Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

COVID-19

Freedom Convoy leaders’ lawyers argue there are five major ‘gaps’ in Crown’s case

Published

7 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

These gaps include ‘the Crown treating the events as a single protest,’ a ‘failure to address the presumption of innocence,’ and an ‘oversimplification of evidence,’ among other things, the Democracy Fund noted

On day 32 of the trial against Freedom Convoy leaders Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, the defense counsel for the leaders exposed gaps in the Crown’s main argument that the protests were unlawful even though there was no violence during the demonstrations against COVID mandates that took place in early 2022.  

Per a day 32 trial update from the Democracy Fund (TDF), which is crowdfunding Lich’s legal costs, Crown lawyers in court last Friday tried to argue that certain text message exchanges from Barber to Pat King, a protestor not related to the main Freedom Convoy, “pointed to a common unlawful purpose” between them.

Counsel for Lich, Eric Granger, identified five gaps in the Crown’s arguments.  

“These gaps included the Crown treating the events as a single protest, a failure to address the presumption of innocence, an oversimplification of evidence, misattributing the common design, and erroneously assuming collaboration between Lich and Barber for an unlawful purpose,” stated TDF. 

Granger also made an argument against the Crown’s assertion “that the absence of violence or peaceful nature of the protest didn’t make it lawful, emphasizing that the onus was on the Crown to prove the protest’s unlawfulness.” 

When it comes to charges against Lich for blocking streets and roadways, TDF noted that Granger “maintained that these actions could be criminal only if done wrongfully or without police authorization.” 

The reality is that Lich and Barber worked with police on many occasions so that the protests were within the law.  

Thus far, counsel for the Freedom Convoy leaders have been detailing to the court how text message exchanges from one of the leaders showed he was trying to ensure protesters were as respectful as possible and that he wanted to work with police. 

The Crown in court has been holding steadfast to the notion in trying to prove that Lich and Barber had somehow influenced the protesters’ actions through their words as part of a co-conspiracy. This claim has been rejected by the defense as weak. 

TDF has said that a Carter application is very “complicated” and requires that the Crown prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that there was a “conspiracy or plan in place and that Lich was a party to it based on direct evidence,” and as such, the defense is asking the judge to dismiss the application.

Crown hints it might want to change its ‘position’  

On Friday in court the Crown hinted that it might be looking to change its position ahead of its Carter application.  

Defense counsel for Barber, Diane Magas, as noted by TDF, “stood and informed the court of an email received from the Crown the previous night after 10:54 pm.” 

“The email hinted at a potential change in the Crown’s position ahead of the Carter application, pending its progression. Magas emphasized the importance for the defense to be informed about the case to meet concerning the Carter application,” noted TDF. 

An agreement was reached between the Crown lawyers and Judge Heather Perkins-McVey. 

Magas, when she spoke before the court on Friday, also made a point to highlight her “disagreement with the Crown’s stance on the absence of violence as only an aggravating factor.” 

“She clarified that an assembly becomes unlawful only if the peace is disturbed tumultuously,” noted TDF. 

As for Granger, he emphasized that the Crown “failed to demonstrate a common unlawful purpose.”  

On Day 31 of the trial government lawyers attempted to paint the two as heading a kind of “occupation” in Ottawa, an assertion the leaders’ lawyers swiftly rejected. 

During Day 29, Lich’s legal counsel argued that her use of the rallying cry “hold the line” during the 2022 protests did not imply she was calling for people to engage in illegal activity. 

In court last week, however, Perkins-McVey reminded the Crown that not everyone involved in the Freedom Convoy was working together. The Crown agreed this was the case. 

Lich and Barber are facing multiple charges from the 2022 protests, including mischief, counseling mischief, counseling intimidation and obstructing police for taking part in and organizing the anti-mandate Freedom Convoy. As reported by LifeSiteNews at the time, despite the non-violent nature of the protest and the charges, Lich was jailed for weeks before she was granted bail. 

In early 2022, the Freedom Convoy saw thousands of Canadians from coast to coast come to Ottawa to demand an end to COVID mandates in all forms. Despite the peaceful nature of the protest, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government enacted the Emergencies Act on February 14. 

During the clear-out of protesters after the EA was put in place, one protester, an elderly lady, was trampled by a police horse, and one conservative female reporter was beaten by police and shot with a tear gas canister. 

Lich and Barber’s trial has thus far taken more time than originally planned. LifeSiteNews has been covering the trial extensively. 

COVID-19

Most Canadian nurses were hesitant to take COVID jab: gov’t data

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Researchers found that over 50 percent of nurses in Canada and nearly a third of doctors were hesitant to take the experimental COVID vaccine, but did so anyway to keep their jobs amid workplace mandates.

A recently unveiled survey has found that a significant number of Canadian healthcare workers, including most nurses, were hesitant to take the experimental COVID shots, and only did so because it was mandated across the sector.   

According to a survey conducted by the Public Health Agency of Canada, results of which were obtained February 19 by Blacklock’s Reporter, 59 percent of healthcare workers were hesitant to take the experimental COVID vaccine, but many chose to put aside their concerns as the shot was mandatory to keep their jobs.  

“The prospect of losing their employment played a role in their decision to get vaccinated or not,” the report, titled National Cross-Sectional Survey Of Health Workers Perceptions Of Covid-19 Vaccine Effectiveness, found.  

“They expressed significant hesitation towards COVID-19 vaccines due to the speed of vaccine development and their perception of the potential for side effects,” it continued.  

The research found that 31 percent of doctors and 54 percent of nurses admitted “some level of hesitancy” to take the shot. The report found that “concerns about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines were among the largest factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy.” 

LifeSiteNews has published comprehensive research on the dangers of receiving the experimental vaccine, including heart damage and blood clots.    

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

However, despite their concerns, the report found that 89 percent of healthcare workers took the shot, mostly due to fears of losing their job.  

“Vaccine mandates were one of the most commonly reported reasons for getting vaccinated among respondents with a high proportion of nurses indicating it was the sole reason for vaccination,” the report said. 

Another revealed that vaccines were “developed in a matter of a couple of months and handed out like candy.”  

“I have a family and a mortgage it was like, what would I be able to do to make the same amount of money?” a third questioned.  

According to the report, 8 percent of workers refused the shot entirely, 87 percent of whom said they were concerned about the long-term effects of the vaccine, while 72 percent said they rejected that the vaccines were being mandated.  

64 percent of those who remained unvaccinated despite mandates said they lacked “confidence in Canada’s regulatory system,” 52 percent thought “the impact of COVID infection is greatly exaggerated,” 45 percent had religious reasons, and 20 percent were planning to become pregnant. Respondents were allowed to select more than one reason for opposing vaccination.

Notably, the survey found that “the proportion of self-reported infection did not vary significantly based on vaccination status,” meaning vaccinated healthcare staff were just as likely to transmit COVID as vaccinated ones.  

Currently, vaccine mandates for healthcare workers are still in place in many jurisdictions across Canada, despite a critical staff shortage in plenty of hospitals. While some provincial governments have lifted their mandates, many hospitals still require the experimental vaccine as a condition of employment.   

However, many healthcare workers have refused the vaccine and are appealing the mandates. In November, hundreds of British Columbia healthcare workers joined together to sue Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry for ongoing COVID shot mandates preventing them from working.      

Similarly, Ontario pro-freedom Dr. Mark Trozzi plans to appeal after he was stripped of his license for critiquing the mainstream narrative around the COVID-19 so-called “pandemic” and the associated vaccines.   

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Large new study finds COVID jabs carry increased risks of heart, brain, blood diseases

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

The study of 99 million jabbed people found ‘significantly higher risks of myocarditis’ after mRNA COVID shots, as well as increased risks of pericarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and other diseases.

A new COVID-19 jab study being billed as the largest to date has found increased risks of rare heart, brain, and blood disorders, yet the organization behind the controversial shots continues to defend them.

The study, published this month in the journal Vaccine, looked for 13 neurological, blood, and heart related medical conditions in 99 million jabbed people across eight countries, according to a press release from the Global Vaccine Data Network (GVDN). It “confirmed pre-established safety signals for myocarditis, pericarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis,” as well as identifying “[o]ther potential safety signals that require further investigation.”

“[W]e observed significantly higher risks of myocarditis following the first, second and third doses of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273” (both mRNA shots), the study says, “as well as pericarditis after the first and fourth dose of mRNA-1273, and third dose of ChAdOx1 [adenovirus-vector vaccines], in the 0–42 days risk period.”

“Another potential safety signal was identified for ADEM after the first dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine, with five more observed than expected events based on 1,035,871 person-years and 10.5 million doses administered,” it continued. ADEM stands for acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, an autoimmune disease that involves serious brain and spinal cord inflammation. “[H]owever, the number of cases of this rare event were small and the confidence interval wide, so results should be interpreted with caution and confirmed in future studies.”

The study also found a 2.5 times higher risk of the immune disorder Guillain-Barré syndrome associated with the AstraZeneca shot, as well as potential signs of increased risk of ​transverse myelitis, another type of spinal cord inflammation, associated with the viral-vector jabs.

It further noted that “[p]otential underreporting across countries may have led to an underestimation of the significance of potential safety signals. It is important to recognize the potential for false negatives, especially when detecting associations with lower confidence intervals below 1.5 that maintain statistical significance.”

Yet on February 12, GVDN also published a blog post doubling down on the dominant medical establishment positions that the COVID shots “reduce the incidence of infection,” despite the jabs’ failure to stop transmission, and that fears about dangers “are often based on misinterpretation of data, anecdotal evidence, or preliminary research that does not stand up to rigorous scientific scrutiny.” The author of the post, Helen Petousis-Harris, was one of 35 authors to whom the new study is credited.

The first in a series of reports by a Florida grand jury impaneled to investigate the COVID jabs recently concluded that COVID was “statistically almost harmless” to children and most adults and that it is “highly likely” that COVID hospitalization numbers were inflated, seriously undermining the presumed need for vaccines.

The federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports 37,100 deaths, 214,248 hospitalizations, 21,431 heart attacks, and 28,121 myocarditis and pericarditis cases as of January 26, among other ailments. An April 2022 study out of Israel indicates that COVID infection itself cannot fully account for the myocarditis numbers, despite common insistence to the contrary.

Jab defenders are quick to stress that reports submitted to VAERS are unconfirmed, as anyone can submit one, but U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) researchers have recognized a “high verification rate of reports of myocarditis to VAERS after mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination,” leading to the conclusion that “under-reporting is more likely” than overreporting.

2010 report submitted to the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ (HHS’s) Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) warned that VAERS caught “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events.” On the problem of underreporting, the VAERS website offers only that “more serious and unexpected medical events are probably more likely to be reported than minor ones” (emphasis added).

In 2021, Project Veritas shed light on some of the reasons for such underreporting with undercover video from inside Phoenix Indian Medical Center, a facility run under HHS’s Indian Health Service program, in which emergency room physician Dr. Maria Gonzales laments that myocarditis cases go unreported “because they want to shove it under the mat” and nurse Deanna Paris attests to seeing “a lot” of people who “got sick from the side effects” of the COVID shots but adds that “nobody” is reporting them to VAERS “because it takes over a half hour to write the d–mn thing.”

Further, VAERS is not the only data source containing red flags. Data from the Pentagon’s Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) shows that 2021 saw drastic spikes in a variety of diagnoses for serious medical issues over the previous five-year average, including hypertension (2,181%), neurological disorders (1,048%), multiple sclerosis (680%), Guillain-Barre syndrome (551%), breast cancer, (487%), female infertility (472%), pulmonary embolism (468%), migraines (452%), ovarian dysfunction (437%), testicular cancer (369%), and tachycardia (302%).

Leading COVID shot manufacturer Pfizer donated more than $8.5 million to political candidates, leadership PACs, trade associations, and party committees representing both parties last year, fueling suspicion as to why only a handful of nationally prominent GOP officeholders, such as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Wisconsin’s Sen. Ron Johnson, are opposed to the company’s shot.

Continue Reading

Trending

X