Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2018

The AIH Transcript for November 19, 2018

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello I'm Carol Off.

JEFF DOUGLAS: Good evening. I'm Jeff Douglas. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight...

CO: School of thoughtlessness. After allegations of a sexually abusive hazing, six teenagers from a Toronto private school are charged. An alumnus who suffered a similar assault at university reflects on what's changed and what hasn't.

JD: Lying awake. An Ontario judge rules a man was fully conscious when he sexually assaulted a woman not suffering from 'sexsomnia.' And tonight that woman shares her relief at that ruling.

CO: Patriot games. Polish nationalists accuse an Ottawa Holocaust scholar of libeling their country. He fights back by taking them to court for a libeling him.

JD: Blowing a fuselage. After our 50th anniversary quiz last Friday some listeners told us we misidentified the aircraft in Frederick Forsyth's 'The Shepherd' -- but we were planely correct.

CO: The shape of things to come out. If you are wondering why wombat poop takes the form of small cubes -- and you are now aren't you -- well one scientists can finally answer your questions fair and square.

JD: And... a rip roaring good time. The rip was a student breaking wind. The roaring was the rest of the class. And the good time came when a sign language interpreter explained to the deaf student that flatulence sometimes makes noise. As It Happens. The Monday edition. Radio that guesses they benefited from each other’s toot-elage.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: Toronto school sexual assault allegations bring back dark memories for McGill alumnus

St. Michael's College

Guest: D'Arcy McKeown

JD: Five turned themselves in. One was arrested on his way to school. This morning six teenagers from an all-boys private school in Toronto were charged with gang sexual assault and assault. Last week reports of a disturbing video from St. Michael's College School emerged -- a video that involves members of the football team allegedly sexually assaulting a student with a broom handle, police sources tell the Canadian Press. That story is all too familiar to D'Arcy McKeown. He reported a similar assault-masked-as-hazing as a freshman football player at McGill University in 2005. And he attended St. Michael's College School for two years prior to that. We reached D'Arcy McKeown in Toronto.

CO: D'Arcy you know what happened to you at McGill and allegedly what happened at St. Michael's College School is described as 'hazing' or 'hazing that went bad' -- what do you think when this kind of behavior is described as hazing?

D'ARCY MCKEOWN: To be perfectly honest I think it's something that people who don't want to admit the severity of these actions. It's a phrase that they use to kind of cover tracks -- it can be more easily chalked up to 'kids messing around,' 'boys will be boys,' whatever have you -- when in reality most of these different hazing events are really assaults of various types.

CO: What happened to you at McGill? And you've talked about this very generously because I know it must be horrible to relive -- but your teammates have been joking about something they called, well a proctologic exam they called 'Dr. Broom.' Did you understand what they are talking about when you heard those words?

DM: I mean I was able to gather together what they were trying to convey. But when I was in the moment before the night of the initiation and hazing I just kind of chalked it up to like mental warfare -- veterans trying to just mess around with the rookie players -- you know people who were smart enough to get in McGill you'd think that they'd be smart enough to know that things with these hazing are unacceptable. And by and large, illegal.

CO: And your father was -- well he had been a professional football player, Bob McKeown, who works at The Fifth Estate here -- and he was I guess telling you that look this is all talk, don't worry about it -- this mandatory team dinner where you were sexually assaulted was something that he thought would be okay right?

DM: Even more so than that -- before I went to McGill I had been working for a CFL team -- and so I knew staff and players who had played university football in Quebec against McGill and they were all saying that 'no way,' 'there's nothing like this will ever happen,' 'I never went through anything like it, it is just them trying to scare you.' So everyone I talked to thought it was an out of taste practical joke -- and in their experiences that's all that would happen.

CO: You told your dad before you left -- you said you had a bad feeling about this. So why not act on that? What would compel you to do something to override your gut instinct on that?

DM: Definitely heavy coercion and pressure from the veterans. You know you're at a team meal and then it was directly to the hazing. So you know I saw all the staff and the coaches leave the team meal kind of at once -- and seemed from that point on the veteran players and the captain controlled the room. And it's a high pressure environment and it's not as easy as just always getting up and leaving. And while I had a bad gut feeling, I couldn't believe that this would actually go forward.

CO: It did go forward though, didn't it?

DM: Yes it did.

CO: And just as you've described it elsewhere and I'm not going to ask you for details-- but it just kept on getting worse until the actual sexual assault. And so today we saw students, young men, who were charged with what happened at St. Michael's College School. Why was no one ever charged with what happened to you?

DM: I was told by McGill University that if I involve the police but they would step aside and the police would handle everything. And for me my situation had gotten to a point where I made the decision that no -- I wanted McGill to be in the spotlight to make change and it may have been an over idealistic idea but for me I wanted to try to do my best to ensure that people were aware that this thing was still going on and that it needs to stop.

CO: You attended St. Michael's College School in high school. You've played on the football team -- before you went to McGill. Did you ever experience anything like that? Because now they're investigating whether there's a culture of this kind of abuse at that school. Did you ever experience that when you were there?

DM: In my experience, no, that was never part of my time at St. Mike's. But one thing I've learned is that these hazings seem to kind of be forming their way through different groups at different times. And for me St. Mike's was actually my safe place -- after McGill I returned to Toronto and ended up helping out the football team there. And between the coaches and teachers of St. Mike's -- and the folks who welcomed me at UofT -- that's what helped get me past the McGill thing. So the fact that this is going on -- and it just brought a ton of different feelings and emotions back which is kind of -- a bit hard to grasp. To be honest I've had some [inaudible] where deep down I'm afraid that the reason that these kids came up with that as a hazing initiation is because of my ties to St. Mike's and the fact that I [inaudible] that because it was public knowledge. And the fact that these kids think it's appropriate -- I mean it's so inherently against everything that is taught at St. Mike's.

CO: But where on earth would they get the idea that it was appropriate to do this?

DM: I have no idea, but it takes a cruel individual to do this type of thing. And you know from my life experience you know these things don't come naturally to people. And these assaults that are under the guise of hazing happen -- way more often than people would think and people just don't talk about it. And that's why it keeps going on. And despite all the charges that happened today and everything else the biggest concern for everyone should be getting these kids through it, these victims through it. Are they being given resources to talk to people? Are they given extended time lines on their studies so that if they need to a month off school they aren't penalized by losing a year -- the full concentration should be on the mental health and physical health of these victims.

CO: The principal of St. Michael's has said that they're launching an independent investigation to examine the past and the present and to look for unacceptable behaviors in the culture within the school. What do you want to see them do to make sure this never happens to anyone again?

DM: Unfortunately I think that there needs to be a harder stance taken not just at St. Mike's level but schools across Canada to implement mandatory anti-hazing, anti-bullying training -- basically outlining that 'no guys -- this isn't just hazing, this is assault. And by taking a video you can now be charged with child pornography.' You know there are things that need to be abundantly clear so that if these people who perpetrate -- there's no question that it was not just 'boys will be boys.' And furthermore I think there needs to be some stricter policies you know especially regarding team sports -- if something like this happens as part of the junior football team then that program gets shut down for a year so that if there was a player who knew this was going to happen who didn't speak up that's not okay either anymore -- whether it's sexual assault, assault, or being pressured, coerced, or forced into drinking to the point of alcohol poisoning. These are all very dangerous acts and really need to be nipped in the bud.

CO: D'Arcy I really appreciate your generosity and talking about this and shedding some light for us so thank you again. Thank you.

DM: Of course.

CO: Bye bye.

DM: Bye.

JD: D'Arcy McKeown attended St. Michael's College School in Toronto and then briefly McGill University. We reached Mr. McKeown in Toronto. We have more on this story and Mr. McKeown's story on our website cbc.ca/aih. And in the interest of disclosure D'Arcy's father Bob McKeown works at CBC and Carol is friends with both of D'Arcy's parents.

[Music]

Press pass

JD: Jim Acosta is getting his White House press pass back even though the CNN reporter had won a court battle against the White House for revoking his credentials this month -- officials were prepared to ban him from news conferences anyway. Well today the White House bowed to pressure -- not however without some strict new rules for the press. Here is CNN's Brian Stelter explaining the about-face to colleague Brooke Baldwin.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: What we have here is a two page letter from the White House that was sent over to Acosta a few minutes ago and it confirms -- it is hard pass, that's the pass that he uses every day to enter the White House, will be restored. That means the White House is voluntarily granting access back to Acosta -- whereas back on Friday it was a court that was forcing the White House to give his pass back temporarily. So we've been in the midst of this 14-day temporary restraining order. Now there's 11 more days remaining on it as mandated by a judge. There was some back and forth over the weekend where it seemed the White House was once again threatening Acosta -- saying that as soon as that temporary restraining order expires, you're going to be out here again. CNN went back to court this morning asked the judge for another hearing but the change here, this backing down as of 3:00 p.m., is that the White House is saying in this letter that the pass will be restored voluntarily by the administration. Now there is of course a caveat and I think that the White House wants to string this along -- wants to make this a threat that looms over the entire White House press corps, the letter to Acosta says 'if you refuse to follow our new rules in the future we will take action in accordance with the rules set forth above.' So what's the new rule? The new rule is one question per reporter at a press conference. You get to ask one question allow and "by the discretion of the President or White House officials taking questions a follow up may be permitted." So what they're trying to do is they are trying to establish some kind of ground rules within a press conference setting so that nobody can act out of order. Now obviously Brooke we all remember the days of Sam Donaldson, we all remember the days of Dan Rather, press conferences with follow up questions that have been going on for as long as there has been press conferences. But I think the Trump administration here is trying to control the situation, control the narrative, and limit the number of questions that get asked at these events. So for now good news is Acosta's press pass is back, the White House is backing down -- we don't know what's going happen with the legal fight but presumably there will be a settlement at this point. Longer term though we might end up back here in the future.

JD: CNN's Brian Stelter speaking with Brooke Baldwin about their colleague Jim Acosta.

[Music]

Holocaust lawsuit

Guest: Jan Grabowski

JD: A Polish group attacked him and his work. And now a prominent Canadian Holocaust scholar is fighting back. University of Ottawa professor Jan Grabowski is suing the Polish League Against Defamation after it claimed his work slandered Poland. Professor Grabowski's work explores in part Polish violence against Jews during the Second World War. Earlier this year the Polish government passed a law making it an offence to accuse the Polish nation of crimes committed by Nazi Germany -- which many scholars worry will have a chilling effect on their work. We reached Professor Jan Grabowski in Ottawa.

CO: Professor Grabowski can you give us some examples of what this group the Polish League Against Defamation -- what are they saying about you and your work?

JAN GRABOWSKI: Well they don't like me very much and they don't mince words in their -- let's say pronouncement-announcements in letters. They have been bombarding institutions with which I am collaborating and working together such as my own University of Ottawa but as well the Holocaust Museum in Washington or Yad Vashem in Jerusalem -- trying to raise doubts as to my academic integrity, accusing me of all possible and impossible kinds of intellectual misconduct.

CO: Tell us a bit about the work you are doing that led to this attack.

JG: Right. Well you see in my work parts of what I do, I do much more, but parts which are here on the frontline are the parts in which I bring evidence of certain complicity of parts of Polish society with the Germans and the German plan to destroy Polish-Jews. So basically whenever I venture into this territory that I am able to demonstrate that significant chunks or segments of Polish society took one way or another part in the extermination of Polish-Jews. Well this triggered among the nationalists in Poland -- it triggers all the kind of very strange reactions which are very prevalent today in Poland. But when shown outside of Poland they are very bizarre indeed.

CO: Why have you decided to sue this group for libel?

JG: The cumulative effect of slander growth over time -- it has been over a year now since they started their campaign against me. And in the beginning you sort of think you don't want to engage people of their kind in any kind of debate and even a trial is a sort of debate. But at a certain point you know you come to the conclusion that this has to be cut and put to rest. And these people have to be reminded that there are areas in the world where you have to be held to account for your lies and acts of slander.

CO: Poland has always been and has increasingly become very very sensitive about how its role in the Holocaust is portrayed, as you know very well -- their view is that because there was never a collaboration with the Nazis that they resisted, that there were some of the greatest efforts to protect Jews happened in Poland -- largest number of people who actually did Polish [inaudible] rescuers of Jews. And so their argument is that they were not part of the problem. But you dispute that.

JG: Well the problem is that indeed -- the problem is more profound in very many cases and that's what I write about -- Poles who were murdering the Jews, Poles who were denouncing the Jews. They were not doing in order to please the Germans, they were doing it in order to cleanse their own country of Jewish presence. And actually they will be very upset if you were to call them collaborators -- they did not collaborate, they did their own thing. That's one story. That's how you have many members of resistance, patriotic resistance, who on the other hand were vicious murderers of the Jews and they document these cases. But on the other hand you have the issue of many Poles saving the Jews and glory to them -- I'm writing about them as well but they cannot, they cannot I repeat, be used as a shield that shields the horrible behavior of very many other Poles who did something quite to the contrary.

CO: Why do you think that the Polish legal system will be sympathetic or impartial to you?

JG: Well the thing you see the destruction of Polish judicial system is well underway but these are courageous judges, courageous people, working inside the system who are brought up in traditional free European let's say independent judicial system for last quarter of a century and eradication of that spirit takes some time. And now you know I don't know before my case they will percolate through the system and come to a trial many months will go ahead and the situation in Poland is so volatile that nobody knows. So I do what was needed to be done and the rest will just you know have to wait and see. And if you are curious give me a call perhaps in half a year and I will definitely have more information about the system, judicial system, for you.

CO: Do you think that you'll have a chance to present the case in a courtroom in Poland? Because if you did you would have to say what Poland says you're not allowed to say in course of your case -- would you not?

JG: I can say still whatever I want. They removed the criminal provisions and now they are threatening researchers in Poland and outside with financial penalties rather than the criminal ones. But you know in this line of work which is a study of Holocaust you do what you need to do. I mean I'm obligated to the memory of 6 million dead people and [inaudible] consequence -- and less importance what the Polish nationalists come up with you know in their obsession to try to defend myths of innocent past.

CO: If you are able to present the case will you be able to, in a Polish courtroom, be able to say what role Poland played in the Holocaust?

JG: Of course.

CO: Can you expand on that?

JG: Well the thing is that in the courtroom I will definitely -- most of all it's a personal attack against my reputation so I will defend my reputation. But if it entails a larger discussion of history -- then that needs to be done, then that needs to be done.

CO: What are you asking for if you win?

JG: Oh well you know nothing much. I want them to admit that they lied and they apologize for their lies. And moreover I requested that they send to each and every possible post-secondary school in Poland two volumes of my most recent book published last April in Poland and I want them to send it so the pupils in Poland can -- school children can read it.

CO: Alright we will be watching. Professor Grabowski I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

JG: Thank you very much. Have a good day.

CO: Bye bye.

JG: Bye bye.

JD: Jan Grabowski is a professor at the University of Ottawa, that's where we reached him.

[Music]

Wombat poop

Guest: Patricia Yang

JD: I have something weird to share with you. It's about wombats. Their poop...it's cube-shaped. I know it blew my mind a bit and it raised questions that I can't answer but I can't stop asking. Now scientists have known this about wombats for a very long time and they have had similar questions but no idea how wombats accomplished this seemingly impossible feat. You know what I'm about to say though: "Until now." Patricia Yang is a post-doctoral student in mechanical engineering at Georgia Tech and she has done a study to try to solve this mystery. We reached Ms. Yang in Atlanta, Georgia.

CO: Patricia maybe you can start by describing what wombat poo looks like.

PATRICIA YANG: Okay it is a cub with round corners.

CO: What would be the biological purpose of having poo in cubes?

PY: So wombats -- they pretty much communicated by the smell of poop, so they have to make the smell fix at the same location. So the shape of the feces, the cubical shape, prevents the smell rolling away.

CO: So if it was sausage shaped or round it might disperse?

PY: Yes. So mostly they live underground. They don't see each other but if they smell someone else’s' smell then it's 'oh it is their home, it's not mine.'

CO: So they find their own home by finding their poo?

PY: Yes. They poop on rocks and they pile it up on the rock to mark their home and also talk to each other just by the smell so when they smell something, even though they couldn't see that well -- each other, but the smell helped them communicate.

CO: What made you want to find out about wombat poo?

PY: I studied feces for two or three years and I know most of the category they have: watery feces, cylindrical feces like humans normally do, and pallet feces --like some pallets from small animals like rodents. But wombats are really really unique -- they have cubical shape -- I have never heard of. And to be honest at the very beginning I thought it was a fake.

CO: You thought it was what?

PY: I thought it was fake.

CO: [Chuckles] You thought the wombat poo was fake because it was cubed.

PY: Yeah -- I don't think there was something cubical in biology [Chuckles].

CO: You said you've studied feces for two years.

PY: Yes. So my study is on urination and digestion and defecation in general. And I published a paper on urination -- how all animals urinate. And I published another paper on how animal defecate cylindrical poops -- it was 2017 or 16 on the journal 'Soft Matter.'

CO: [Chuckles] It's called what? 'Soft Matter?'

PY: Yeah the title is Hydrodynamics of Defecation.

CO: But the journal is called 'Soft Matter?'

PY: Oh yeah.

CO: [Laughs] There is actually a periodical for feces?

PY: Yeah that's a serious journal for people studying like ketchup or play-doh. I think that's why the editor feels like we are a very good fit of the journal.

CO: Okay speaking of fit, how did you find out that their poo comes out in cubes? How did you find out about how they do that?

PY: So I reached out to a wombat expert in Tasmania and he told me that he has many road kill wombats so he actually has ten wombats in his freezer and asked me, how many I need? He ship over the wombat intestine with feces in there to Georgia Tech.

CO: Okay so you still had the feces intact inside the guts?

PY: Yeah.

CO: So what did you see in those intestines that could explain why they poo cubes?

PY: The first thing I noticed there are really chunks at the end of the intestine like maybe it's the last one and half metre that becomes very consistent. I would say the same dimension like two by two by four centimetres cube. But these cube or these fecal chunks -- they are not equally cubical, some of them have sharper corners than others. So I later measured how sharp they are by the size of the corner and then only at the very final 50 centimetres, the last 8 percent of the intestine they are all consistent shape with sharp corners.

CO: Sounds really painful.

PY: [Chuckles] For the wombat or for me?

CO: [Laughs] I'm thinking of the wombat. And how many of these little poos does the wombat squeeze out in the course of a night?

PY: In the course of a night they can do 80 to 100.

CO: Oh dear. So we presume that it's not -- I mean if they have options they're not exercising them -- this is a reason for doing it and they are okay with it.

PY: They are good at it. Don't worry.

CO: [Laughs] No I won't worry. What do you think is the value of your finding? What do you think that tells you?

PY: I think the special part is how wombat really manufacture these cubes. For human it is very difficult. We don't have a natural...

CO: [Laughs] Thank goodness.

PY: And if we want something cubical like ice cubes or any square size phone chargers -- we mould it or we cut it to the shape we want but wombat seems to have a third way to do it. So what I've done -- I measure how stretchy they are. They have periodic stiffness like stiff-soft-stiff-soft [inaudible] circumference. And then this method could actually inspire us about what's an easier way or a cheaper way and portable way to make cubicals.

CO: So there is a practical application to this idea of stiff-soft-stiff-soft.

PY: Oh yeah. We are learning from wombats.

CO: [Chuckles] They have much to teach us. But can I ask you Patricia what fascinates you about poo and pee? Why you are such a close student of feces and urination?

PY: I like animals and I love fluid mechanics -- animals they all have this common behavior -- like they all defecate, they all urinate. And they easy to observe. And a lot of fluid mechanics inside.

CO: Okay. Well a happy hunting and it's good to talk to you Patricia. Thank you.

PY: Yeah good to talk to you. Thank you again.

CO: Bye.

JD: Patricia Yang is a post-doctoral student in mechanical engineering, believe it or not, at Georgia Tech. We reached her in Atlanta. And you can see some photographs of the wombat's poop on our website, because you probably don't believe us, that is cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Part 2: How a classroom fart became a teachable moment for deaf and hearing students

'Sexsomnia' trial

JD: It was a sexual assault case that spanned two criminal trials, two appeals, and seven years. But today the victim in the case finally breathed a sigh of relief in a Brockville, Ontario courtroom. 38-year-old Ryan Hartman claimed he was suffering from a sleep disorder known as 'sexsomnia' when he sexually assaulted an Ottawa area woman at a party in 2011, and was therefore not criminally responsible. The victim was sleeping on an air mattress next to her boyfriend and awoke as Mr. Hartman was sexually assaulting her. Today the judge rejected that defense. Mr. Hartman will be sentenced later this month. The victim's identity is being protected by a publication ban. But we reached her just outside of Ottawa. And a warning the details in this story are disturbing.

CO: You heard Judge Kimberly Moore say she did not accept the evidence that he was asleep and that he was awake when he assaulted you. What does that mean to hear that Mr. Hartman is found criminally responsible?

VOICE: It was empowering. It was validation to me that the court recognized that this assault did happen and he could not succeed in using 'sexsomnia' as an excuse.

CO: And 'sexsomnia' is the argument that he and his lawyers were presenting as to why he had sexually assaulted you. He pleaded guilty, in this trial not the previous one, he pleaded guilty and said but he was not criminally responsible because he was asleep?

VOICE: That's right yes.

CO: And the judge didn't buy it.

VOICE: No.

CO: You were pretty concerned going into this -- this is the fourth time you've come face to face with this man who attacked you, Ryan Hartman. What were your thoughts going in as to whether or not this was going to have the outcome that you got today?

VOICE: To be completely honest with you, I wasn't worried. In my heart I knew that this happened and I knew that he wasn't sleep. So I just couldn't come to terms with anything other than that. There was obviously that little piece of uncertainty in my mind, but 90 percent of me believed that he was going to be found guilty again.

CO: This is a man you didn't know before the party where he assaulted you, is that right?

VOICE: That's right.

CO: And this was at a party. This is a house party in 2011. And you were there with your boyfriend. You ended up staying the night there with your boyfriend because a lot of drinking had happened and so you went to sleep with your boyfriend. What happened?

VOICE: Well I didn't want to stay there to begin with. I just didn't feel comfortable. But went to sleep -- set an alarm before you know I fell asleep with my arms around my boyfriend and I woke up in pain. And you know very quickly found out that I was being assaulted.

CO: This man Ryan Hartman was still in the bed.

VOICE: That's correct.

CO: And so how did he respond when you did wake up?

VOICE: Well I put my hand behind me to feel where the pain was coming from. And he completely withdrew from my body and just went limp.

CO: Did it seem to you that he was asleep?

VOICE: No not at all. He withdrew so quickly like 'oops you know I've been caught' and started to make this fake snoring noise -- and I actually had to make that fake snoring noise in court. And that was kind of put in my face you know like 'oh well what is snoring? And what is real snoring?' And in a way that might have [inaudible] against me in the end. But after I turned on the light in the bathroom and called out what had happened to me -- he got up and said to my boyfriend at the time, I think I just woke up making out with your girlfriend. So it's like he knew he had done something wrong but was trying to cover it up in a way and denied that he had done anything wrong. I don't know what his reasoning was behind that to be honest with you.

CO: So in the first trial he was found guilty -- he pleaded not guilty. He was found guilty of having sexually assaulted you. And then during the appeal he argued that he was asleep. That he did do it but he was asleep. You had to go through the whole thing again.

VOICE: Exactly. When I first got the phone call in 2012 from a Victim/Witness Assistance Program that he's been found guilty -- it never crossed my mind you know that he would appeal it or that he could appeal it. You know I just was like oh my god it's finally over. He's been found guilty and the relief I felt was just unreal. You know I dropped to the floor crying -- just joy. You know just so relieved. And then he appealed it and then it was just like I can't believe it.

CO: He successfully appealed it and then had another trial. So you had to go through the trial again. Did they explain why they didn't use this defense in the first trial to say that he was suffering from 'sexsomnia?'

VOICE: Well yes he said that his lawyer during the first trial was inadequate. She signed an affidavit I believe that said she didn't even know that this 'sexsomnia' defense existed. They re-tried it upon the partial grounds that he didn't have effective counsel.

CO: In the testimony in the trial to support Mr. Hartman's claim -- his mother said he sleepwalked as a child. He had a fiancé who said he had episodes of sexual touching while he slept. And there was a sleep expert that said Mr. Hartman was likely suffering from 'sexsomnia' the night he attacked you. Why do you think that Judge Moore didn't buy any of that?

VOICE: Because the Crown attorney was successful in providing enough reasonable doubt -- this expert was biased and more of an advocate than an expert witness.

CO: And as you point out the Judge regarded the Dr. Shapiro evidence as that some of his comments demonstrated a lack of professionalism, she writes in her verdict. She said he was confusing his role as a witness with that of an advocate.

VOICE: She tore him down. Like she did not accept his evidence. Like when I was sitting there listening to her saying I do not accept this evidence -- she would lay down a point that you know testimony and she said several times, I do not accept this. And every time she said that it was just [chokes up] one brick at a time being taken off my shoulders. You know one brick at a time just like this really bit by bit until finally the words came out of her mouth you know -- Ryan Hartman guilty of sexually assaulting. And just finally you know like this is it.

CO: How has this affected your life over these past seven years?

VOICE: One thing I've spent a lot of thought into recently is how it has affected everyone else's life: my family, my husband, but it has affected my career path. It has affected my relationships. I have serious anger built up inside of me. I have extreme anxiety -- and one of those things that triggers that anxiety is time because I had set my alarm to wake up and leave and if I had woken up a little bit earlier, if I had to set my alarm a little earlier maybe this wouldn't have happened. It's affected my life in so many ways. It doesn't control my life but it has affected a lot of decision making and emotion and you know my personality overall.

CO: Do you think that we'll see more trials with this 'sexsomnia' as a defense?

VOICE: Unfortunately I do think that there may be you know future trials of this as a defense. Do I think this trial contributed to the possibility of it being a successful defense? No. I don't understand 'sexsomnia' enough. I don't know enough about it to really give a strong opinion. But I do not believe that it's an excuse for assaulting somebody. I don't.

CO: I really appreciate speaking with you. And thank you for being so frank with us.

VOICE: Thank you very much for taking the time to talk to me.

JD: We reached our guest just outside of Ottawa. Her identity is protected under a publication ban.

[Music]

The Vampire or The Mosquito?

JD: You thought you'd caught us asleep at the radar. No doubt you muttered something like this under your breath.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: You bastards! All so damn drunk you can't do your jobs properly.

JD: That of course is a clip of the late great "Fireside Al" Alan Maitland from his immortal reading of The Shepherd -- an annual Christmas tradition here at As It Happens -- and one that we touched on in our 50th anniversary quiz which aired Friday in which I asked our competing panelists: our very own Carol Off, Tom Power host of CBC Radio's q, and former As It Happens host and current host of The Sunday Edition Michael Enright the following question.

SOUNDCLIP

JD: What model airplane does pilot Johnny Kavanagh fly?

JD: The answer to which, like The Shepherd himself, is not quite as straightforward as it may seem or as it might first appear. Here for instance is how Michael responded.

SOUNDCLIP

MICHAEL ENRIGHT: Is it a Vulcan?

[Buzzer sound]

JD: My god Michael.

MICHAEL ENRIGHT: No.

JD: Michael.

JD: Now let me be clear Michael was wrong. Michael was not even close. But that didn't stop a couple of you from insisting that I was wrong.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: Hi Cara Worthington from Toronto and I'm listening to your 50th anniversary tonight Friday. The question about The Sheperd that Alan Maitland used to read -- and Michael (Enright) called the plane a 'vampire.' You said it was incorrect. But in both pieces that you had to guess [inaudible] it mentioned I pulled the vampire -- and so I think Michael was right. You have got to him those points. Thank you.

JD: Well Cara, Michael did not respond first of all with 'vampire.' But you were not alone, Michael Epp of Bowen Island emailed us this response "Michael Enright guessed Vulcan and he was close. I said 'vampire' and I was right. As the clip of Alan Maitland following immediately showed 'mosquito' presented as the correct answer surprised me -- as it was normally a two crew aircraft." Well Mr. Epp you are right that the mosquito is normally a two crew aircraft but you are not right about it not being the plane flown by the fictional Johnny Kavanagh, the titular Shepherd of the story -- as this clip proves.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE: Of course he could not fly at my speed. I was in a jet fighter. He in a piston engined aircraft of an earlier generation. To my surprise my Shepherd was a de Havilland Mosquito -- a fighter bomber of World War II vintage.

JD: You see -- the confusion stems from there being two airplanes in the story. Both made by de Havilland by the way. The 'vampire jet' piloted by the nameless protagonist and the 'mosquito' piloted by Johnny Kavanagh aka 'the Shepherd' -- who guides the vampire pilot to safety. I hope that clears up the fog. It has been our pleasure to guide you through it.

[Music]

Fart-hearing lesson

Guest: Anna Trupiano and Stacy Abrams

JD: I am going to speak to you now about farts. Not simply because I am juvenile, but for a much more important reason. Anna Trupiano works at a school in Michigan. One day recently in her Grade One classroom, one of the children broke wind... quite loudly. Some of the other students reacted to the noise and that left the child who had passed gas a bit bewildered because that child is deaf. We reached sign language interpreter Anna Trupiano to tell us what happened next.

CO: Anna first of all what did this student say to you when they realized that everyone had turned to look at them?

ANNA TRUPIANO: The student was very surprised -- they didn't really understand what was going on. They weren't angry or upset, they just were curious like what was happening.

CO: And no idea that the other students had heard this one kid fart?

AT: No. Absolutely no idea.

CO: Well just point out to people you don't want to embarrass this child on the radio so we're not including any details about the location of your school or even the child's gender.

AT: Right, it is really important to you know keep their identity private so that they are safe and secure.

CO: So how did this child react when they realized that farts make noise?

AT: It was interesting because I actually have three students in that class that I interpret for and they didn't think it was funny. It was more just so many questions. Like a million questions right after that. Just really curious as any kid would be learning something that they had no idea about.

CO: You turned it into a teachable moment.

AT: Yeah. I mean when these students have situations like this they don't have people they can ask at home, they don't have people they can chat with, so honestly a lot of these moments come up where you have to really explain things that other kids would know ahead of time -- and it's not because they are deaf or because they're using a different language, it's just because they don't have anyone at home who speaks the same language as they do to talk about those things.

CO: The 'same language' being sign?

AT: Correct. Yeah American Sign Language.

CO: I want to read a bit of your Facebook post because you say they asked a lot of questions and it's funny but it's so dear, and I'll read this and then you can tell us a bit more about this. And you put it in a dialogue. (Carol Reading)

SOUNDCLIP

KID 1: Why are they looking at me?

TEACHER: Because they heard you fart.

KID 1: What do you mean?

TEACHER: Teacher: Hearing people can hear farts.

KID 2: *Looking totally horrified* Wait, they can hear all our farts?!

TEACHER: Well no not all farts, but some of them yes.

KID 3: How do you know which farts they can hear and which farts they can't?

TEACHER: Hmm you know how sometimes you can feel your butt move when you fart, a lot of those they can hear. But if your butt doesn't move, it's more likely they didn't hear it.

KID 1: Tell them to stop listening to my farts. It's not nice!

CO: [Chuckles] And it goes on from there Anna -- it's just so well laid out for how this conversation went. What's behind all of that? Just describe a bit about their horror and fascination with all of this.

AT: Right. Kids are kids no matter what their abilities are. And I think that's pretty evident. They found out something that they didn't know about, and I think at first they were just like 'Wait a minute. This is like a mind blowing experience,' but then just like any kid would be -- they're just fascinated. "Who can hear farts?" "Who farts?" And all of these things that go with it. And while it was adorable, and kids are adorable inherently, it's a little sad too. I mean there's a sad part of that story. I never posted it with the intention of 'okay this is funny because they don't know it.' It's more like 'A) Kids are adorable B) but you know this is kind of a sad thing that they don't have access to that language so that they can learn about these things that everybody else knows about.'

CO: I've actually got somebody else on the line. And I want to bring her into the discussion now. It's Stacy Abrams and she's a deaf activist and educator in Washington D.C. She's going to speak to us through an ASL -- as an American Sign Language interpreter. Stacy hello.

STACY ABRAMS: Hello.

CO: Stacy has anything like this ever happened to you where you had to explain something like this to 6 year olds?

SA: No. I have had this conversation with my friends and people in our community where oftentimes you know we become the last people to find something out. And so this particular story is funny because it's about farts and farts are funny. But if you look at the larger picture of this it's really about access to communication. And for myself, my parents are both hearing but they can both sign. And so my parents have always made absolutely sure that myself and my sister, who is also deaf, are both able to understand when things make noise. They would tell us what made noise. It didn't matter that we couldn't hear it for ourselves, they wanted us to at least have that awareness, right, so if we were out in the community, out in public, we knew what was making noise. And I often would be in situations with my friends who didn't know that. And so I found myself being the person that would relay that information to them about the things that we do that make noise because they hadn't found that out through their families. And oftentimes that burden becomes part of the teachers and the community to explain that to these children -- and it's often lacking. The opportunity for incidental learning doesn't happen at home for children -- the way that it does for hearing people, and I think hearing people often take things like this for granted. Things like -- another example would be doorbells, right. You know hearing children know that when someone's at the door just because someone rings the doorbell, whereas you know I perhaps wouldn't hear the doorbell and my parents would just walk over to open the door and there would be a person standing there and I didn't know why they knew there was a person standing there, right. So I had to be told that the doorbell made noise and that meant there was someone you know to open the door for. So that type of access information about accountability within the community, within families, should be there to guarantee that everyone has access to this information and there shouldn't be an assumption that people already know it because we often end up feeling like we're the very last person to be told something.

CO: It's interesting something else that Anna says in her Facebook post. I'm going to ask you about this Anna is that there is a conversation, part of the Q and A you have with the kids, is that they want to know if their moms and dads know about all this. They know that farts make noises and everything, because it would appear that their parents haven't told them. Is that part of the issue -- is that at home parents don't know to say, 'that's a doorbell,' 'yeah that's a fart,' 'that's a sound,' 'that makes that noise?'

AT: Well I think Stacy is incredibly lucky that her parents did learn to sign. And there are a lot of deaf children who are lucky and do have parents that learn sign, but there are also a lot of deaf children whose parents don't learn to sign -- and all of my students, that I've worked with, have never had parents who learned to sign. I work in mainstream setting and so they are with other hearing children -- it is a lot more rare that parents learn to sign which is a sad thing. And so when they go home they might be able to say something like you know 'the food is ready' or 'don't do that' but that's pretty much where their language ends as far as being able to find that.

CO: Stacy just finally to you -- this Facebook post that Anna put up, it had huge a response. She was quite overwhelmed by it. Not clear what people are taking away from that story. What would you want them to take away? What would you like them to learn from this story?

SA: Well for me I really think we need to look at the bigger picture. Right. This isn't just about farts. It needs to be about how we all can become more proactive in ensuring that we are focusing on information access and language so that things aren't missing -- so there are not are gaps. We need to continue to push for more ASL in classes. We need to push for more ASL classes for parents -- to ensure that deaf children have full language access both in their educational setting and at home with their families. In understanding what it's like to grow up deaf, schools may not have the same understanding of the deaf experience. And so we need to make sure that we are including deaf adults in the educational environment, in the school setting, so that there is that perspective there about language, about access, and about communication -- because we as deaf people know the experience of growing up you know with language and communication needs so that we can advocate both at school and with families -- so that these deaf children really have an ability to understand themselves and understand other students and peers as well.

CO: Stacy it's so interesting to hear what you have to say -- lots of people will be illuminated by it. And also thank you for speaking with us. And Anna thank you for your Facebook post and for speaking with us.

AT: Absolutely.

JD: Anna Trupiano is a sign language interpreter at a school in Michigan. Stacy Abrams is a deaf activist and educator in Washington D.C. We spoke to her through an ASL interpreter. To find out more about learning to sign look for Ms. Abram's hashtag 'why I sign.' And you can find this story on our website cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Part 3: Polar bear management plan

Nunavut premier

Guest: Joe Savikataaq

JD: Scientists say that the numbers are very clear: in many areas of Canada's north -- polar bears are in decline. However as we told you on the program last week the Nunavut government is claiming the exact opposite. In a draft polar bear management plan informed by local indigenous knowledge, the Territory says there are actually too many polar bears in parts of Nunavut. The report also questions whether climate change is adversely affecting the bears. Joe Savikataaq is the Premier of Nunavut. We reached him in Arviat.

CO: Premier Savikataaq how did your government get to the conclusion that there are actually too many polar bears in Nunavut right now?

JOE SAVIKATAAQ: I'm not sure if we're -- if we can come to that conclusion but there's a lot more bears being seen, a lot more bear human conflicts, and we're hearing from people that there is a lot more bears around now. And the scientific knowledge might say that they're staying stable, but traditional knowledge or what people actually see is -- they are seeing more bears than there was before.

CO: And the draft report that we've seen -- the Nunavut government says that although climate change could impact bears and here's a quote it says 'no declines have currently been attributed to climate change.' The polar bear scientists we spoke to say that's wrong -- that there is a decline and it is related to climate change. What do you say to that?

JS: Well all the animals are pretty adaptive. You can't make a blanket statement I think that climate change is affecting all bears in a negative way. We have many different subpopulation of polar bears and these subpopulations might be affected by climate change more in one area than the others. We also know that polar bears are very adaptive to the environment that they have to survive in.

CO: When we talk about there being too many bears it's in reference to the fact that there have been many polar bears sightings and attacks in your communities and that's become more prevalent. And so that's the conclusion that we heard from other sources that you believe that there are too many polar bears in the communities right now. Is that not true?

JS: The tragic sad incidents where there was polar bear attacks that's not the main reason why people are saying there's too many bears now -- that's one of the indicators but people are seeing in the communities and people who are out on the land -- they're seeing more polar bears, they're seeing more females with cubs, and the female bear has to be in good shape in order to reproduce to have -- most of them are seen with two cubs so just by the evidence that people are seeing there's indicators that the polar bear population is doing all right. And another question I think that should be asked to the scientific community is what is the caring capacity of the ecosystem for the subpopulation [inaudible] polar bears that's there. You want the polar bears to be healthy. And in terms of being able to be supported by the ecosystem then there's a certain number that ecosystem can keep healthy. If there is more bears then the ecosystem can't support -- there'll be more bears but they'd be skinnier, they'd be hungrier, they'd be more inclined to look for food in town, they'd be more inclined to maybe attack people. But in order to have a healthy polar bear population that population has to be within the ecosystem -- what the ecosystem can support -- the carrying capacity of the ecosystem in that area.

CO: Well we spoke with Andrew Derocher who's at the University of Alberta and he says that this report is just plain wrong. He says that the bears are showing up more in your communities because sea ice is disappearing. They are looking for food in other places and that the appearance of more bears is only because they are looking elsewhere for food sources for themselves and for their cubs. What do you say to Andrew Derocher?

JS: I'd like to ask him if he has ever done any studies to see how many polar bears the ecosystem can support in terms of polar bears. He studies the western Hudson Bay. That's where I live. This is where I grew up too. And you can't artificially say there has to be this many bears in this area. You have to go the other way -- okay here's the ecosystem, how many bears can this ecosystem healthily support? You don't come up with the arbitrary number and say this is how many bears we need here. The trend may be going down, maybe going up, but I think they got to go back to the basics and say okay here's the ecosystem for the bears, how many bears can this ecosystem healthily support?

CO: Well I guess there are other scientists not just Mr. Derocher. And Environment Canada says that there are four populations of polar bears that are shrinking -- the Inuit are saying none of their populations are shrinking -- of the 13 populations that have been studied. Why do you think there is such a difference of opinion between the Inuit who live in those communities and have the bears around them and the scientists who are studying it?

JS: I think there's a big disconnect because the Inuit see the bears and what we see is what's there -- if we see a whole bunch of cars going by, more than there was 20 years ago and the traffic jams are worse, you say well I think there's too many cars here now, and they may be right.

CO: So what do you want southerners to understand -- to know about polar bears in the north that you feel that we lack the knowledge of?

JS: I think they should know that we as a government of Nunavut we manage our polar bears very well. They are not, the Inuit, want to hunt the polar bears to extinction and they don't even want to hunt them till they're so few, they want them around forever too but they just want manage the polar bear population in a way that is beneficial to them and beneficial to the polar bears. It's a resource that we use here and a resource that we manage well. So it will be around for many many generations to come so that people can enjoy not only harvesting it but also seeing a bear.

CO: Premier Savikataaq I appreciate speaking with you thank you.

JS: Thank you very much for letting us explain about our polar bear situation here -- how we manage them well, and we feel we manage them well, and we know we manage them well.

CO: Alright. Thank you.

JS: Alright good bye.

CO: Bye bye.

JD: Joe Savikataaq is the Premier of Nunavut. We reached him Arviat.

[Music]

Picasso hoax

Guest: Mira Feticu

JD: Back in the year 2012 there were seven pieces of art stolen from Rotterdam's Kunsthal Museum including works by Monet, Matisse, and Picasso. Local media called it the "theft of the century." Well recently writer Mira Feticu got an anonymous letter about where that Picasso piece might be. It is called "Harlequin Head." That letter lead her to a forest in Romania where she says she found an artwork. But Ms. Feticu says she believes she was duped by a theater company. We reached Mira Feticu in The Hague.

CO: Mira can you tell us about this letter you got? What did it say?

MIRA FETICU: The letter [chuckles] it's a letter from Romania -- from a city in Romania Slobozia -- it's posted in Slobozia in Romania. And the letter said it was there were eight phrases in the Romanian language -- 'I am tired to protect the painting. I want the story stopped now. I know where the painting is. Follow the path. After [inaudible] metres you see old tree. After the tree -- you see another tree with a red sign. And then under the rock you will find the painting.

CO: And you got this in a letter. Someone wrote this to you in a letter.

MF: Yes crazy eh.

CO: Yes it's crazy. Why would they write you a letter? Why would someone send you a letter about where they may have hidden a stolen Picasso?

MF: I wrote a book about, I write in Dutch -- and my third book is the book of the robbery. I wrote a book about the case. I wrote about the girlfriend of the main suspect, Tasha, and the suspect -- the main suspect was Radu Dogaru. Then I wrote a book about the case. And I think that's why they contacted me.

CO: You wrote -- this was a fiction work. It was a novel you wrote and this was about this...

MF: It is a novel but I used all the information that I got from my sources in Romania. I am also a journalist.

CO: And this was all based on this robbery, these seven pieces of art stolen from the Kunsthal Museum in Rotterdam in 2012 -- there were four Romanians who were convicted and jailed in 2014 for that robbery right?

MF: Yes yes. Seven pictures, paintings, from Meyer de Haan to Monet. One Matisse. One Picasso. And one Lucian Freud.

CO: Okay so the one that you got this letter about was about the Picasso called "Harlequin Head." And so you got this letter and then why did you decide to go and actually look for it? Why didn't you just turn that letter over to the police?

MF: I did it. First of all I called the police in Rotterdam. You know. I spoke to the policeman who was involved in the case. He told me, oh hello Mira I read your book and I bought your book and I will call you later to make an appointment with you. And I thought okay he will call later but he didn't call and I was waiting for I think 10 days. And then I thought I have to do something because I have to check -- it is my duty to check the story.

CO: So you followed the instructions in the letter. And where did they take you to?

MF: The village where I found the painting is Greci.

CO: And did you find the work of art in the woods as the letter described?

MF: Yes precisely. It was actually -- sorry, it was not so difficult to find it actually. It was I don't know like a child's play.

CO: And did you have to dig deep into the ground?

MF: No. No it was not so deep. I didn't use the shovel.

CO: You brought a shovel but you didn't need to use it. So you pulled this out. And what did you see? So tell us what you saw when you got this out of the ground?

MF: A plastic package -- I thought I found it. I found it! This is big! I found it guys because I went there with another journalist and writer, Frank Westermen, and he also believed the story and yeah it was an adventure, it was amazing. We found it. But it was not the painting -- not the real painting.

CO: It was a forgery or a fake right?

MF: Yeah it's a fake. Yeah it is a big fake.

CO: And this was some kind of a publicity stunt that you got caught up in?

MF: Yeah.

CO: Do you know who it is that pulled this stunt -- that you got caught in? Do you know what the source of that was?

MF: Because they wrote a play I think and they wanted publicity for the play.

CO: Ah so you got caught up in some sort of thing that they were -- you were used to in order to get publicity for their theater.

MF: Yeah I think I was. They play [inaudible].

CO: And so you find out this is not the painting -- this is not...

MF: This is not the painting. No. I don't know maybe that the real painting is burnt -- I don't know. The mother of the main suspect, Radu Dogaru, her name is Olga Dogaru -- she told the police that she burnt the painting. I don't know.

CO: Well Mira it's quite a story. And thanks for telling it to us.

MF: It's another subject for another book.

CO: [Laughs] You got another novel now.

MF: Yeah I will write a nonfiction book now about our adventure.

CO: Well this one is stranger than fiction so that works. Thanks Mira.

MF: I thank you. Thank you. Good evening. Bye.

JD: Romanian writer Mira Feticu was in The Hague.

[Music]

Restaurant returns Michelin Star

Guest: Kathryn Francis

JD: Venison Wellington with orange peppercorn jus. A salad of seared scallops and sweet corn. Just some of the haute cuisine delights you could have experienced at the restaurant called Checkers in Montgomery, Wales, near Shropshire. It was one of the few joints in Wales to be awarded a Michelin star. And for seven years foodies flocked from far and wide to try the celebrated degustation. But a few months ago the trio that runs Checkers decided to pack it in, return at that Michelin star, and rewrite the menu completely. They have just had their opening weekend. Kathryn Francis is the front of house manager for the Checkers Pantry & Rooms. We reach her in Montgomery, Wales.

CO: Kathryn I know you have just made it through your opening weekend as this new kind of eatery. How did it go?

KATHRYN FRANCIS: It went really well. We were really really chuffed with kind of the number of guests we had coming through the door and we only advertised that we were opening on Wednesday of last week because we wanted the workload to be manageable. So we had a really nice comfortable footfall so it was kind of busy enough to feel like there was a very nice vibe but not so busy that we were overwhelmed.

CO: And how different is this new iteration to what you had before as a Michelin star restaurant?

KF: Well it's in the daytime which is the biggest difference. And we always -- our restaurant has always felt quite informal so you know whenever anyone came in previous today we were always greeted with a smiley face and kind of quite an informal vibe. So this is the same but it's a little bit more rapid so you know we don't have that delayed pre-dinner drinks -- now it is kind of, have a seat, here is your menu, we'll take your drinks. Everything happens much more quickly.

CO: And you don't have that evening dinner with your tasting menu.

KF: No.

CO: And that's the menu that brought people from all over the place to your restaurant because of the Michelin star you had for that right?

KF: Yep perfect. So we used to get guests travelling from maybe up to an hour and a quarter to dinner in the evening by car and that we've got five letting bedrooms so people would travel for kind of upward of three hours to kind of stay overnight -- for one or two nights and have the tasting you so food cook to a certain level.

CO: So your restaurant Checkers was wildly successful, you had this Michelin star, and now you decided to give it up. You contacted Michelin said thanks but we're giving this back. Why did you decide to do that?

KF: We thought long and hard about it -- between our two families so the business is myself and my sister and Sarah's partner Stefan. So they've got three children together. My other half and I've got two children. And you know it was brilliant. We kind of love what we do. But it just got to the stage where we're now kind of seven-eight years in and just juggling the kids and working in the evening and getting a balance between kind of quality of life and work was just getting you know tricky and tiring. And I think we just kind of decided to take a look at what we did and how we do it and not work in the evening was kind of fundamental ready to improving our work life balance.

CO: And it wasn't just that you worked in the evening. I mean if you can describe what it's like to have a restaurant of that quality with a Michelin star having people driving an hour just to have dinner there -- what kind of pressure was that?

KF: Well it's a tricky one to answer because for us the pressure was never really the Michelin star. Sarah and Stefan are both superb chefs and they both cook to a really high level and it's innate -- it's just in them. They've got real pride in what they do. And so you know I think any pressure that you feel is almost self-imposed pressure. So for us the Michelin star was kind of a benchmark that we were so chuffed to get to but maintaining that standard is something that kind of, for us, was just something that we aspire to do for ourselves rather than for anything else.

CO: How did Michelin react when you called them up and said thanks but here's your star back?

KF: Well you know it' was an emotional thing for us because you know we've been so proud of it. And the Michelin star was such an important kind of part of our business and our identity that you did almost feel like you're being ungrateful saying we loved having this star but our current business model doesn't work for us anymore so we're going to swizzle things around. And it was really emotional. But I think, I hope, that Michelin were just kind of happy that we were upfront and honest with them and we let them know before we did the change -- they are just a really professional organization really. And definitely the benchmark for us -- for what we do.

CO: What you're describing is a sort of gradual -- you changed your restaurant. But there are stories aren't there of how much grief it has brought into people's lives, the pressure of these stars, how much emotional and mental pressure it's been. There are chefs who have just said no take it back I can't take it -- I don't want to have you even and judge me for a star because you can't take it. I mean so can you understand what that's like?

KF: Like I said I the pressure for Sarah and Stefan would always be self-imposed because they would always be their own harshest critics. When you do have an inspection it's always nerve racking but for us it was always quite exciting. And from our point of view the inspectors were always really helpful and if they presented themselves then they were at the end of their kind of dining experience it was always a very positive thing because any feedback that you get you'd want to hear it.

CO: And how have things changed at home?

KF: [Chuckles] Well it's actually been really nice and refreshing to not be working in the evenings. So it's nice. We still work kind of you know full time hours. We are still cramming a lot into our day, but to get home in the evening and know that you can light the fire, sort the kids out, read them a story and tuck them up --and then you've got the rest of the evening to you know watch TV, cook, do whatever. It's lovely. [Laughs]

CO: Well Kathryn best of luck. Best of success with the new Checkers and thanks for speaking with us.

KF: Thank you so much.

CO: Bye.

JD: Kathryn Francis is the front of house manager of the Checkers Pantry & Rooms. We reached her in Montgomery, Wales.

[Music]

Premiers meet

JD: Seemed like awkward timing for a little visit between Premiers Doug Ford and Francois Legault. Mr. Ford was welcoming his Quebec counterpart just after eliminating Ontario's French language commissioner and canceling plans for a French language university. He insists the moves are necessary to cut costs but they perhaps understandably have many Franco-Ontarians feeling burned. And if those Franco-Ontarians were hoping that Premier Legault would hold Premier Ford's feet to the fire -- they might have imagined a fire with a little more heat. Here is how Francois Legault described the meeting to reporters this afternoon.

SOUNDCLIP

FRANCOIS LEGAULT: I asked him to reconsider the decisions regarding Francophone university and regarding the commissary.

REPORTERS: What was the reaction?

FRANCOIS LEGAULT: You can ask him. But of course it is agreed.

REPORTER: Could you tell us you why you object to Premier Ford's decession [inaudible]?

FRANCOIS LEGAULT: I think that right now Francophones are co-founder of Canada. In Quebec I have the responsibility of giving services to Anglophones. We have three Anglophone universities. We have a large hospital, McGill hospital in Montreal only for, not only, but specially for Anglophones. So I would have liked to see a francophone University in Ontario. I would prefer to keep a commissary that is dedicated only to Francophones.

REPORTER: Will this hurt your relationship?

FRANCOIS LEGAULT: No I don't think so. I think right now what I want is really to increase commercial exchanges. As you may know it's important for me to create wealth in Quebec. So we'll work on that and I'm still hopeful to convince him eventually about exporting more electricity.

JD: Quebec Premier Francois Legault describing his meeting with Ontario Premier Doug Ford today in Toronto.

[Music]

Fart gate

SOUNDCLIP

[Chatter in Dutch]

JD: Dutch darts commentator Arjen van der Giessen addressing the controversy hanging over one match in this year's Grand Slam of Darts. Yesterday the Grand Slam wrapped up in Wolverhampton, England. Welsh player Gerwin Price staged a dramatic comeback to defeat former professional darts champion Scotsman Gary Anderson. Apparently it was a nasty series of games in which neither player held back. But Mr. Anderson was playing under a cloud accused of not holding back in a game several days earlier. On Thursday he squared off against Dutch darter Wesley Harms. Gary Anderson won ten to two. But after the match Mr. Harms raised a stink claiming his opponent had. This then is "fart gate." Wesley Harms said Gary Anderson had attempted to intimidate him with flatulence. He told the Dutch TV station RTL-7L "it will take me two nights to lose the smell from my nose." And after that a Dutch sportscaster confronted Mr. Anderson with his opponents claim.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: It was bad.

VOICE 2: It was bad.

VOICE 1: It was bad. It was a stink. I thought it was him. [Inaudible]

VOICE 2: And he thought it was you.

VOICE 1: Oh no. Hands up, swear on my kids life so help me god, nothing crossed.

VOICE 2: But it was smelly anyway.

VOICE 1: It was smelly. Usually I fart I just [censor bleep] myself because I have told you in a documentary. If I farted and it smelt like that I'd put my hands up and go sorry.

VOICE 2: So who was it then?

VOICE 1: Well don't tell me -- you've gotten enough boys up there. So [Chuckles] it was table side It was eggs. Rotten eggs.

VOICE 2: Not from you?

VOICE 1: Not from me. No.

JD: A candid, perhaps excessively so, Gary Anderson insisting that he who had reported smelling it, Wesley Harms, was in fact the one responsible for dealing it. And according to the Guardian Mr. Anderson confessed to having broken wind during matches before but said he had "never used it as an advantage." And that is where we leave 'fart gate' with the air fittingly uncleared. We will never know which player is getting a bum rap or whether Gary Anderson staged a come from behind victory.

November 19, 2018 Episode Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode