Victims’ families boycotting N.S. mass shooting inquiry over questioning of Mounties | Canada News Media
Connect with us

News

Victims’ families boycotting N.S. mass shooting inquiry over questioning of Mounties

Published

 on

TRURO, N.S. — The relatives of victims of the 2020 Nova Scotia mass shooting have told their lawyers to boycott the public inquiry investigating the tragedy, after its commissioners decided to prevent cross-examination of key Mountie witnesses.

The law firm representing 14 of 22 families issued a statement saying it was instructed not to attend the hearings on Wednesday and the next three hearings on the schedule. Patterson Law said the families are “disheartened and further traumatized” by the commission’s decision Monday to prevent the law firm’s lawyers from directly questioning Staff Sgt. Brian Rehill and Sgt. Andy O’Brien.

Rehill was the RCMP’s risk manager at its Operational Communications Centre in Truro, N.S., when the rampage that claimed 22 lives over two days began in nearby in Portapique, N.S., on April 18, 2020. When the centre received reports of an active shooter, Rehill assumed command while O’Brien assisted in overseeing the early response.

The federal-provincial commission of inquiry agreed Monday to provide special accommodations for three senior Mounties when they testify about command decisions they made as the tragedy unfolded.

Rehill and O’Brien will face questions from commission lawyers via Zoom calls that will be recorded and broadcast at a later date. Participants and lawyers who wish to observe their testimony must remain off screen with their microphones muted while each Mountie is speaking.

No reasons were given for the special arrangements. The commission has said this information is considered private because it deals with physical or psychological health needs.

Participating lawyers were told to submit questions for Rehill and O’Brien to commission lawyers in advance of the officers’ testimony, which is expected to take place on Monday and Tuesday, beginning with Rehill.

Sandra McCulloch and Rob Pineo, the lawyers for the majority of the families, left their seats at the inquiry unoccupied on Wednesday and held a news conference outside the public library in Truro. Pineo said it’s now unclear whether the family’s representatives will return to the process, adding that he will keep consulting with them.

“This was supposed to be the process that would get the families information and get their questions answered and that is simply not happening,” he said, recalling that they had to hold a public march in Truro and Halifax to pressure the federal and provincial governments to launch a public inquiry instead of the limited review that was originally planned.

Nick Beaton, whose pregnant wife, Kristen Beaton, was killed, said he’s now referring to the mass casualty commission as “a review,” adding that he believes the public inquiry has evolved into a “love triangle” between the commission, the RCMP and the government.

Lawyer Tara Miller said her clients have given her instructions not to attend this week and next week.

“In addition to being fundamentally offside, what this decision does is further erode the confidence of family members who are the most affected,” she said in an interview Wednesday.

“These are individuals who put children to bed alone at night. These are the individuals who celebrate Mother’s and Father’s Days with memories.”

Miller said it has been her clients’ position all along that participating lawyers should be allowed to engage in unfettered but appropriate cross-examination of witnesses.

“That is a fundamental tenet of any kind of a litigation proceeding, and that includes public inquiries,” Miller said.

Miller also said cross-examination of Rehill will be central to the inquiry’s purpose.

“This was the individual who had command of the entire first response,” she said. “The decisions that he made and why he made them, those are all questions that are highly relevant.”

Lawyers for the families of victims Gina Goulet, Lillian Campbell, Aaron Tuck, Jolene Oliver and Emily Tuck said in interviews that they will continue to participate next week despite the restrictions on questioning.

Meanwhile, Staff Sgt. Al Carroll — former district commander for Colchester County — is expected to testify Thursday via a live Zoom call. He will be provided with breaks during his appearance, the commission said Tuesday. He could face direct cross-examination.

The National Police Federation and the federal Department of Justice had requested that O’Brien and Rehill be allowed to provide their information by sworn affidavit and that Carroll testify in person with questions asked only by commission counsel.

Commission chairman Michael MacDonald closed the hearing on Wednesday by describing the absence of the families’ lawyers as “unfortunate.” However, he said earlier in the day he didn’t expect that the accommodations would prevent the gathering of “necessary information” from the Mounties.

Staff Sgt. Bruce Briers took the witness stand Wednesday. He was the risk manager who oversaw the RCMP dispatch in Truro during the second day of the rampage on April 19, 2020. On cross-examination, Briers broke down in tears over not having heard, after he came on shift at 7 a.m., that the killer’s replica police car had a distinctive, black push bar on the front.

He said he now realizes that two officers had mentioned the bar at different points in the morning, adding “I didn’t hear either time. I wish I had; this is one of those regrets.” The bar was also visible in a photo of the replica vehicle that was distributed among some senior officers at about 7:27 a.m.

He said he could have issued a broadcast on police radio about the push bar and it might have “made a big difference.”

“I have to live with that.”

This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 25, 2022.

— With files from Michael MacDonald in Halifax.

 

Michael Tutton, The Canadian Press

News

Five Things to Know: Toronto Raptors’ 2024-25 season

Published

 on

TORONTO – The Toronto Raptors kick off the 2024-25 season on Wednesday night when they host the Cleveland Cavaliers at Scotiabank Arena. Here are five things to know ahead of the Raptors’ home opener:

THREE DECADES — It’s the Raptors’ 30th anniversary and the team has plans to celebrate all season, including bringing back their purple jerseys from the mid-1990s. Toronto will also be honouring former players, including Hall of Famer Vince Carter. He’ll be the first-ever player to have his Raptors jersey retired in a ceremony at Scotiabank Arena on Nov. 2.

DEPTH CHART — The Raptors lacked depth to start last season with essentially one player coming off the bench — shooting guard Gary Trent Jr. — with then-rookie swingman Gradey Dick sometimes rotating in too. That short bench was evident with a -4.4 net rating over the season, tied with the San Antonio Spurs for third-worst in the NBA. Net rating is an advanced stat that indicates how much better or worse a team performs on a per-possession basis.

However, a series of trades and four draft picks remade the roster and greatly improved Toronto’s depth.

Point guard Davion Mitchell, power forward Ochai Agbaji and centre Chris Boucher of Montreal will lead the reserves to start the season. All three have serious NBA experience, averaging more than 17 minutes per game in their careers. They’ll be joined on the second unit by centre Kelly Olynyk (back) of Kamloops, B.C., and small forward Bruce Brown (arthroscopic knee surgery) once they’re healthy for a robust veteran bench that can handle big minutes. Ja’Kobe Walter, Toronto’s 19th overall pick in this past summer’s draft, will presumably be Dick’s backup at the two-guard once he’s recovered from a sprained shoulder.

COMMUTERS — Walter was the highest of Toronto’s four picks selected in the 2024 NBA draft in late June. Power forward Jonathan Mogbo (31st), point guard Jamal Shead (45th) and centre Ulrich Chomche (57th) were also selected. Although all four will see some NBA minutes this season — especially Shead, whose dogged defence was a highlight of the Raptors’ pre-season — they’ll also be regulars for the G-League’s Raptors 905 in nearby Mississauga, Ont.

IN-SEASON TOURNAMENT — The Raptors are in Group B for the NBA’s second-annual in-season tournament. They’re grouped with the Milwaukee Bucks, Indiana Pacers, Miami Heat and Detroit Pistons. Toronto’s so-called Cup Nights will begin Nov. 12 in Milwaukee and continue when the Raptors host Detroit on Nov. 15. Their third tournament game will be Nov. 29 in Miami and then their group stage will end Dec. 3 when Indiana visits Scotiabank Arena.

Financial incentive has been added to the NBA Cup playoffs this season, with players on the winning team earning US$514,971 each, while $205,988 goes to each player on the runner-up team. Players who lost in the semis will get $102,994 apiece and players that lose in the quarters will get $51,497.

PORTER SENTENCING — Former Toronto backup centre Jontay Porter will receive face sentencing on Dec. 18 after he pleaded guilty in the summer to a U.S. federal conspiracy crime. Porter, 24, was banned from the NBA after admitting that he helped bettors by intentionally underperforming in games. Prosecutors have estimated that he could be facing a range from just under 3 1/2 years in prison to a little over four years.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 22, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.



Source link

Continue Reading

News

Judge tosses suits against 3 lawmakers over posts after Chiefs Super Bowl Rally shooting

Published

 on

KANSAS CITY, Kan. (AP) — A judge has tossed three more lawsuits filed against lawmakers who shared social media posts that falsely accused a Kansas man of being among the shooters who opened fire at a rally celebrating the Kansas City Chiefs’ Super Bowl victory.

Denton Loudermill Jr., who was briefly handcuffed but not charged in the chaos that followed the deadly Feb. 14 shooting, filed federal lawsuits against three Republican Missouri state senators: Rick Brattin of Harrisonville, Denny Hoskins of Warrensburg and Nick Schroer of St. Charles County.

The dismissal of those suits Monday comes a month after a similar suit was dismissed against U.S. Rep. Tim Burchett, a Republican from Tennessee.

The judge cited issues with jurisdiction. Loudermill, who is from Olathe, Kansas, filed in federal court in Kansas, rather than in Missouri, where the lawmakers were from.

Loudermill’s lawyer, Arthur Benson, said that he planned to refile the lawsuits soon. Benson said previously that he also plans to refile a lawsuit against Burchett in Washington, D.C., where the congressman was when he posted about Loudermill on social media.

The shooting outside the historic Union Station in Kansas City, Missouri, killed a well-known DJ and injured more than 20 others, many of them children.

Loudermill’s lawsuits said he froze when the gunfire erupted, standing in the middle of the chaos so long that police had put up crime scene tape by the time he finally started to walked away. As he tried to go under the tape to leave, officers stopped him and told him he was moving “too slow.” They handcuffed him and put him on a curb, where people began taking pictures and posting them on social media, the suits said.

Loudermill ultimately was led away from the area and told he was free to go.

But soon posts began appearing on X, formerly known as Twitter, that included a picture of Loudermill, a car wash employee who was born and raised in the U.S. The posts called him an “illegal alien” and a “shooter,” even though he had no involvement, the suits said.

Versions of those posts, one by Burchett, were then were re-posted on the three Missouri lawmaker’s accounts, accompanied by comments from the lawmakers.

Schroer asked for confirmation or denial from law enforcement when he reposted the message from Burchett’s account.

“I’ve been sent videos or stills showing at least 6 different people arrested from yesterday but officially told only 3 still in custody,” Schroer wrote on social media over Burchett’s post. “The people deserve answers.”

After the judge’s ruling, Schroer described the lawsuits as frivolous in a statement and said he was “exploring all legal options available against persons and media outlets that knowingly spread fake news instead of what I actually asked on social media.”

Hoskins said in a statement that he agreed with the judge’s decision and would “continue to pray for the innocent victims of the Kansas City parade shooting.”

Brattin said elected officials “must have the right to speak publicly on matters of public safety without fear of liberal elites in the media creating false narratives in an attempt to destroy their credibility and provoke frivolous legal attacks.”

The judge had denied as moot an argument that the three senators were protected by “legislative immunity” in their roles as lawmakers.

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s office, which defended the three senators, praised the ruling.

“Questions of Missouri law belong in Missouri courts, not in remote courts in other states,” spokesperson Madeline Sieren said in a statement. “We have said that from Day One. Missourians should rest assured that they have an Attorney General who will always follow the law, even when it’s not easy.”

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.



Source link

Continue Reading

News

Feds’ order to end rail shutdown ‘unprecedented,’ labour tribunal says

Published

 on

MONTREAL – The federal government’s directive to end the countrywide rail shutdown in August marked an “unprecedented” move, says Canada’s labour tribunal, signalling a stauncher approach to disputes that rarely see direct intervention from cabinet.

Labour Minister Steven MacKinnon’s instruction that the Canada Industrial Relations Board halt work stoppages and begin binding arbitration amounted to an order, the quasi-judicial body said in a new document explaining its earlier ruling.

“These ministerial directions are unprecedented in that … the minister has effectively directed the board to end the strikes and/or lockouts and to impose final and binding interest arbitration to settle the terms of the collective agreements,” wrote chairwoman Ginette Brazeau in a unanimous decision released Tuesday.

However, the tribunal also said the labour minister was simply using his “discretionary powers” under the Canada Labour Code, and that the board had no leeway to refuse the directive.

Union members and labour advocates have criticized the move, saying it undermined workers’ negotiating leverage and bargaining rights.

MacKinnon has said he supports collective bargaining but that the directive was needed to limit the fallout of a work stoppage that halted freight and commuter traffic across the country.

On Aug. 22, Canadian National Railway Co. and Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd. locked out some 9,300 engineers, conductors and yard workers in anticipation of potential job action.

The shutdowns ranged from one to four days and capped off a two-week operational wind-down from coast to coast, marking the first time in decades the country’s two major railways were stopped at the same time.

Following the minister’s directive, the tribunal ruled on Aug. 24 that freight trains must start rolling again and imposed binding arbitration on all parties involved, in spite of a challenge from the Teamsters Canada Rail Conference.

The union has launched a court challenge to the board’s decision.

In his order, MacKinnon drew on Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code. The provision allows the labour minister to “direct the board to do such things as the minister deems necessary … to maintain or secure industrial peace” — such as ending a work stoppage via binding arbitration.

The tribunal said Tuesday the provision has been used “sparingly” over the past two decades. Its records indicate only 10 other examples since 1984.

The decision carried an undertone of skepticism while also stating that the board had no authority to challenge or change the minister’s directive.

“One can certainly question whether it was Parliament’s intent, when it modified Section 107 of the Code in 1984, that a ministerial direction would be used to end a work stoppage and order workers back to work,” the members wrote.

“The assessment of whether the minister appropriately exercised that discretion and made that determination within the applicable legal constraints falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the (Federal Court).”

The board also pointed to a pair of task forces from 1968 and 1995 that rejected the idea of handing authority to cabinet or the labour minister to intervene in public interest disputes.

Instead, the experts recommended creating an “external and standalone body” to advise the minister on the best way to step in, including when to resort to back-to-work legislation — a more democratic forum than a sole cabinet member or executive body — the tribunal said Tuesday.

The unprecedented part of Mackinnon’s directive stems from its concrete instructions and lack of wiggle room for the tribunal.

“In the present matters, the minister was explicit in his direction to the board to order the resumption of operations and the return to work of employees. He further directed the board to extend the terms of the existing collective agreements, thereby foreclosing the period for a work stoppage while also providing for the imposition of binding interest arbitration to settle the terms of the new collective agreements,” the tribunal wrote.

“There was no ambiguity in this.”

The government may have learned its lesson after a looser directive from then-labour minister Seamus O’Regan during a strike by WestJet mechanics in June resulted in a ruling for binding arbitration — but failed to halt the job action.

The tribunal said in that case that the government never technically barred a strike, allowing workers to maintain the work stoppage that grounded flights until a deal was reached at the bargaining table.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 22, 2024.

Companies in this story: (TSX:CNR, TSX:CP)



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version