Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

COVID-19

Police officer challenges harsh discipline in free speech case

Published

5 minute read

From the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

The Justice Centre announces that the Ontario Civilian Police Commission will hear the appeal of Constable Michael Brisco today, who is challenging his conviction and penalty for donating to the Ottawa Freedom Convoy in early 2022. This case raises questions about the Charter’s protection for freedom of expression, the right of police officers to support political causes while off duty, and the privacy rights of all Canadians.

Constable Michael Brisco of the Windsor Police Service is a highly trained and respected police officer with no prior disciplinary record. He made a $50 donation to the peaceful Freedom Convoy protest through the GiveSendGo fundraising platform on February 8, 2022 – one day after an Ontario Superior Court Judge held that people could continue to engage in “peaceful, lawful and safe protest” in Ottawa so long as honking ceased. When making his donation, Constable Brisco did not identify himself as a police officer and did not contribute to the protest in his capacity as a police officer.

Days later, the GiveSendGo donor list was hacked. The Ontario Provincial Police Service acquired the list and forwarded a set of names to the Windsor Police Service, who discovered that Constable Brisco had donated to the protest.

The Windsor Police Service then chose to charge Constable Brisco for “discreditable conduct.”

After a six-day hearing before an Ontario Provincial Police Adjudicator, Constable Brisco was found guilty of discreditable conduct by a Tribunal on March 24, 2023. Two months later, on May 18, 2023, the Tribunal ordered that Constable Brisco should forfeit pay for 80 hours of work as a penalty.

With the support of the Justice Centre, on June 14, 2023, Constable Brisco filed a Notice of Appeal with Ontario Civilian Police Commission, challenging his conviction and the imposed penalty.

Counsel for Constable Brisco argue that the prosecution against him lacks sufficient evidence. The claim that the Freedom Convoy in Ottawa was an unlawful protest rested entirely on claims made in newspaper articles by various officials, including the Prime Minister and the Premier of Ontario. No credible video, photographic, or other evidence on this point was filed against Constable Brisco. Further, counsel for Constable Brisco argue that the evidence against him – a hacked list that ought to have remained private and confidential – was obtained illegally. Counting the donor list as evidence against Constable Brisco amounts to an abuse of process, counsel argue.

Brisco’s legal counsel further argue that his conviction and penalty rested on a claim that Mr. Brisco’s donation was a demonstration of support for the Ambassador Bridge blockade in Windsor, Ontario; Mr. Brisco argues that there is no evidence of a link between the Ottawa protest and the Windsor blockade, and he denied any support for the blockade during his hearing.

Finally, Constable Brisco argues that the Tribunal’s decisions to convict and discipline him fail to acknowledge or proportionately balance their impact on his Charter-protected right to freedom of expression. While a police officer’s right to free expression is limited during the performance of their duties as officers, Constable Brisco did not donate to the Freedom Convoy in his capacity as a police officer. He also expected the donation to be confidential, and he did not seek to advertise his giving. The expression of off-duty police officers is protected by the Charter to the same degree as the expression of any other citizen.

Darren Leung, one of the lawyers for Constable Brisco, stated, “Freedom of expression is a right that is guaranteed to all Canadians. Police officers are also entitled to express their political beliefs, so long as they do it without identifying themselves as police. Furthermore, it is an injustice that Constable Brisco was investigated on the basis of illegally obtained information. Instead of investigating who was responsible for the hack, the Windsor Police Service have dedicated their resources in prosecuting Constable Brisco.”

“Every Canadian, including police and also including doctors, nurses, teachers and other regulated professionals, has a right to donate to the cause of her or his choice, and to do so privately and confidentially. No Canadian should face disciplinary proceedings at the hands of her or his professional association for expressing support for a cause or movement,” stated John Carpay, President of the Justice Centre.

COVID-19

Study finds Pfizer COVID vaccine poses 37% greater mortality risk than Moderna

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

A study of 1.47 million Florida adults by MIT’s Retsef Levi and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo finds significantly higher all-cause mortality after Pfizer vaccination compared to Moderna

A new study of 1.47 million Florida adults by MIT’s Retsef Levi and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo finds significantly higher all-cause, cardiovascular, and COVID-19 mortality after Pfizer vaccination.

The study titled “Twelve-Month All-Cause Mortality after Initial COVID-19 Vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech or mRNA-1273 among Adults Living in Florida” was just uploaded to the MedRxiv preprint server. This study was headed by MIT Professor Retsef Levi, with Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo serving as senior author:

Study Overview

  • Population: 1,470,100 noninstitutionalized Florida adults (735,050 Pfizer recipients and 735,050 Moderna recipients).
  • Intervention: Two doses of either:
    • BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech)
    • mRNA-1273 (Moderna)
  • Follow-up Duration: 12 months after second dose.
  • Comparison: Head-to-head between Pfizer vs. Moderna recipients.
  • Main Outcomes:
    • All-cause mortality
    • Cardiovascular mortality
    • COVID-19 mortality
    • Non-COVID-19 mortality

All-cause mortality

Pfizer recipients had a significantly higher 12-month all-cause death rate than Moderna recipients — about 37% higher risk.

  • Pfizer Risk: 847.2 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Moderna Risk: 617.9 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Risk Difference:
    ➔ +229.2 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess)
  • Risk Ratio (RR):
    ➔ 1.37 (i.e., 37% higher mortality risk with Pfizer)
  • Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
    ➔ 1.384 (95% CI: 1.331–1.439)

Cardiovascular mortality

Pfizer recipients had a 53% higher risk of dying from cardiovascular causes compared to Moderna recipients.

  • Pfizer Risk: 248.7 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Moderna Risk: 162.4 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Risk Difference:
    ➔ +86.3 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess)
  • Risk Ratio (RR):
    ➔ 1.53 (i.e., 53% higher cardiovascular mortality risk)
  • Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
    ➔ 1.540 (95% CI: 1.431–1.657)

COVID-19 mortality

Pfizer recipients had nearly double the risk of COVID-19 death compared to Moderna recipients.

  • Pfizer Risk: 55.5 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Moderna Risk: 29.5 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Risk Difference:
    ➔ +26.0 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess)
  • Risk Ratio (RR):
    ➔ 1.88 (i.e., 88% higher COVID-19 mortality risk)
  • Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
    ➔ 1.882 (95% CI: 1.596–2.220)

Non-COVID-19 mortality

Pfizer recipients faced a 35% higher risk of dying from non-COVID causes compared to Moderna recipients.

  • Pfizer Risk: 791.6 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Moderna Risk: 588.4 deaths per 100,000 people
  • Risk Difference:
    ➔ +203.3 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess)
  • Risk Ratio (RR):
    ➔ 1.35 (i.e., 35% higher non-COVID mortality risk)
  • Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
    ➔ 1.356 (95% CI: 1.303–1.412)

Biological explanations

The findings of this study are surprising, given that Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine contains approximately three times more mRNA (100 µg) than Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine (30 µg). This suggests that the higher mortality observed among Pfizer recipients could potentially be related to higher levels of DNA contamination — an issue that has been consistently reported worldwide:

The paper hypothesizes differences between Pfizer and Moderna may be due to:

  • Different lipid nanoparticle compositions
  • Differences in manufacturing, biodistribution, or storage conditions

Final conclusion

Florida adults who received Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine had higher 12-month risks of all-cause, cardiovascular, COVID-19, and non-COVID-19 mortality compared to Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine recipients.

Unfortunately, without an unvaccinated group, the study cannot determine the absolute increase in mortality risk attributable to mRNA vaccination itself. However, based on the mountain of existing evidence, it is likely that an unvaccinated cohort would have experienced much lower mortality risks. It’s also important to remember that Moderna mRNA injections are still dangerous.

As the authors conclude:

These findings are suggestive of differential non-specific effects of the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines, and potential concerning adverse effects on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. They underscore the need to evaluate vaccines using clinical endpoints that extend beyond their targeted diseases.

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation

www.mcculloughfnd.org

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

Reprinted with permission from Focal Points.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Canada’s health department warns COVID vaccine injury payouts to exceed $75 million budget

Published on

Fr0m LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

A Department of Health memo warns that Canada’s Vaccine Injury Support Program will exceed its $75 million budget due to high demand, with $16 million already paid out.

COVID vaccine injury payments are expected to go over budget, according to a Canadian Department of Health memo.

According to information published April 28 by Blacklock’s Reporter, the Department of Health will exceed their projected payouts for COVID vaccine injuries, despite already spending $16 million on compensating those harmed by the once-mandated experimental shots.

“A total $75 million in funding has been earmarked for the first five years of the program and $9 million on an ongoing basis,” the December memo read. “However the overall cost of the program is dependent on the volume of claims and compensation awarded over time, and that the demand remains at very high levels.”

“The purpose of this funding is to ensure people in Canada who experience a serious and permanent injury as a result of receiving a Health Canada authorized vaccine administered in Canada on or after December 8, 2020 have access to a fair and timely financial support mechanism,” it continued.

Canada’s Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP) was launched in December 2020 after the Canadian government gave vaccine makers a shield from liability regarding COVID-19 jab-related injuries.

While Parliament originally budgeted $75 million, thousands of Canadians have filed claims after received the so-called “safe and effective” COVID shots. Of the 3,060 claims received to date, only 219 had been approved so far, with payouts totaling over $16 million.

Since the start of the COVID crisis, official data shows that the virus has been listed as the cause of death for less than 20 kids in Canada under age 15. This is out of six million children in the age group.

The COVID jabs approved in Canada have also been associated with severe side effects such as blood clots, rashes, miscarriages, and even heart attacks in young, healthy men.

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.

Interestingly, while the Department of Health has spent $16 million on injury payouts, the Liberal government spent $54 million COVID propaganda promoting the vaccine to young Canadians.

The Public Health Agency of Canada especially targeted young Canadians ages 18-24 because they “may play down the seriousness of the situation.”

The campaign took place despite the fact that the Liberal government knew about COVID vaccine injuries, according to a secret memo.

Continue Reading

Trending

X