Ottawa police detective found guilty of discreditable conduct
An Ottawa police detective has been found guilty of discreditable conduct following a lengthy police disciplinary hearing into allegations she invaded the privacy of families by inappropriately accessing files of dead children and asking one parent about a vaccination status.
Const. Helen Grus, a detective with the Ottawa Police Service's sexual assault and child abuse unit, was accused of self-initiating "an unauthorized project" by accessing case files to which she wasn't assigned.
She also faced accusations that, in late January 2022, she interfered in an investigation by calling and speaking with the father of a deceased infant — inquiring about the COVID-19 vaccination status of the mother.
She was suspended with pay a short while later.
Grus felt duty-bound to investigate
The crux of Grus's argument, as presented to the hearing, was that she took reasonable steps based on a firm belief and that she was unfairly charged for upholding her oath.
In his decision, Supt. (retired) Chris Renwick details that the detective noticed a "doubling or tripling of infant deaths" and saw it as "her duty to investigative criminal negligence on the part of the government."
Grus' defence lawyer, Bath-Shéba van den Berg, submitted that there is no such thing as an unauthorized investigation and no such thing as unlawful interference by making a phone call for policing purposes, according to Renwick's summary.
She told the tribunal that Grus had intended to inform her chain of command of her actions, but her suspension prevented it — as did former police Chief Peter Sloly's departure soon after.
The decision also notes that, according to Grus' lawyers, she was shut down by a lie concocted by her unit that led to the "never seen before" charge, influenced by "political control of the police."
Renwick's decision also details that, in her affidavit, Grus determined that she "at most" stepped on her colleague's toes.
But in the end, the hearing officer wasn't buying it
Renwick said Grus' description of events demonstrated, at best, a poorly thought-out criminal negligence investigation, kept from her higher ups and "with national implications far beyond her individual capabilities and resources."
"It can certainly be viewed as an attempted weaponization/politicalization of police powers to exert pressure on municipal, provincial, and federal health officials," Renwick wrote.
He wrote that Grus' failure to document her call with the father only compounded the potential damage to the lead investigator's relationship and trust with the family.
Renwick said, while he accepted the underlying motivation was one of concern, he found Grus had applied her own personal views, formed by her self-initiated research and her strong opposition to her employer's decision to implement a mandatory vaccination policy.
Issues with decorum
He found her guilty under the Police Services Act.
"Grus allowed her personal beliefs and opinions to seep into her professional responsibilities and cloud her judgment and, ultimately, her professional conduct," he wrote.
In his decision, Renwick also took aim at some of the behaviour he saw throughout the hearing, which kicked off in August of 2023.
He said poor decorum by counsel led to "name calling and accusations," with constant objections adding several days to the hearings.
He said disruptions by members of the public were another issue, with the hearing having to be stopped on two occasions to remove disruptive persons. He said police eventually had to initiate a security protocol, significantly adding to the tension within the room.
According to the police service on Tuesday, no dates have been set for submissions on penalty as of yet. The Ottawa Police Association said Tuesday Grus is still employed by the Ottawa police.
The police service settled a civil claim related to Grus' actions in December 2023.
In April 2024 Grus launched a lawsuit against the CBC over articles concerning the accusations. That legal proceeding has not been resolved.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Intercept
34 minutes ago
- The Intercept
How the FBI and Big Ag Started Treating Animal Rights Activists as Terrorists
As COVID raged across northern California in March 2020, a pair of farm industry groups were worried about a different threat: animal rights activists. Citing an FBI memo warning that activists trespassing on factory farms could spread a viral bird disease, the groups wrote a letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom to argue that their longtime antagonists were more than a nuisance. They were potentially terrorists threatening the entire food chain. 'The safety of our food supply has never been more critical, and we must work together to prevent these clear threats of domestic terrorism from being realized,' the groups wrote. A coalition of transparency and animal rights groups on Monday released that letter, along with a cache of government documents, to highlight the tight links between law enforcement and agriculture industry groups. Activists say those documents show an unseemly relationship between the FBI and Big Ag. The government–industry fearmongering has accelerated with the spread of bird flu enabled by the industry's own practices, they say. The executive director of Property of the People, the nonprofit that obtained the documents via public records requests, said in a statement that the documents paint a damning picture. 'Transparency is not terrorism, and the FBI should not be taking marching orders from industry flacks.' 'Factory farms are a nightmare for animals and public health. Yet, big ag lobbyists and their FBI allies are colluding to conceal this cruelty and rampant disease by shifting blame to the very activists working to alert the public,' Ryan Shapiro said. 'Transparency is not terrorism, and the FBI should not be taking marching orders from industry flacks.' Industry groups did not respond to requests for comment. In a statement, the FBI defended its relationship with 'members of the private sector.' 'Our goal is to protect our communities from unlawful activity while at the same time upholding the Constitution,' the agency said in an unsigned statement. 'The FBI focuses on individuals who commit or intend to commit violence and activity that constitutes a federal crime or poses a threat to national security. The FBI can never open an investigation based solely on First Amendment protected activity.' The dozens of documents trace the industry's relationship with law enforcement agencies over a period stretching from 2015, during James Comey's tenure as FBI director, to the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic and the more recent outbreak of bird flu, also known as avian influenza. Animal rights activists have long said that federal law enforcement seems determined to put them in the same category as Al Qaeda. In the 2000s, a wave of arrests of environmental and animal rights activists — who sometimes took aggressive actions such as burning down slaughterhouses and timber mills — was dubbed 'the Green Scare.' The law enforcement focus on animal rights groups continued well after Osama bin Laden's death, news clippings and documents obtained by Property of the People show. In 2015, a veterinarian with the FBI's Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate told a trade publication, Dairy Herd Management, that eco-terrorists were a looming threat. 'The domestic threat in some ways is more critical than international,' Stephen Goldsmith said. 'Animal rights and environmental groups have committed more acts of terrorism than Al Qaeda.' Four years later, emails obtained by Property of the People show, Goldsmith met with representatives of a leading farm trade group, the Animal Agriculture Alliance, at a government–industry conference. The meeting happened in April 2019, and within weeks the AAA's president was warning Goldsmith in an email about planned protests by 'by the extremist group Direct Action Everywhere,' a Berkeley-based group that conducts 'open rescues' of animals. Within months, the FBI was touting the threat from animal rights groups in stark terms in an official communication: the intelligence note partially produced by Goldsmith's Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate. The August 2019 note written with the FBI Sacramento field office said activists were accelerating the spread of Virulent Newcastle disease, a contagious viral disease afflicting poultry and other birds. The note claimed that activists were failing to follow proper biosafety protocols as they targeted different farms, and could spread the disease between farms on their clothes or other inanimate objects. While the note did not point to genetic testing or formal scientific analysis to back up this assertation, it said the FBI offices had 'high confidence' in their assessment. Activists have rejected the idea that they are not following safety protocols, pointing to protests where they have donned full-body disposable suits. The most withering criticism of the FBI note may have come from another law enforcement agency, however. Four months after the FBI document came out, the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center rebutted the idea that activists were spreading disease. Those activists, the Bay Area-based fusion center said in the note to local law enforcement, were nonviolent and posed a 'diminishing threat to law enforcement.' Citing the activists' use of safety precautions and U.S. Department of Agriculture research, the fusion center said that 'animal rights activists are probably not responsible' for any of the Virulent Newcastle disease outbreaks. Emails obtained by Property of the People suggest that the FBI regularly shared information with the Animal Agriculture Alliance, as both sought to spotlight the threat of animal rights activists. As new animal disease outbreaks occurred, the activists were regularly cast as potential vectors. The nonprofit trade group, based in Washington, D.C., describes itself as an organization that defends farmers, ranchers, processors, and other businesses along the food supply chain from animal rights activists, on whom it regularly distributes monitoring reports to its members. The industry's concerns grew in 2020, as activists created a nationwide map of farms, dubbed Project Counterglow, that served as reference for locating protest sites. The AAA's president, Hannah Thompson-Weeman, sent out an email to industry leaders hours after the map was published. 'This is obviously extremely troubling for a lot of reasons. We are contacting our FBI and DHS contacts to raise our concerns but we welcome any additional input on anything that can be done,' she said. In multiple emails, Goldsmith, the FBI veterinarian, distributed to other FBI employees emails from the AAA warning about upcoming protests by the activist outfits, including Direct Action Everywhere. Another email from a local government agency in California showed that the AAA sent out a 'confidential' message to members in June 2023 asking them to track and report 'animal rights activity.' The trade group provided members with a direct FBI email address for reporting what it called ARVE: 'animal rights violent extremists.' The AAA was not the only industry group using the FBI as a resource. The March 2020 letter to Newsom casting activists as potential terrorists was penned by the leaders of the California Farm Bureau Federation and Milk Producers Council. Those groups did not respond to requests for comment. As the bird flu outbreak ramped up in 2022 and beyond, the industry's claims that animal rights activists could spread disease were echoed by government officials, emails obtained by Property of the People show. Animal rights activists say the claims by law enforcement and industry groups that activists are spreading disease have had real-world consequences. In California, college student Zoe Rosenberg faces up to 5-and-a-half years in prison for taking part in what movement members describe as an 'open rescue' of four chickens from a Sonoma County farm. 'It's always a shocking thing when nonviolent activists are called terrorists.' Rosenberg, a member of Direct Action Everywhere, has been identified by name in monitoring reports from the Animal Agriculture Alliance. For the past year and a half, she has been on an ankle monitor and intense supervision after prosecutors alleged in a December 2023 court hearing that she was a 'biosecurity risk' because of ongoing bird flu outbreaks. Rosenberg said last week she was taken aback by the similar allegations contained in previously private emails between law enforcement and industry. 'Instead of taking responsibility for what they are doing, they are trying to blame us. Of course, it's always a shocking thing when nonviolent activists are called terrorists or framed as terrorists,' she said. 'It just all feels backwards.'
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
RFK Jr. says healthy pregnant women don't need COVID boosters. What the science says.
Getty Images You're pregnant, healthy and hearing mixed messages: Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is not a scientist or doctor, says you don't need the COVID vaccine, but experts at the Centers for Disease Control and Protection still put you in a high-risk group of people who ought to receive boosters. The science is on the side of the shots. Pregnant women who contracted COVID-19 were more likely to become severely ill and to be hospitalized than non-pregnant women of the same age and demographics, especially early in the pandemic. A meta-analysis of 435 studies found that pregnant and recently pregnant women who were infected with the virus that causes covid were more likely to end up in intensive care units, be on invasive ventilation, and die than women who weren't pregnant but had a similar health profile. This was before covid vaccines were available. Neil Silverman, a professor of clinical obstetrics and gynecology and the director of the Infectious Diseases in Pregnancy Program at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, said he still sees more bad outcomes in pregnant patients who have covid. The risk of severe covid fluctuated as new variants arose and vaccinations became available, Silverman said, but the threat is still meaningful. 'No matter what the politics say, the science is the science, and we know that, objectively, pregnant patients are at substantially increased risk of having complications,' Silverman said. A request for comment regarding the scientific literature that supports covid vaccination for pregnant women sent to HHS' public affairs office elicited an unsigned email unrelated to the question. The office did not respond when asked for an on-the-record comment. Kennedy, a longtime anti-vaccine activist before joining the Trump administration, announced May 27 that covid vaccines would be removed from the CDC's immunization schedule for healthy pregnant women and healthy children. His announcement, made in a video posted on the social media platform X, blindsided CDC officials and circumvented the agency's established, scientific processes for adding and removing shots from its recommended schedules, The Washington Post reported. There's still much unknown about how covid affects a pregnant person. The physiological relationship between covid infections and mothers and fetuses at different stages of a pregnancy is complex, said Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX The increased risk to pregnant patients comes in part because pregnancy changes the immune system, Rasmussen said. 'There is natural immune suppression so that the mother's body doesn't attack the developing fetus,' Rasmussen said. 'While the mother does still have a functioning immune system, it's not functioning at full capacity.' Pregnant patients are more likely to get sick and have a harder time fighting off any infection as a result. In addition to changing how the immune system works, being pregnant also makes women five times as likely to have blood clots. That risk is increased if they contract covid, said Sallie Permar, chair of pediatrics at Weill Cornell Medicine. The virus that causes covid can affect the vascular endothelium — specialized cells that line blood vessels and help with blood flow, Rasmussen said. In a healthy person, the endothelium helps prevent blood clots by producing chemicals that tweak the vascular system to keep it running. In a person infected with the covid virus, the balance is thrown off and the production of those molecules is disrupted, which research shows can lead to blood clots or other blood disorders. Permar said that those clots can be especially dangerous to both pregnant women and fetuses. Inflammation and blood clots in the placenta could be connected to an increased risk of stillbirth, especially from certain covid variants, according to studies published in major medical journals as well as by the CDC. When the placenta is inflamed, it's harder for blood carrying oxygen and nutrients to get to the developing baby, said Mary Prahl, an associate professor of pediatrics at the University of California-San Francisco School of Medicine. 'If anything is interrupting those functions — inflammation or clotting or differences in how the blood is flowing — that's really going to affect how the placenta is working and being able to allow the fetus to grow and develop appropriately,' she said. It makes sense that we see the effects of covid in the placenta, Silverman said. 'The placenta is nothing more than a hyper-specialized collection of blood vessels, so it is like a magnetic target for the virus.' Blood vessels in the placenta are smaller and may clot more easily than in the mother's circulatory system, he said. Louisiana senators trim private education vouchers, expand Medicaid budget Permar said recent data suggests that pregnant women sick with covid still have a higher risk of pregnancy complications such as preeclampsia, preterm birth, and miscarriage, even with existing immunity from previous infection or vaccination. Covid, she said, can still land women in the hospital with pregnancy complications. Prahl said the connection between stillbirth and covid may be changing given the immunity many people have developed from vaccination or prior infection. It's an area in which she'd like to see more research. There's already strong evidence that both mRNA-based and non-mRNA covid vaccines are safe for pregnant women. Prahl co-authored a small, early study that found no adverse outcomes and showed antibody protection persisted for both the mother and the baby after birth. 'What we learned very quickly is that pregnant individuals want answers and many of them want to be involved in research,' she said. Later studies, including one published in the journal Nature Medicine showing that getting a booster in pregnancy cut newborn hospitalizations in the first four months of life, backed up her team's findings. Prahl expects more evidence will be available soon to support the benefits of mothers receiving a covid booster during pregnancy. 'I can say, kind of behind the scenes, I'm seeing a lot of this preliminary data,' she said. She blames the delay in part on the Biden administration's scaling back of federal efforts to track covid. 'A lot of the surveillance of these data were pulled back,' she said. The Trump administration is further cutting money used to track covid. But because the vaccines give a pregnant woman's immune system a boost by increasing neutralizing antibodies, virologist Rasmussen is confident that getting one while pregnant makes it less likely a pregnant woman will end up in the hospital if she gets covid. 'It will protect the pregnant person from more severe disease,' she said. Getting a covid vaccine while pregnant also helps protect newborns after birth. Pregnant women who get vaccinated pass that protection to their young babies, who can't get their own shots until they are at least 6 months old. According to data released by the CDC in 2024, nearly 90% of babies who had to be hospitalized with covid had mothers who didn't get the vaccine while they were pregnant. As recently as April 2024, research showed that babies too young to be vaccinated had the highest covid hospitalization rate of any age group except people 75 and older. The Trump administration's decision to remove the covid vaccine from the list of shots it recommends for pregnant women means insurance companies might no longer cover it. Pregnant women who want to get it anyway may have to pay hundreds of dollars out-of-pocket. 'I don't want to be that doctor who just says, 'Well, it's really important. You have to vaccinate yourself and your kids no matter what, even if you have to pay for it out-of-pocket,' because everyone has their own priorities and budgetary concerns, especially in the current economic climate,' Silverman said. 'I can't tell a family that the vaccine is more important than feeding their kids.' But he and his colleagues will keep advising pregnant women to try to get the shots anyway. 'Newborns will be completely naive to covid exposure,' he said. 'Vaccinating pregnant women to protect their newborns is still a valid reason to continue this effort.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license. KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF and subscribe to KFF Health News' free Morning Briefing.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
U.S. Supreme Court won't hear Michigan gym's case over COVID-19 losses
The U.S. Supreme Court on June 2 declined to take up the case of an Alma gymnasium that sued the state of Michigan, arguing that it should be compensated for the months it was forced to be closed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's stay-at-home orders during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Supreme Court denied a request to take up the case without comment. Randy Clark and his wife, Yvette Franco-Clark, who own and operate The Gym 24/7 Fitness in Alma sued the state in 2020 over an order by Whitmer that closed gyms and certain other businesses to protect the public from the health emergency caused by COVID-19 in March of that year that remained in place for six months. The gym owners didn't question the governor's right to issue the order but sought compensation because of what they argued was the "economic devastation" it caused their business, saying it amounted to an "unconstitutional taking" of their property. The state Court of Claims denied a request to dismiss the case, saying Whitmer's office had failed to produce evidence that the closure was necessary, but the state Court of Appeals reversed that ruling. The state Supreme Court then declined to take up the case. Lawyers for the gym owners had urged the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider the case, claiming that the state court never adequately considered the economic burden placed on their business and arguing that the rules for when a state action rises to the level of one that justifies compensation for a business are too vague. The state Attorney General's Office, representing the state, said the closure − without compensation − was justified given the "staggering rates of death and life-threatening illness" and officials' efforts to protect public safety. More than 40,000 people died of COVID-19 in less than three years in Michigan, according to state records in late 2022. Contact Todd Spangler: tspangler@ Follow him on X @tsspangler. This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: U.S. Supreme Court won't hear Michigan gym's case over COVID-19 losses
