2 years ago

244

COVID19 vaccine VaxInjury VaxSafety VaccineMandate canada

Read the full judge's ruling:
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2022/2022onsc1198/2022onsc1198.pdf

See dr. Julie Ponesse's discussion of the ruling:
https://youtu.be/FLBU1HoGq4E

NOTABLE SECTIONS OF THE JUDGMENT

[24] A chilling example: I recently had a case where a mother tried to cut off an equal-time father’s contact with his children, primarily because he was “promoting anti-government beliefs.” And in Communist China, that request would likely have been granted.
[25] But this is Canada and our judicial system has an obligation to keep it Canada.

[34] In this case, the father doesn’t like what the children are saying, so he submits their views aren’t worthy of consideration – just as he submits the mother’s views aren’t worthy of consideration. There’s a bit of a pattern here.

[43] But that’s not at all what I’m dealing with in this case.
a. Despite the father’s relentless campaign to dismiss the mother as some sort of lunatic, the reality is that the mother presented all her evidence and made all her oral submissions in a calm, mature, articulate, analytical, extensively researched, and entirely child-focussed manner. She is to be commended for her skillful and professional presentation as a self-represented party.
b. In contrast, the father came across as somewhat dogmatic, intolerant and paternalistic. He focussed more on discrediting the mother’s ideas rather than explaining his own. And his shameless efforts to vilify the mother by ridiculing her personal beliefs bordered on hysterical.
c. I mention this to further explain why I have confidence that the mother has not inappropriately influenced the children to adopt their current views.
d. If the mother explained herself to the children the way she explained herself to me...and if the father explained himself to the children the way he explained himself to me...then I have absolutely no doubt about which of the parents communicated with the children in a more responsible manner.

[70] As well, there is a systemic issue common to most of these COVID vaccine cases.
a. The father presented his expert evidence.
b. The mother then presented her expert evidence.
c. The father responded that the mother’s theories have already been “debunked” – so we shouldn’t waste time talking about them.
d. Alleging that your opponent’s position has already been debunked is a common tactic these days.
e. And quite effective.
f. Because unlike stare decisis – the doctrine of precedent which requires judges to follow specifically cited earlier court decisions – there is no such formality to the concept of debunking.
g. All you have to do is make the blanket assertion that an opposing view has already been debunked – without providing any details – and hope that nobody asks for proof.
h. In this case, I reject the father’s claim that all of the mother’s concerns about COVID vaccines have already been properly considered and disproven, in a process adhering to natural justice, conducted by an appropriate judicial body.
i. Quite to the contrary, I have not been able to find any indication – in the father’s evidence or in the body of COVID vaccine case law – that allegedly debunked theories have ever been properly considered or tested. In any court. Anywhere.

[79] With respect to the positions advanced by each parent.
e. I find that the mother’s position is more reasonable and helpful in that she invites discussion and exploration of both sides of the story, while the father seeks to suppress it.
f. I find that the father has inaccurately and somewhat unfairly characterized both the mother’s position and her evidence.
g. The father has attempted to dismiss the mother as some sort of crazy antivaxxer. Nothing could be further from the truth. The mother’s materials and submissions actually addressed the important and complex issues in more detail and with more comprehension than conveyed by the father. She has made it very clear that she has not completely rejected COVID vaccinations for L.E.G. and M.D.G.. She is simply concerned that in her view there is overwhelming evidence of unresolved safety concerns with respect to the current vaccines being administered. She has come to the conclusion that at this time the risks associated with the vaccines outweigh the benefits.
h. As well, the mother’s statement that she believes “in personal choice, knowledge, understanding and informed consent” is to be viewed in a reassuring context. She has gone to extraordinary lengths to inform herself, to maintain an open mind, and to discuss the issue with her children in a balanced, enlightened, and dispassionate manner.
i. The father has attempted to dismiss the mother’s supporting materials as unreliable and less persuasive than his own materials. Once again, I find his attack to be misguided and inaccurate.
j. Pro-vaccine parents have consistently (and effectively) attempted to frame the issue as a contest between reputable government experts versus a lunatic fringe consisting of conspiracy theorists, and socially reprehensible extremists. This was absolutely the wrong case to attempt that strategy. The professional materials filed by the mother were actually more informative and more thought-provoking than the somewhat repetitive and narrow government materials filed by the father.

[94] We should all return to discussing the issues rather than making presumptions about one another.

DESCRIPTION BY REBEL NEWS

http://www.RebelNewsPlus.com | Watch our full-length premium shows
On last night's episode of The Ezra Levant Show, Ezra discussed a truly remarkable court ruling from earlier this week.
FULL REPORT: https://rebelne.ws/3IpJeUY

Rebel News: Telling the other side of the story.
►https://www.RebelNews.com for more great content.
We rely on our generous audience to help keep us reporting, so please consider supporting us through one of the following:
►Donating to help fund our independent journalism - https://rebelne.ws/donation
►Signing up for our free emails and newsletters - https://rebelne.ws/emails
►Becoming a Premium Content subscriber - https://rebelne.ws/plus
►Buying Rebel gear - https://rebelne.ws/store
►LISTEN to our FREE podcast - https://rebelne.ws/podcastMake sure to follow Rebel News on social media too!
FACEBOOK - https://rebelne.ws/fbook
TWITTER - https://rebelne.ws/twitter
INSTAGRAM - https://rebelne.ws/Instagram