Covering Up the Covid CRIMES
A Sentencing Procedure Aimed at Convicted Coutts Protestors Points to the Worldwide Phenomenon Where the Criminal Justice System is Protecting the Top Criminals Responsible for the COVID CRIMES.
Members of the large and tightly-knit Dutch Reformed and Mennonite communities in Alberta’s Deep South squeezed into the overcrowded public gallery of the largest court room in the Lethbridge court house. The seating limit was slightly less than 100, so many observers of necessity sat outside the court room.
Most people in attendance were the relatives of the convicted men. These men, Alexander Van Herk, Marco Van Huiegenbos, and Gerhard Janzen, were convicted in a prior jury trial. They were about to be sentenced by Justice Keith Yamauchi. The convicted men have big families including many children of their own.
The three men were convicted of “mischief” at the Coutts protest which took place on the Alberta-Montana border-crossing point. The vague and open-ended crime of “mischief” is being harnessed to the fast-evolving police state in Canada. Nowadays one can be put into prison for ten years for being mischievous in ways that Canada’s Criminal Code forbids.
The Coutts 2, 3 and 4
The sentencing event of Van Herk, Van Huigenbos and Janzen, sometimes referred to as the Coutts 3, took place on January 9 and 10. The proceedings, which are not yet complete, are part of a complex of legal procedures in the Lethbridge court house. These proceedings are all based on the the criminal justice system’s responses to the Coutts protests on the Alberta-Montana border between January 29 and Feb. 15 2022.
The trial of the Coutts Three was not initiated until April of 2024, more than two years after the Coutts protest. It is anyone’s guess why the Alberta Ministry of Justice decided to bring charges after such a long delay. Some might say it had something to do with the breakdown of the procedure to convict all members of the Coutts Four of a conspiracy to kill cops.
Van Herk, Van Huigenbos and Janzen were all considered leaders of the Coutts protest. The nature and extent of their leadership roles was discussed in court. Each man was charged with one count of mischief.
The Coutts Four refers to the four men, Tony Olienick, Chris Carbert, Jerry Morin and Chris Lysak, who were all charged in the most controversial and widely covered legal procedure emanating from the Coutts protest. The Alberta Ministry of Justice with Crown Prosecutor Stephen Johnston as the tip of the spearhead, forced all four individuals into the same forum. This Prosecutor’s strategy was most likely adopted with the intent of creating the basis for a political show trial.
The four men composing the Coutts Four did not make up a recognizable group before the Coutts event. By putting them all in the same trial, however, the impression was created that they could well have been fellow-co-conspirators. All four men were denied bail in individual hearings so they were jailed and mistreated for many hundreds of days having been convicted of nothing.
All the bail hearings involved transcripts of testimony from undercover police plants at the Coutts protests. Given that the witnesses were not present to be be cross-examined, the bail hearing were biased in favour of the Crown. The Crown side in the bail hearings were all monopolized by Stephen Johnston.
This pattern of the Crown Prosecutor’s monopolization of the process would come to colour virtually every aspect of the multiple legal procedures flowing from the Coutts protest. Johnson’s relationship to the RCMP was frequently described throughout the proceedings as that of a lawyer to his clients. The Crown Prosector should not have been representing the RCMP as its lawyer in the various court proceedings.
The Coutts Four men were subjected to a varied and often intensive series of so-called Pre-Trial processes. The so-called Pre-trial processes seemed to subject the accused to every attribute of a full-fledged trial. Each of the accused was expected to pay for their own lawyers, amounting in some cases to hundreds of thousands of dollars for Pre-Trial add-ons.
Perhaps the denial of bail was to make all four men uniformly available at a moments notice for Pre-Trial duty. Were the Pre-Trial events designed as dress rehearsals to work out the kinks for the political show trial that kept on being delayed and delayed?
The Coutts Two after Feb. 6 of 2024 became Tony Olienick and Chris Carbert. They were left by Chris Lysak and Jerry Morin who pleaded guilty to lesser charges as a prelude to being released from prison. The Ministry of Justice made no attempt to explain to the public how the supposed conspiracy to kill cops, an allegation directed at four individuals, suddenly didn’t involve Lysak and Morin but continued to involve Olienick and Carbert.
I think it quite likely that the charges brought against the Coutts Three, Van Herk, Van Huigenbos and Janzen, were to make up for the implosion of the Coutts Four. It was an attempt to repair the murkiness in the process accompanying the transformation of the Coutts Four into the Coutts Two with the obvious damage that was done to the central premise of the Conspiracy to Murder Cops scenario.
By Feb. of 2024 the trial-by-media developed by the Canadian state broadcaster, the CBC, along with other media venues including the New York Times, was well entrenched in the public’s imagination. The addition of a Coutts Three was calculated to draw attention away from the transformation of the Coutts Four to the Coutts Two.
Bioweapons Disguised as a Cure for COVID-19
The protest at Coutts was part of the nation-wide Truckers Freedom Convoy demonstration whose core action was the Truckers’ parking protest in Ottawa. This parking protest, preceded by the heroic Truck Caravan across the Prairies and the Precambrian Shield during the height of a frosty Canadian winter, infused millions of discouraged people with a measure of optimism and hope.
The seizure of the initiative by conscientious and well-organized representatives of the Canadian working class aroused considerable resistance against the perpetrators of the Covid Crimes being perpetrated throughout the world. The resistance was directed at pushing back against the massive transnational drive to universalize the gene-modifying injections. We can now see these injections for what they were, namely bioweapons disguised as a cure for COVID-19.
Already by early 2022 when the Freedom Convoy jumped into prominence, there was widespread understanding that there was something terribly wrong with the COVID-19 vaccines. The COVID jabs were not actual vaccines. The concoctions were developed within the US Department of Defence. The military bioweapons were jabbed into billions of arms worldwide under the pretext that they were created to vanquish a viral infection.
The bioweapons have many purposes. One of them is to introduce the genetic re-engineering of humans in order to realize a number of eugenic objectives including depopulation.
https://www.sott.net/article/457483-mRNA-Vaccines-Eugenics-the-Push-for-Transhumanism
Many outcomes continue to arise from the worldwide project of injecting billions of bioweapons into more than half of the global population. Prominent among the results of this unprecedented experiment imposed on living human subjects, is the many tens of millions of deaths and injuries resulting from all the jabbing.
The surge in all-cause mortality began in late 2021, just as the effects of the jab grew into a tsunami of decimated lives including the sudden demise of many young and healthy people people with good enough jobs to have group life insurance policies. It was reports from the life insurance companies and from all-cause death statistics gathered by governments, that helped created the growing body of irrefutable evidence that the needle jabs were lethal and/or injurious to a significant portion of injection recipients.
The full scale of this human-generated catastrophe continues to come to light. We are in the midst of crimes against humanity whose full extent is not yet known. No end of the disaster is presently in sight. The main imperative right now is to broaden the scale of the concerted resistance of citizens who refuse to comply with the predations still coming our way.
As emphasized, for instance, by Edward Dowd in his actuarial research, the economic and logistical stability of many millions of families has been dramatically undermined because of the need to provide home care for disabled injection recipients.
Here is a recent assessment by a former Vice-President of Pfizer Corporation. In the video Dr. Mike Yeadon outlines his assessment of the nature of Operation COVID, a sequence of manufactured events enabling a huge power grab that continues to unfold in our midst.
https://rumble.com/v5t2qbh-silver-bullet-by-dr-mike-yeadon-and-tim-west-2024.11.25.html
Dr. Yeadon’s interpretation, of course, does not not conform with the dominant narrative giving censored accounts of the global response to the supposedly sudden appearance of a supposedly new coronavirus. In spite of the persistence of the Covidian misrepresentations, however, there is a broad and growing recognition among the public that government and the media lied about most facets of the COVIDIAN saga.
While there are some breaks in the solidarity of those misrepresenting the Covid saga, the agents of power remain fairly consistent in their speciousness.
For some, it is hard to come to terms with the gravity of the lies and just how far they extend. The aim was and is to kill and enfeeble a portion of injected people as well as to genetically alter all of those who received the clot shots.
To be clear, these outcomes continues to be purposefully, not inadvertently, pushed. It is true that many professional people have been blackmailed or bribed to advance the Covidian saga which obviously does involve some incompetence at lower levels of the operation. At the highest level, however, the homicidal objectives were strongly embraced and the still-unfolding plans for more murder and mayhem continue to be promoted.
The public continues to be pushed into acting against our own health and against whatever independence we have managed to retain. We are being nudged towards early deaths, disabling injuries, psychological confusion, infertility, impoverishment, transhumanism and bio-digital enslavement with the help of the scare tactics that were introduced and tested in Operation COVID.
Many of the members of the Freedom Convoy, including at Coutts, were already warning against that dangers of accepting to be jabbed with the experimental clot shots. It turns out that we were right as I can prove by referring to my many dozens of essays on the subject published well before the Coutts protest.
Here is one essay I wrote in September of 2021 indicating that many medical professionals were already aware the clot shots would do much damage to human health.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/deregulation-injections-manufactured-covid-crisis/5754648
https://www.globalresearch.ca/author/anthony-j-hall
The almost complete failure of the criminal justice system worldwide to address the plague of crimes against humanity justified in the name of fighting COVID-19 is widely noted and increasingly well documented. The result is that the credibility of the legal establishment in many jurisdictions, including Alberta, is not in tact. As hard as some of the culprits try, the scale and gravity of this sad state of affairs cannot continue to be swept under the carpet forever.
Those of us who have been alert to the onslaughts pointed our way share a deep sense that we have been betrayed and abandoned. We well understand that our governments and many of our key institutions were and are committing treason.
Protecting the Guilty by Creating the Fantasy of a Terrorist Uprising
One conspicuous example of the zeal to maintain the coverup of Officialdom’s Covidian crime spree is currently being exposed in the dubious circumstances surrounding the continuing imprisonment in Germany of the legendary German-American jurist, Reiner Fuellmich.
Fuellmich emerged in the summer of 2020 as the primary point person in a monumental investigation into Officialdom’s Covid crimes. Fuellmich and his colleagues conducted many hundreds of interviews widely broadcasted on social media. He explored the interpretations of many experts in their fields. Collectively they identified a well-orchestrated and unprecedented crime directed against all of humanity.
The dubious apprehension and jailing of Fuellmich in Germany for a spurious charge supposedly unrelated to his investigations, has obviously blocked the jurist from following through on his commitment. That commitment is to make the case that there is wide culpability for the Covidian crimes against humanity.
In the video below, Fuellmich speaks in September of 2021, again well before the Coutts protest in 2022. He explains what he sees as the thoroughgoing corruption of the judiciary in Germany with one type of law for the rich and powerful people involved in large corporate complexes and another type of law for average people.
Fuellmich explains in considerable detail the depth of the fraud involving the original means of identifying COVID cases and how this fabrication created the necessary fiction to float the whole scam of the Covidian apparatus. One needed so-called “COVID cases” to justify the WHO-declared pandemic. These cases were not real but rather the fake results from a the totally-flawed PCR test.
Fuellmich makes it very clear the manufactured COVID crisis was not business as usual but rather that it represented a many-faceted crime spree by an elaborate international and supranational consortium including a large chunk of German officialdom. The theatrics were all about imposing controls and compliance on the people of Germany and many other countries.
Fuellmich made it clear that the same abuses he tracked in Germany were replicated in many countries. Certainly the responses of Canadian officialdom to the Covidian saga were no better than in Germany. It fact they may well have been be worse in Canada.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/reiner-fuellmich-persecution-prison%E2%80%A8/5870070
https://odysee.com/@GrandJury:f/Grand-Jury-1-EN:0
I have seen at least five different judges in the Lethbridge court house preside over aspects of the myriad procedures arising from the Coutts protests. All these procedures and others I have not personally witnessed have been handled by Stephen Johnston representing the Alberta Ministry of Justice.
This member of the Special Prosecutor’s unit of the Alberta Ministry of Justice seems to exude the aura of the kind of official that emerged as a covert state-sanctioned combatant engaged in waging the so-called War on Terror after 9/11.
Stephen Johnston seems to wield an unusual configuration of powers that shows up in how he treats all those that come before him as possible terrorists who must not be afforded the presumption of innocence until guilt is proved. In one of the social media broadcasts presented by Johnston in the September 9 proceedings on the Coutts Three trial, Marco Van Huigenbos made an observation along these lines.
To understand the underlying importance of the subject of terrorism when it comes to the totality of the various legal proceedings emerging from the Coutts protests, one has to bear in mind the relationship of the invocation of the Emergency Act to many of the Coutts arrests.
The laying of many charges against protestors at Coutts on or around Feb. 14, Valentine’s day 2022, came just as the most recent iteration of Canada’s War Measures Act was set in motion in Ottawa through an announcement led by PM Justin Trudeau and his Deputy PM, Chrystia Freeland.
In his examination of Chyrstia Freeland on behalf of the “the Convoy Organizers,” lawyer Brendan Miller questioned Chyristia Freeland on November 24, 2022 on her note made days before her invocation of the Emergency Act.
In her own notebook Freeland underlined for herself she that “you need to designate them [the Freedom Convoy] as terrorists.” With Freeland’s own notes up on the presentation screen controlled by Miller, the lawyer replied,“its not your job, but you wanted to designate them as terrorists, right?”
Commissioner Paul S. Rouleau, Public Hearings, The Public Order Emergency Commission, Vol. 30, Held at Library and Archives Canada, Bambrick Room, 24 November 2022
The full comment in Freeland’s handwriting comment above indicates
“you need to designate the group [the Freedom Convoy] as a terrorist group and seize their assets and impair them.”
Freeland’s short note described precisely what was about to transpire based in the implicit treatment of the Truckers to this very day as terrorists.
Marco Van Huigenbos retained Brendan Miller as his lawyer for the proceedings in the Lethbridge court house on January 9 and 10 the same Brendon Miller.
Freeland and Trudeau went forward with the Deputy Prime Minister’s script by declaring the Emergency Act that suspended the normal workings of the Canada’s constitution.
The RCMP in Coutts, the governments of Canada and Alberta, and the Trudeau-friendly media all complied by going along with with the narrative that the Trucker’s Freedom Convoy was somehow infiltrated with terrorists who threatened to overthrow the Canadian government. The decision was clearly made at some high level to direct a media spotlight at Coutts and depict it on Valentine’s Day as the Truckers’ terrorist hot spot.
The assignment to depict the Coutts protest as Terrorist Central of the Truckers was, it seems, happily taken up by Stephen Johnston. I assume it was Johnston who came up with the idea of creating a trial to be built around the premise that the Coutts protest provided the platform for a group of terrorists whose main ambition was to kill RCMP officers and to overthrow the government. An RCMP official at Coutts was already filmed talking about such a charge on Feb. 14.
This allegation quickly became the dominant interpretation of the Legacy media as illustrated by the report of Global News on the day following the invocation of the Emergency Act.
Anti-hate experts are raising concerns after a picture of weapons, ammunition and body armour seized at the border protest at Coutts, Alta. showed patches belonging to a neo-nazi group in Canada.
The Canadian Anti-Hate Network tweeted on Monday that gear seized by police at Coutts includes a plate carrier with Diagolon patches. According to the network, Diagolon is an accelerationist movement that believes a revolution is inevitable and necessary to collapse the current government system. It wants to build its ideal nation-state, which runs diagonally from Alaska through the western provinces down to Florida.
It is also a neo-fascist militia with a sizeable support base across the country, said the network.
Global New’s decision to designate the Canadian Anti-Hate Network as the primary interpreter of the main meaning of the Coutts protest, is indicative of the depths of dishonest reporting that came to dominate the Legacy media in Canada during the manufactured COVID crisis. It is still unclear where the police photograph of the weaponry, as well as the weaponry itself, came from. To make two small patches on a carrying case showing a diagonal line on a black background the basis of such an wild and extravagant interpretation is journalistic malfeasance at its worst.
The Canadian Anti-Hate Network is funded in part by the Canadian government. CAHN is essentially a propaganda agency that represents many officials who were deeply embarrassed and discredited by the justified criticism they received by the Trucker’s Freedom Convoy and their supporters. The Diagolon image was created by Jeremy MacKenzie who in the video below answers his critics in the CAHN circle of collaborators, including Trudeau and the RCMP, as follows:
The planting in the trial-by-media of the concocted narrative of terrorism at Coutts seemed at the time to give legitimacy the passage of Emergency Act. A year later a judge in the Federal Court of Canada found the Emergency Act to have been unconstitutional. This ruling that would have generated some serious repercussions in the proceedings of the Coutts trials if they had been serious and substantial in nature.
What a cacophony of errors! One would have to look long and hard for a criminal procedure as bizarre as this over-the-top response to a totally justified protest against governments engaged in forcing killer jabs on their own citizens.
Instead of dealing with the crimes resulting in many deaths and injuries imposed on the citizenry, Crown officials and their media collaborators worked hard to transform the image of the protesters. The disinformation agents misrepresented a valid protest movement as a fascist scheme to kill police as a prelude to overturning the government.
The jury in the Coutts Two show trial did not sanction Johnston’s interpretation but found the accused, Olienick and Carbert, to be NOT guilty of the conspiracy to commit murder charge. The jury’s decision, however, did not stop the presiding Judge, David Labrenz, treating the two men as terrorists by sentencing them each to six-and-half year jail sentences.
By deciding to fly in the face of the results of the jury’s innocent verdict, Judge Labrenz’s severe sentencing essentially salvaged the original goal of associating the protestors with terrorism.
After the delivery of the NOT guilty charge on the main allegation, Johnston immediately threatened to ask for a re-trial based on a host of accusations against Judge Labrenz’s handling of several aspects of the trial. This threat can be pictured as blackmail to pressure Judge Labrenz to come up with severe punishments for the secondary allegations against Olienick and Carbert?
There are many features of the conspiracy-to-commit-murder trial, including the so-called sealed envelop matter associated with allegations that Stephen Johnston had committed “crime fraud” in acting as the RCMP’s lawyer.
See
Trudeau's and Freeland's Fear and Loathing of Canada's Continuing Freedom Convoy
The Coutts fiasco is emblematic of the political capture of Canada’s now-mostly-dysfunctional criminal justice system. The latest “pre-trial” phase of this major scandal-in-the-making, unfolded in late July in a Lethbridge Alberta courthouse. There a process is sporadically underway based on the government’s accusation that four men at the Coutts protes…
Back to Text
The Trust of the People Must Be Earned, Not Commanded By Political Appointees
Let us return to the court proceedings of the Coutts Three who were not charged until the February 2024 breakup of the Coutts Four and all the government-sanctioned conspiracy theories spun around them. Suddenly the Coutts Four without any credible explanation from the Crown Prosecutor, became the Coutts Two.
Of all the judges I’ve seen interacting with the Crown Prosecutor Stephen Johnston, Mr. Justice Keith Yamauchi seemed to me most able to stand up to the zealous demands made by the Alberta Ministry of Justice’s supposed all-purpose expert on every aspect of the Coutts protest.
Some of the features of Judge Famouchi’s exchange directed largely, I believe, at the family members of the convicted men, drew my attention. As noted, these family members were in the majority White Christians whose livelihoods, many of them substantial, came largely from farming and related agricultural businesses.
Part of the complex of crimes associated with the Covid misrepresentations is the worldwide attack on farmers and food production. This attack must be affecting the attitudes and interests of the Dutch Reformed community in Southern Alberta.
I believe that many in the gallery in the Lethbridge court house must had taken part in the Coutts protests. I expect that most of the people in the gallery must have remained proud of their convicted relatives for boldly and eloquently standing up against the forces of corruption. The government’s response to COVID embodied a classic display of government overreach obvious to most conservatives engaged in the Coutts Three process.
Roxanne Halverston, who has produced a steady stream of commentaries on trails of the Coutts 2, 3 and 4, spoke for me with some of her comments concerning the strange position that Judge Yamauchi created for himself with his sentencing ruling. She wrote
“I found a fair bit of irony in the words the presiding Judge Keith Yamauchi used in passing sentences on Van Huigenbos and Janzen telling them how the illegal blockade at the border had “affected the lives of many Canadians”. It didn’t seem to occur to him that the men had joined the protest because they were extremely concerned about how the unending COVID restrictions – the extended lock downs, the business closures, the stay at home orders, the church and school closures and the rigid enforcement of mask and vaccine mandates were negatively affecting the lives of Albertans and all Canadians, for that matter.”
“People had lost their jobs and businesses, children were feeling isolated due to school closures, many people were suffering from depression and some had even contemplated or actually committed suicides – meanwhile ministers had been jailed for holding church services and people were being arrested for breaching even minor COVID dictates. The even greater irony is that we have since learned that all these actions did little, if anything to control the spread of a virus……”
Judge Yamauchi went on to tell those following his ruling,
“We must make it clear that the majority of Canadians denounce their actions.” Really? Did the judge take a poll? Does he really know if the majority of Canadian were really against these men protesting COVID restrictions.”
From my perspective the final question points towards the lethal and injurious character of the injected bioweapons still presented dishonestly as if the jabs are genuine “vaccines” meant to protect against an expanding plague of COVID-19. As already noted, the understanding that the COVID injections were and are very hazardous and without redeeming features, is well established for those who are paying attention.
I recall this interpretation was avidly discussed in some of the public education meetings organized by medical people who were invited to present at Truckers’ Freedom Convoy events in early 2022.
I also question whether the majority of Canadians really denounced the resistance to the irrational policies of governments of Canada and of Alberta during the premiership of Jason Kenney. Of course the state of public opinion would be influenced by the biased coverage in the Legacy media and especially the Crown broadcaster, the CBC. The trial-by-media of the Coutts protesters presented notoriously slanted accounts of the COVID saga.
I also questioned whether the frequent explanations offered by the judge and the Crown Prosecutor really did justice to the need for better understanding of what was meant by their frequent references to “the rule of law.” In my view both Crown officials tended to throw this very important phrase around without proper care and precautions and without clear definitions. The basic message was, Just Trust Us.
As I heard it, these two Crown officials regurgitated again and again the idea that, in their professional actions, they consistently embody in every situation the rule of law. I thought of similar claims by the notorious Dr. Anthony Fauci. At one point Dr. Fauci famously claimed that any criticism of him was the equivalent to criticizing science. It seemed to me Judge and the Crown Prosecutor made a similar self-centred generalization in their references to the rule of law.
Both Judge Yamauchi and Mr. Johnston spoke as if civil disobedience should never be permissible or implemented in any situation, even where government may be engaged in deeply injurious or even criminal actions of which we have seen lots especially since 2020.
If civil disobedience was transformed into a completely forbidden action, would we still have, for instance, race-based slavery, no votes for women, and no right of collective bargaining for workers? Would children still be employed in dangerous industrial factories? Should the commentaries on the freedom campaigns of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr. and Nelson Mandela be removed from school texts because they purposely broke the law to advance political objectives?
Frankly I can look at the trials of the Coutts 2, 3 and 4 and imagine that in some instances those that intermittently blocked Highway 4 were defending the rule of law against the violations of government, media, the police and the courts.
Maybe they were not “taking the highway hostage”as Stephen Johnston asserted. Maybe they were trying to free Canadian citizens whose health, economic viability, and wellbeing were being taken hostage by our own governments.
I could cite a possible example in the account offered up on September 9 in a video introduced into the proceedings by Mr. Johnston. The Crown Prosecutor introduced three video clips and several written posts in an effort to indicate why Marco Van Huigenbos deserved a longer jail sentence than the others in the Coutts Three.
In one of the videos presented to the court as evidence to justify a harsher sentence than Alex Van Herk and Gerhard Janzen, Mr. Van Huigebos referred to a tweet he made on X. Marco violated the court rules by sending out his tweet as the Crown Prosecutor was introducing Dr. Barbara Perry. Dr. Perry was being presented to the court in a bid to get her recognized as a expert witness who would testify in the Coutts Two show trial.
Dr. Perry is a Canadian academic at the Ontario Tech University which was created in 2002 in Oshawa Ontario, the auto making capital of Canada. With a Ph.D. in Sociology from Carleton University Dr. Perry has developed a field involving something called “hate speech” and “right-wing extremism” in Canada. Both terms lend themselves easily to the idea that people who engage in such extremes are something like terrorists.
Barbara Perry is “Director of Centre for Hate, Bias and Extremism and holds a UNESCO Chair in Hate Studies.” Dr. Perry advises police and many government agencies on what constitutes hate speech and what to do about it. These judgements, of course, are often very subjective and politically motivated with large consequences in terms of who gets censored and criminalized and who gets protected and coddled.
Allegations of so-called “hate speech” form a favourite means of achieving censorship of the Internet as promoted extremely zealously by, for instance, the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith. The Anti-Defamation League engages in severe Defamation and Hate Speech against those it targets for silencing and deplatforming. The same applies to those targeted by Barbara Perry in her professional capacity.
Accusations of Hate Speech form a powerful wrecking ball when it comes to attacking free speech and related principles like academic freedom. Essentially Dr. Perry has built a career for herself as a kind of academic cop giving actual police forces, governments, armed forces and such her professional advice on where free speech ends and where Hate Speech begins.
This kind of activity can be very lucrative given the large budgets some organizations have to purchase professional backing on where they should draw the line on destroying peoples lives based especially on what they say especially on the Internet.
In the following video Dr. Perry faces very friendly and gentle questions about her professional life and objectives. Much of what she says sounds on the surface to be reasonable and fairly well informed.
When it comes to those she defines as “right-wing extremists,” however, Dr. Perry engages in defamatory rhetoric that might be viewed as Hate Speech in its own right. All the groups she describes that are said to need need protection, do not include any collectivity where White people and Christians predominate. Under no circumstances in Dr. Perry’s professional realm do White Christian males ever fall prey to dangerous and hurtful discrimination. They must always be the victimizers and never the victims of racist aggressions and slurs.
I understand from what I learned from Marco that when Dr. Perry was on “the witness stand” via Zoom in Lethbridge, she was asked directly to explain her picture of “far-right extremism.” Apparently she indicated that such extremism is primarily to be found in males who are White and Christian. That is the group that everyone is invited to chastise and harm without consequence.
Marco explained in the video showed in court, that he immediately tweeted out news of Dr. Perry’s “extremist” position. For doing so Marco was banned by Judge David Labrenz from observing in the gallery the remainder of the Coutts Two show trial. Marco indicated the post went viral with significant consequences.
The long and short of it was that the academic Hate-Speech specialist was not recognized as an expert in the Coutts Two show trial. Marco has emphasized his view that the court proceedings in Lethbridge would have been greatly damaged if Dr. Perry had been paid by the Alberta Ministry of Justice to introduce her expert interpretations into the court proceedings. A precedent and a pattern would have been established that points in dangerous directions.
I believe Marco was correct in embracing his inclination to hold back the incursion into litigation of a new form of absolutist authoritarianism. While Dr. Perry faced a setback in Lethbridge, however, she was awarded in mid-December the Order of Canada by the federal government of Justin Trudeau.
Stephen Johnson’s efforts to include Dr. Perry in the Crown’s proceedings reveals again much about how the Crown Prosector seems to view as “right-wing extremists” all those who identified and joined with the Truckers’ Freedom Convoy movement. Mr. Johnston quite likely viewed through this lens all the accused as well as their friends, supporters and family who attended the Coutts 2, 3, and 4 court proceedings.
In another video clip shown by Stephen Johnston on January 9, Marco explained his opinion that the Crown Prosecutor seems to see as automatically guilty every protestor aligned against the COVID mandates and restrictions. Perhaps the Crown Prosecutor’s secret identity as a terrorist hunter has led him to this biased approach in the conduct of many aspects of his professional life.
It is pretty clear that Stephen Johnson and Barbara Perry belong to the same team as the RCMP and Justin Trudeau. The Canadian PM notoriously dismissed the Freedom Convoy as a movement dominated by a misogynist, bigoted and racist “fringe minority.” Its pretty clear that this group of provocateurs has near its core the principal parties in the Canadian Anti-Hate Network.
Originally led by the organizations founder, Bernie Farber, CAHN captured broad media coverage with the view that the Coutts protests hosted members of a neo-nazi militia. The “accelerationist” goals of the supposed militia were said to include the creation of a new polity named Diagolon to be achieved by overthrowing the governments of Canada and the United States.
The absurdity of the interpretations disseminated by CAHN and it network of collaborators including Canada’s PM, are exposed in the following:
Some of the most interesting material in the HateGate Affair pulled me to conduct my own research on Bernie Farber in the late 1980s and early 1990s. I learned much from a Report to the Solicitor-General of Canada entitled The Heritage Front Affair (9 December, 1994)
https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/lbrr/archives/jl%2086.s4%20s43%201994-eng.pdf
The 1994 report describes a working relationship involving Grant Bristow, an undercover agent employed by the Canadian Intelligence Security Service. CSIS is our country’s equivalent to the CIA. Bristow pretended to be a Nazi zealot. While playing this role Bristow took control of the leadership of the so-called Heritage Front.
Bernie Farber, then leader of the Canadian Jewish Congress, worked closely with Bristow helping to produce the theatrics manipulated in the media to plant fear and organized opposition against real or imaginary neo-Nazis. Were some members of the Heritage Front paid with CSIS money to do play acting?
In its current role the CAHN seems to be attempting a similar scenario in the quest to depict the Truckers Freedom Convoy as the basis of a terrorist neo-nazi threat to the social harmony of Canada. Stephen Johnston seems to have a role, knowingly or inadvertently, in a broader process of inventing a new terrorist threat for Canada to justify pre-planned actions on the part of police and military officials.
This kind of manoeuvring is emblematic of psychological operations against average people that permeates the conduct of the Global War on Terror. What a perverse operation!
When viewed in this light I am not persuaded “that the majority of Canadians would denounce the actions” of the Coutts protestors as processed through the criminal justice system in the Coutts 2, 3 and 4 trials.
In a parallel process of seemingly endless arbitration concerning mischief charges, Tamara Lich and Chris Barber will face some sort of ruling for taking leadership roles in the Ottawa parking protest of the Trucker’s Freedom Convoy.
It seems that the Coutts Three and their strong, mostly large and resilient Christian families fulfill Dr. Perry’s as well Stephen Johnston’s conception of “far-right extremists.” A similar judgment would probably be shared by Justin Trudeau, Chrystia Freeland, and Bernie Farber, founder of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network.
Does Judge Yamauchi share the views associated with the officials named above who probably would have categorized those who squeezed into his court room on January 9 and 10 as group of “far-right extremists”. Is that what Judge Yamauchi was implying by indicating that that those involved in the Coutts Three Trial should try to alter their opinions and behaviour in order to better conform with the standards of “the majority of Canadians”?
My sense is that many Canadians appreciate the principled stand taken by the leadership of the Coutts protests and millions of others like them. To dismiss their quest for justice with clichés like the vague and overused term, “right-wing extremism,” does an injustice to Canada.
Many throughout the world still look with high regard to the Truckers’ Freedom Convoy that rejuvenated a sense of hope and self-empowerment when the global population was becoming ensnared in a thick web of government abuses and media lies. More and more nonsensical impositions were being forced on humanity for reasons that have yet to be properly explained to the public by the responsible parties.
How much more insanity is yet to come until a sufficient number of people in the world join together to assert, NO MORE?
I think most Canadians would see their family groups gathered together at the Lethbridge court house on January 9 and 10, as significant contributors to the wealth, cultural richness, and social stability of Canada. I think Judge Yamauchi overstepped his professional responsibility by making himself the mouthpiece for his view of the beliefs of the majority of Canadians. The Judge’s assessment might be seen as a slight to some of the Dutch Reformed and Mennonite families gathered in front of his judicial pulpit.
The truth is the rule of law is in tatters in Canada and many other places. Much of the damage has been done by officials within the criminal justice systems. Too often they have opted to benefit themselves rather than serve the people whose lives and wellbeing they are supposed to protect.
Yet more damage is being done by those that increasingly dominate the resources of courts with lawfare. The abuse is contaminating the necessary apparatus of third-party adjudication even as their wealth and power of those at the top put them in positions that are essentially above the law.
In this tarnished juridical system of different rules for different kinds of people, much of the most dirty forms of criminality are transacted. Even genocide eludes the capacity of courts to enforce the law. If any of this malaise in the courts is to change for the better, the trust of the people must be earned, not commanded as an obligation owed to political appointees.
A Politicized Judiciary Betrays the Canadian People During the Manufactured Crisis
In his sentencing ruling Justice Keith Yamauchi devoted a large part of his presentation to going through a long list of cases generated by highway blockades, pipeline construction blockades, wilderness protection blockades, and Aboriginal rights blockades often affecting the movement of trains. It turns out that blockades are rare in the history of Alberta but they are very abundant in British Columbia.
Marco’s lawyer, Brendan Miller, apparently shared a long list of BC cases with Judge Yamauchi I took note of the fact that neither Marco nor his lawyer employed the term “civil disobedience” in their representations. Alternatively Alan Honner, the lawyer for Gerhard Janzen, frequently used the language of civil disobedience throughout his fairly long presentation on behalf of his client.
Honner pointed out many cases where judges were gentle in sentencing with convicted people because they saw contrition and sometimes merit in their aspirations to bring about positive change. Clearly Janzen’s lawyer made a plea to the Judge to show some compassion.
Janzen is a 45 years old father to eight children, many still at home. The lawyer made the case that, with a criminal record and jail time, it was likely that Janzen would lose his real estate license and thus lose his sole means of supporting his children.
As it happened, Judge Yamauchi did show compassion especially after Janzen read out a letter of apology to the court for being involved in the blockade. It also emerged in the sentencing process that throughout the Coutts protest, Janzen helped the RCMP sort out traffic problems and other logistical issues.
In discussing the circumstances and verdicts in dozens of cases that supposedly were comparable to the Coutts Three case, Judge Yamauchi seemed to be signalling that the Coutts blockade was not unusual in the larger scheme of things. He emphasized that in almost every instance, those involved in blockade and similar actions pictured their causes as being worthy enough to justify drastic actions.
The judge emphasized that it was not part of his role to decide on the worthiness of the issues that various self-declared social justice warriors wanted to fix. His role was to enforce the law as worded in legislation and in case law. His role was to come up with sentences harsh enough to create deterrence against further violation of the law.
In repeating this assertion from a number of perspectives, Judge Famouchi lauded the merits of Canada’s democracy as transacted through institutions healthy enough to make possible the alteration of laws through hard work and political persistence.
Stephen Johnston sometimes added his voice in making the case that the rule of law must never be breached because Canada continues to be a working democracy.
What is the state of Canadian democracy how is it being served by officials like Stephen Johnston and Judge Yamauchi? From my perspective the Truckers’ Freedom Convoy epitomized the embrace of a robust political agenda aimed at achieving necessary political reform. Any discomfort or negative economic impact created by the movement was small compared to the enormous economic and health impacts of the preconceived global lockdowns and jab campaigns that brought enormous harms without any identifiable benefits.
The government used an array of dirty tactics in the effort to discredit and criminalize the Truckers movement with its sensible suggestions to bring an end to the Covidian madness. In my view some of those dirty tricks have been integral to the framing of Coutts protestors as supposed cop killers, nazis and terrorists seeking to redraw the map of North America.
The federal government’s sabotage of Canada extended to the wrecking of the CBC, the state broadcaster that has made the demeaning depiction of the Truckers’ Freedom Convoy a mainstay of its psychological warfare pointed at what remains of its hugely diminished audience.
CBC's Assault on Canada
In her very popular Substack entitled Absurdistan, Elizabeth Nickson has explained how the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has “nearly destroyed the richest country in the world.” Nickson explains, “The public broadcaster, once loved to excess by every Canadian, is now widely hated.”
Back to Text
The Covidian Hoax was managed, in part, out of the UN’s World Health Organization and the UN’s PR spin doctors at the World Economic Forum. This globalist handoff to billionaire politicians, especially at the WEF, helped undermine any remaining independence still left to national and local governments including their judicial branches.
Many national governments have constitutions and other codified instruments meant to reassure citizens that our rights and freedoms will be protected even in times of crisis. All these national instruments, together with many UN conventions and such, guaranteed supposed universal human rights. These supposed guarantees were nullified and pushed aside at the behest of supranational entities beginning in 2020.
Imagine the planning that would have had to go into the process of negating all the constitutional protections that should have protected people of the world from the pandemic of incursions into our human rights, our civil liberties and our choices in the financial realm. These protections were said to include bodily autonomy, medical privacy, protection from being medically experimented upon, as well as a wide array of freedoms of speech, assembly, travel, religion and such.
Imagine the task of clearing aside the legal rights of people to open up space transnationally for the wide application of the Covidian incursions into so many facets of our bodies, our minds, our relationships, our finances, our education, our breathing, our travel, our recreation, our nourishment and on and on and on. Why were so many of the judges so obviously serving the amplification of government powers at the expense of citizens rights?
In Canada we had been promised that our Canadian Charter of Right and Freedoms would protect us from all kinds of incursions into our autonomy. What we learned, however, was that we apparently have protected rights only until such time that we require those protections. For the first months and years of the WHO-declared pandemic, the courts kept us wondering about where our Charter rights had gone.
Citizens were kept off balance and police were purposely kept in a permanent state of uncertainty about which body of laws they were supposed to follow. Should they enforce the constitutional law— the so-called “supreme law” in Canada— or should they follow the administrative laws empowering executive branches and their bureaucrats in the name of fabricated emergencies.
Perhaps if some positive affirmations of our Charter protections had occurred before 2022, the Truckers’ Freedom Convoy would not have been necessary. Similarly the Convoy might not have been necessary if there had been some genuine political contention in Parliament rather than conformist displays of obedience and compliance by MPs in ALL the political parties.
As Christine Anderson of the EU Parliament has observed, throughout the world there have been very few elected officials who have shown any genuine inclination to protect their constituents from the many-faceted harms of the Covidian incursions. Judge Yamauchi’s cheer-leading approach at the Lethbridge court house, where he asked those of us in attendance at the Coutts Three trial to put our faith in his version of democracy, seems chronically uninformed.
Judge Yamauchi’s depiction of Canada’s conditions avoids meaningful reference to the realities of what has been taking place, including in our highly politicized courts, since 2020.
It wasn’t until autumn of 2022 that Canada’s judges finally seemed to have settled on a course where the status of the Charter in relationship to the COVID mandates and restrictions was finally to be arbitrated. Without a definitive finding from a top-level court, it remained impossible for citizens to determine where we stood so that we could determine how to go on with the rest of our lives.
By late 2022 many issues had arisen about the capacity of employers, schools, unions, sports teams, professional associations, transportation companies and such to require people to take the jabs in order to avoid unemployment, poverty, homelessness, medical apartheid and more.
Could businesses require potential customers to have so-called vaccine passports and digital IDs to gain access to gyms, restaurants, sports events, and such? These were very big issues for the judiciary to leave unaddressed or ambiguously addressed for so long. As a result the judiciary in Canada is no longer held in high regard by many Canadians. Some go farther, viewing Canada’s judiciary with contempt.
There were many applicants wanting to put Charter issues to the test before the high courts of the country. One such applicant was former Newfoundland and Labrador Premier, Brian Peckford. Peckford had the distinction of being in the First Ministers group that had drafted the Charter and put it forward to be approved in many parliamentary settings including the Mother of All Parliaments in Great Britain.
The Charter issue that Peckford chose to highlight was one of mobility rights. This legal strategy came about because Trudeau had prohibited unvaccinated people from getting on planes and trains where they might infect vaccinated people. What use were the so-called vaccines if they didn’t provide protection from infection? As demonstrated by the notorious clip below, the bed rock stupidity of Justin Trudeau is quite evident.
When the Charter issue finally went before a Trudeau appointee, The Honourable Jocelyne Gagné, Associate Chief Justice of Canada’s Federal Court, refused to make a ruling. She deemed that because the restrictions on the unvaxxed flying had been removed, it was not necessary to come up with a verdict. The Charter issue, Judge Gagné determined, had become “moot.” The legal uncertainty would be made to continue.
Judge Gagné’s determination left the status of our Charter rights in a twilight zone of malfeasant judicial neglect done in close partnership with the political branch of government. For Canadians to imagine that henceforth we are protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is naive at best. Judge Gagné’s decision that the role of the Charter is moot has had monumental implications whose effect has been to seriously degrade the integrity of the rule of law in Canada.
The merger between the political branch and the judicial branch of government that is not supposed to happen, did happen. It happened both formally and officially at the inception of the Covid saga. Attorney General David Lametti and the Chief Justice of the Supreme court of Canada, Richard Wagner, formed an “Action Committee on Court Operations in Response to COVID-19.”
This Action Committee had the effect of undermining the independence of Canada’s judiciary. If judges are not independent from the political branch of government, judges then become a high-priced genre of politician not readily distinguishable from the politicians that appoint them.
Generally speaking the judges did not do a proper job of determining “the facts” in the Covid-related cases brought before them. With few exceptions they simply assumed that the government side could be counted upon to produce “the facts” whereas the information and arguments brought forward against governments and their agents could be largely disregarded.
Here is how I explained this “Judicial Negligence” in October of 2022”
The judicial tendency in COVID-related matters to downgrade or disregard the evidence brought forward by individuals or by non-governmental organizations, is proving to have injurious and sometimes even lethal outcomes for members of the public. Too often government mistakes and even lies are translated by lazy or corrupt judges directly into legal “facts”.
Competent judicial determination of legal “facts” requires diligent and open-minded evaluation of the evidence brought forward by the litigants on all sides of the legal contentions at issue.
The dependence on politics over science seems to have taken hold of the judiciary. It is the political deeds of major power brokers that have been most responsible for causing economic and social devastation as well as the rise in injuries and deaths. The increase of deaths has been showing up in the form of huge increases in all-cause mortalities in 2021 and early 2022.
Alternatively the Canadian judges have, like the regime media, been much too quick to disregard the evidence of many learned analysts whose diagnoses, interpretations and predictions have proven to be much more accurate than the prognostications produced by bought-and-paid-for government experts.
By and large most of our judges in Canada have simply bypassed their professional duty to dig down deep into the nitty gritty of competing collections of evidence and interpretations in order to identify the genuine truths and weed out mistakes, fabrications, distortions and lies. Such open-minded yet skeptical assessment of all sides of the legal contentions in COVID-related cases is the only way to determine genuine “facts.” Anything else is judicial dependence on mere assumptions disguised as “facts” often put forward to advance the agendas of powerful interests working behind the scenes.
The unwillingness of most judges to give fair consideration to all sides of COVID contentions has not gone unnoticed. Over time the increased awareness of judicial bias is generating growing public hostility towards the courts and the politicized judges that preside over them.”
Liberal Party judges have been recruited to play important roles in the effort to smear, discredit and criminalize the Truckers’ Freedom Convoy. For instance the Liberal Party insider, Paul Rouleau, was appointed to lead the study of the legality of the invocation of the Emergency Act. As reported by the Toronto Sun, “Rouleau is a member of the Liberal party, supporter of the Liberal party, worked for the Liberal party and was appointed to the bench by a past Liberal prime minister, Paul Martin.” Rouleau also worked for the same legal firm as Pierre Trudeau, Justin’s PM father.
Similarly Julie Bourgeois, the Liberal Party Judge who was also a Liberal Party political candidate, was dropped into the court assigned to hear the case of Tamara Lich, a Freedom Convoy leader charged with “counselling mischief” in Ottawa. Judge Bourgeois denied Lich bail in Feb. of 2022, describing the jailing of the accused without any conviction as “necessary for the protection and safety of the public.”
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/tamara-lich-says-liberal-judge-should-have-recused-herself
Three years later Ms. Lich’s mischief case is still before the courts. Her treatment bears many resemblances to the Coutts 2, 3, and 4 cases still unfolding in the Lethbridge court house.
Keeping Heads in the Sand to Avoid a True Reckoning with the State of the Rule of Law During These Lawless Times
In the sentencing hearing in the Lethbridge court house, Judge Yamauchi reflected a lot on the significance of remorse in convicted law breakers as well on the creation of deterrence as an objective in the sentencing process. The Judge seemed uneasy with the fact that Marco Van Huigenbos had not shown remorse.
Nor did Marco renounce his actions in any way. Marco made it clear he knew he might be charged for his words and actions. Moreover, in the honourable traditions of civil disobedience, Marco made it clear he was prepared to bear the burden of the legal consequences of his well-considered actions.
In contrast Gerhard Janzen had shown remorse. He said he regretted his actions.
Stephen Johnston had asked that Marco be sentenced to nine months of hard jail time. Instead he was sentenced to four months in jail. Gerhard Janzen was not sent to jail. He was sentenced to 90 days to be served in the community with 100 hours of community service. Mr, Johnston had wanted to sentence him to six months of jail time.
Alex Van Herk fired his lawyer shortly before the sentencing on January 9 and 10. His sentencing hearing will take place shortly.
A very interesting part of the sentencing process was the discussion between the Judge, lawyer Brendan Miller, and Stephen Johnston on Marco’s political activities after the Coutts protest. The basic line of analysis was the Marco had somehow mended his ways by involving himself in the political procedures of the United Conservative Party.
The assumption was that involvement in a political party was admirable whereas involvement in civil disobedience was somehow the sign of a reprobate. One of Marco’s roles in the UCP was to call for a NO vote on the renewal of Danielle Smith’s mandate to lead the UCP. In promoting this cause Marco teamed up with a number individuals including Dr. William Makis.
Dr. Makis is an oncologist who has made himself an expert on the deep criminality permeating many aspects of Alberta Health Service. Many conscientious doctors have been deplatformed for failing to go along with the policies of the AHS, an agency that is still promoting the jabbing of babies with the bioweapons disguised as COVID vaccines.
Dr. Makis has pointed to much evidence on the public record indicating the AHS is deeply involved in cover up cases of pedophilia in its network of medical professionals. He points out that the AHS is basically more powerful in Alberta than the elected government of Danielle Smith.
With much research and personal experience to draw upon, Dr. Makis points to the huge budgets of the AHS and its ability to purchase the services of powerful networks of corrupt lawyers and judges. This malady runs contrary to the best interests of Albertans in ways that undermine the health of our communities.
This legal establishment so far has been able to keep the lid on the dozens of scandals that would pop up if the AHS was not so well protected by the media, Alberta’s law enforcement system, the provincial NDP, and, it seems, the upper echelons of the UCP government. I have written about these issues in realm of the UCP Party and its dissidents including Marco, Dave Parker and of course Dr. William Makis. Please see
Jail Time for Questioning Covid Crimes in Alberta?
The Humpty Dumpty Narrative - There's No Way To Put It Back Together Again
Back to Text
In the essay above, “Jail Time for Questioning COVID Crimes in Alberta,” the dark and dubious intrigues linking the Ministry of Justice with the AHS is discussed. A good primer on the character of this partnership is the horrific case brought against David and Collet Stephan who lived in the Cardston region of Southern Alberta. The case unfolded over an extended period between 2012 and 2021. Much of the case unfolded in the Lethbridge court house where the Coutts 2, 3, and 4 trials have unfolded since 2022.
The effort on the part of the protagonists, including prominently the Alberta Ministry of Justice and the RCMP, was directed at the production of case law. The effect of the anticipated case law was to make all Albertans subject to a draconian policy. The objective was to create a legal basis of the principle that not getting one's children vaccinated according to government dictate, would be a major crime sufficient for the provincial government to remove children from their parents.
The episode, which did not produce the desired outcome, illustrates the lengths the Ministry of Justice will go to create the theatrics of a manufactured crime with the goal of producing preconceived case law. The saga, which is now the basis of a major documentary film, demonstrates the viciousness, dishonesty and incompetence of some of the the folks running "vaccine" policy at the AHS. It helps reveal the importance of bringing to light the history underlying Dr Makis’ accusations which have striking implications for the criminal justice system in Alberta.
All of this background is to help make the case that Judge Yamauchi and the Alberta Ministry of Justice might consider putting their own house in order before presuming to condemn episodes of principled civil disobedience.
The research and treatment of Reiner Fuellmich is indicative of the ongoing coverup at the global level of the intended murder and mayhem accompanying the jabbing of the largest part of the global population. There is a growing array of scholars that have done the homework to understand that Operation COVID was in fact a cover for the dissemination of bioweapons that had nothing to do with bringing a viral contagion to an end.
As I have tried to demonstrate at length throughout this essay, many elements of the judiciary in many countries have been deeply implicated in the lies and crimes of Operation COVID. The result of this complicity is showing up in the criminal proceedings at the Lethbridge court house where high level violations of law are swept under the carpet and rendered invisible.
Crown officials studiously avoid any reckoning with the larger setting creating the context and background of the Coutts 2, 3 and 4 trials. They prefer to keep their heads in the sand rather than widen their horizons even to the point of trying to understand how their own profession is being viewed.
At the same time the efforts of average citizens to push back against violations against their lives and livelihood are subjected to legal recriminations including long terms of imprisonment without any conviction. Could it be that the calculation was to deny all members of the Coutts Four bail in order to create the impression they must be extremely dangerous?
The whole fiasco should be made subject to a proper investigations emanating from initiatives within Alberta’s discredited legal system. The onus should not be on the people wronged and assaulted to bear the responsibility of dealing with criminality within the criminal justice system.
Great damage has been done to many people in the rush to produce some evidence of terrorism to justify the invocation of the Emergency Act, an invocation which has since been shown to be “unconstitutional.”
Questions about the nature of the rule of law that figured significantly in the sentencing process of the Coutts Three permeate many facets of the Covid saga. Patent lawyer David E. Martin has become world famous for his studious investigations on the manufactured COVID crisis in relationship to the rule of law and the many failures of the criminal justice system.
In the following presentation Dr. Martin builds on his history of the World Health Organization which declared the existence of a global pandemic in March of 2020.
https://x.com/FatEmperor/status/1878476673131089951
The history brought forward by David E. Martin provides the context and background necessary for a serious investigation of the manufactured COVID crisis and the rule of law.
The aspect of the bail hearings for the Coutts Four - " Given that the witnesses were not present to be be cross-examined, the bail hearing were biased in favour of the Crown. The Crown side in the bail hearings were all monopolized by Stephen Johnston." - underscores how far the justice system has fallen.
Your summary in the Coutts Four case which morphed into the Coutts Two trial - that "The Ministry of Justice made no attempt to explain to the public how the supposed conspiracy to kill cops, an allegation directed at four individuals, suddenly didn’t involve Lysak and Morin but continued to involve Olienick and Carbert." - further reflects the shaky foundation of the prosecution of the Coutts Two.
Certainly the reason for the protest - numbers of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms violations (right to a livelihood, to allow the bearer of a passport to pass freely across a border point without delay or hindrance etc.) - and those established at Nuremberg after WWII regarding bodily autonomy (as illustrated by your references to Dr. Michael Yeadon, Edward Dowd and his excellent book Cause Unknown, etc.) - is a good reminder for anyone who needs reminding why the protests in Ottawa, Coutts, Windsor, Surrey (BC), Emerson (MB) and elsewhere spontaneously emerged in January 2022.
Pointing to the German governments prosecution of Reiner Fuellmich illustrates that the trials of the Coutts Four, Coutts Two, Coutts Four, (Tamara Lich, Chris Barber and so many others in Canada) are part of a broader pattern of punishment across "the West."
In a Substack in December 2022, Roxanne Halverson (The Intrepid Viking) persuasively argued that the "Dave" Chrystia Freeland had written that was an exhibit at her NOV 24/22 testimony under cross-examination by Brendan Miller, was most likely David "Dave" McKay the CEO of the Royal Bank of Canada. This was since Halverson points out the note was written during a conference call with heads of financial institutions including Canada' big banks. (Before that I had assumed it was likely David Vigneault, head of CSIS, after all, how many "Dave's" could DM Freeland know who had the power to designate individuals as terrorists?)
https://roxannehalverson.substack.com/p/convoy-bank-account-freeze-should
And your quote from Halverson is on point regarding the disconnect between the harms of the pandemic measures (lockdowns, coerced vaccination, science-free insistence on keeping six feet apart - an an airport for example and then inches apart in airplane seating - the mask mandates (that Dr. Teresa Tam in March 2020 was dismissive of saying “most people haven’t learned how to use masks,” “there is no need to use a mask for well people,” and “putting a mask on an asymptomatic person is not beneficial.” (See https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/national-directive-on-wearing-face-masks-coming-today-trudeau-says)
Thanks for a solid review of these matters.
"When you understand that they are trying to kill you, everything becomes clear."
;-(