield, a medical doctor, also dismissed a January 2021 presentation by government officials about a plausible lab origin of COVID as “misinformation,” two sources told the DCNF. Her top aide Zach Bernstein, who possesses a master’s degree in security studies but no scientific credentials, also dismissed the presentation, according to three sources.
Gabbard disbanded NCBC in August following questions from the DCNF about its role in suppressing COVID origins intelligence.
But in the years preceding Gabbard’s takeover of the intelligence community’s central office, the ODNI’s public reports omitted any analysis of COVID’s viral genome. One intelligence agency filed a formal complaint about this glaring omission, the DCNF reported.
Scientists often received fierce pushback from former National Intelligence Council official Adrienne Keen, who helped steward former President Joe Biden’s 90-day review into COVID’s origins, an official told the DCNF. Paul’s request for records from ODNI includes a request for some of Keen’s communications.
Brinsfield and Keen did not respond to requests for comment.
Unanswered Questions
Despite the new disclosures, the precise nature of the CIA’s interest in Baric’s coronavirus work remains unknown. The documents do not include any further details about the work that the CIA and Baric may or may not have undertaken.
The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) funded the discovery of novel coronaviruses and shipped the samples to Wuhan through a 2009-2020 program called PREDICT, the DCNF reported in July. USAID sometimes acted as a CIA front before Trump dismantled it earlier this year — but no evidence exists that the CIA directed PREDICT.
An unnamed FBI special agent was in communication with Baric about responding to public requests for his research and emails with the Wuhan lab through the North Carolina Freedom of Information Act, according to a 2024 congressional letter, but details about the contact between the FBI and Baric also remain uncertain.
The CIA was slow to acknowledge that a lab was the pandemic’s most likely source, an assessment that the CIA made public more than five years after the pandemic emerged and well after the FBI and the Department of Energy.
In early 2020, when Trump’s Deputy National Security Advisor Matt Pottinger tasked CIA analysts to dig into the matter, they came up empty, according to a New York Times report. Instead, anonymous sources smeared Pottinger as having a “conspiratorial view” of the Chinese Communist Party.
Trump’s current CIA Director John Ratcliffe, who served as the DNI from May 2020 to January 2021, revealed in a 2023 Wall Street Journal op-ed that he had pushed for the declassification of COVID origins intelligence as the DNI but that he “faced constant opposition, particularly from Langley.”
COVID-19
Crown still working to put Lich and Barber in jail
From LifeSiteNews
The Crown’s appeal claims the judge made a mistake in her verdict on the intimidation charges, and also in how she treated aggravating and mitigating factors regarding sentencing.
Government lawyers for the Crown have filed an appeal the acquittals of Freedom Convoy leaders Tamara Lich and Chris Barber on intimidation charges.
The Crown also wants their recent 18-month conditional sentence on mischief charges replaced with harsher penalties, which could include possible jail time.
According to the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), it is “asking the Ontario Court of Appeal to enter a conviction on the intimidation charge or order a new trial on that count,” for Barber’s charges.
Specifically, the Crown’s appeal claims that the judge made a mistake in her verdict on the intimidation charges, and also in how she treated aggravating and mitigating factors regarding sentencing.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, both Lich and Barber have filed appeals of their own against their house arrest sentences, arguing that the trial judge did not correctly apply the law on their mischief charges.
Barber’s lawyer, Diane Magas, said that her client “relied in good faith on police and court direction during the protest. The principles of fairness and justice require that citizens not be punished for following the advice of authorities. We look forward to presenting our arguments before the Court.”
On October 7, Ontario Court Justice Heather Perkins-McVey sentenced Lich and Chris Barber to 18 months’ house arrest after being convicted earlier in the year of “mischief.”
Lich was given 18 months less time already spent in custody, amounting to 15 1/2 months.
Lich and Barber were declared guilty of mischief for their roles as leaders of the protest against COVID mandates in April 2022, and as social media influencers. The conviction came after a nearly two-year trial despite the non-violent nature of the popular movement.
The Lich and Barber trial concluded in September 2024, more than a year after it began. It was originally scheduled to last 16 days.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, the Canadian government was hoping to put Lich in jail for no less than seven years and Barber for eight years.
LifeSiteNews recently reported that Lich detailed her restrictive house arrest conditions, revealing she is “not” able to leave her house or even pick up her grandchildren from school without permission from the state.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, Lich, reflecting on her recent house arrest verdict, said she has no “remorse” and will not “apologize” for leading a movement that demanded an end to all COVID mandates.
-
armed forces16 hours agoIt’s time for Canada to remember, the heroes of Kapyong
-
Housing2 days agoTrump advancing 50-year mortgage to help more Americans buy homes
-
International2 days agoBBC boss quits amid scandal over edited Trump footage
-
Digital ID17 hours agoCanada moves forward with digital identification for federal benefits seekers
-
Daily Caller2 days agoMcKinsey outlook for 2025 sharply adjusts prior projections, predicting fossil fuels will dominate well after 2050
-
Agriculture1 day agoBovaer Backlash Update: Danish Farmers Get Green Light to Opt Out as UK Arla Trial Abruptly Ends!
-
Opinion1 day agoThe Germans called her the ‘White Mouse’ for her elusiveness
-
Daily Caller9 hours agoUS Nuclear Bomber Fleet Shares Fence With Trailer Park Linked To Chinese Intel-Tied Fraudster



