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 2016

The AIH Transcript for February 9, 2017

Hosts: Helen Mann and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

HM: Hello, I'm Helen Mann.

JD: Good evening, I'm Jeff Douglas. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight:

HM: It's no place like home. Yesterday, Guadalupe Garcia de Rayos went for a routine immigration check in Phoenix, Arizona – and today, her family's still there, but she's been deported to Mexico.

JD: He kept his nose out of trouble. But the rest of him was in serious jeopardy – and an Australian man's nostrils were what kept him alive after his excavator fell in a waterhole, trapping him inside for hours.

HM: Points of entry. Canadians are being turned away and visitors may be ordered to hand over their phones and passwords – so we ask a lawyer to explain what rights we really have when entering the United States.

JD: The meat of the matter. A brand of American canned dog food is recalled after a pug dies – and a euthanasia drug is found both in the can and in the dog's stomach.

HM: Instead of a total fox, a complete weasel. Instead of a dreamboat, a deflating dinghy. There are lots of versions of Jane Austen's Mr. Darcy, but in terms of sex appeal, Colin comes Firth – and a new portrait is a distant second.

JD: And...twist ending. Wait – do people still do the twist? Well, in one Oklahoma town, there'll be no twist or hustle or Macarena: the Valentine's Day dance was cancelled – because the venue was too close to a church.
As It Happens, the Thursday edition. Radio that thinks it's time they woke up from their booty sleep.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Part 1: Phoenix deportation, border rights explainer, Valentine's dance cancelled

Phoenix deportation

Guest: Ray Ybarra Maldonado

JD: It happened so fast. Yesterday, Guadalupe Garcia de Rayos stepped into an immigration office in Phoenix, Arizona. She was detained. And then she was deported to Mexico – a country she hasn't even visited for twenty-one years.
Her deportation order is believed to be the first since U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order cracking down on undocumented immigrants. Ray Ybarra Maldonado is Ms. Garcia de Rayos' lawyer. We reached him in Phoenix.

HM: Mr. Maldonado I hear your client was deported this morning to a border town in Mexico. Does she have any connection with that town?

RAY YBARRA MALDONADO: No. The town she was dropped off in is a border town in the state of Sonora. She's from the state of Guanajuato, which is probably a 13 hour drive to get there, so she has no connection to the city where she was deported to.

HM: Are you worried about her being there?

RYM: I think I'm worried for the family more than anything. The separation from your mother, from your wife is just heartbreaking. Safety wise, for Guadalupe, she's an incredibly strong woman. It is obviously, unbelievably scary to be in a country that you probably don't even remember. She left Mexico when she was 14. So we do hope that she's been taken good care of.

HM: You speak of her strength. You have also spent time with her husband and children since this all began. How are they dealing with all of this and what are they saying?

RYM: It's tough. You know you can see the tears, the pain when they're speaking. We just came from a press conference where they addressed the media, talking about the pain of being without their mom, but also the faith that they have to keep moving forward even though they just suffered a tremendous loss.

HM: Your client was detained yesterday when she went to an Immigrations and Customs office in Phoenix. Why has she gone there in the first place?

RYM: She has an ICE check-in. In her case, she was arrested for working with fake Social Security number, given a criminal conviction then went through immigration proceedings. She was given a voluntary departure. She did not leave the country. That turned into an order of removal based off of that, she had an order of supervision to check in with ICE Immigration and Customs Enforcement every year. And based on that, she was sent in there, it was a routine check-in, but because President Trump’s executive orders, she was taken into custody yesterday.

HM: Why was it that your client was required to check-in with these border enforcement people? I'm just… I know something happened eight years ago. What was that?

RYM: In the United States America to work. You have to pass E-Verify. To pass E-Verify, you have to give a fake social security number. It was discovered that she did that, she was arrested following an investigation by a notorious former sheriff down here, Joe Arpaio. The results of his actions have been a federal civil rights lawsuit, multiple files against him, and to this day, the sheriff’s office cannot engage in those kinds of unlawful raids because only the federal government can do them. So she's even being removed on a conviction that you know wouldn't take place in this day and age because the county does not have the authority to go after someone. Her real crime is wanting to feed herself. Her real crime is wanting to write a better life for her children than her parents are able to provide for her. And obviously an just society, we reward that, we encourage that, we support that. But in our society here in United States of America, we punish that. The desire to improve your lot, the desire to have a better life for your children, is something that is criminalized to this day in the United States of America.

HM: That removal order. She knew that was in place. Knowing that, was she worried that she might actually be deported from this office when she showed up one day?

RYM: Guadalupe is an incredibly strong woman, an incredibly believer in her faith, right. She just has this strong belief in her religion, in her god. She wanted to do the right thing to do.

HM: Did she can they're not going in there?

RYM: Yeah there were they were options presented of going into a church for sanctuary. They gave her options for just not showing up. At the end of the day, it was the family's decision. But I think more than anything, in her belief system it’s just “Do the right thing.” And the right thing is to present when they tell you the present. That's what she did.

HM: You said that Ms. Garcia de Rayos was just 14 when she arrived in the U.S. How did she get there?

RYM: She entered the country, as many people do, without inspection. You know, coming through the desert, coming through the mountains, and built a life here in Phoenix, Arizona, has two beautiful children, both in high school, has a loving husband, and now she's torn apart from them. And they were just living their life just like all of us want to do. We want to work hard. We want to get ahead a little bit. We have a family and now the government screwed that up for them.

HM: U.S. President Donald Trump has made it clear he plans to expand the nation of undocumented immigrants. Do you think your client's deportation is a direct consequence of that order?

RYM: I do. I think we're seeing the implementation of an executive order, basically calling on anybody that had a dark skin to be deported. I mean it's absolutely outrageous, the priority for deportation. Not a felony conviction, not a misdemeanor conviction, not even an arrest. You can also just be thought of as someone as having committed a crime and you're now a priority for being deported.
It's a declaration of war. It’s a declaration of war against immigrants in the United States of America. We all need to be afraid. We all need to tremble at the sight of the all mighty powerful federal government and we have to be ready. It's time for us not to just to think about law suits, but ways that we can organize a community and we can be prepared to fight back.

HM: We hear a lot of reaction from people who ask why clients like yours don't just apply for legal status in the United States. What do you say to that?

RYM: Yeah I mean I would love it. You know, if someone gives me an application, I got 2000 immigrants that I can send to you in the next two weeks that are God-fearing, law abiding people who are working to support themselves and their family and have not done a damn thing wrong in their entire lives. The problem is that that application doesn't exist. There is no line for someone to jump into and say Give me a litmus test of whether or not I belong in this community. It just doesn't exist.

HM: Your client's children are American citizens. What do those teenagers and her husband do now?

RYM: Yeah I think everybody is in a state of shock. You know they weren't prepared for or expecting this to happen. It's time to give them time to regroup and set up a game plan of how they're going to move forward as a family.

HM: What options do they have?

RYM: Not much legally. You know, the government wanted her deported. As they mentioned, they can deport her, and as they showed up, they did deport her. So legally, the options are not even few and far between. They're just nonexistent.

HM: Mr. Ybarra Maldonado, thank you for talking with us today. We appreciate it.

RYM: Of course. My pleasure.

HM: All right. Goodbye.

JD: Ray Ybarra Maldonado is the lawyer representing Guadalupe Garcia de Rayos. Ms. Garcia de Rayos was deported to Mexico today, after 21 years living in the United States as an undocumented immigrant.
At a press conference today, outside a Phoenix immigration office, her family spoke to a crowd. This is part of what her 14-year-old daughter Jackie said.

SOUNDCLIP

JACKIE DE RAYOS: Seeing my mom in that van. It was unexplainable. My mom's really kind person. She would never hurt anybody. Everybody loves her. She would treat everybody as if they were family. She has a really big. And I think it's unfair that they just took her away just because she was working in order to support us. And no one. No one should ever go through the pain of having their money taken away from them. Or the the pain of packing her suitcase. No one should go to their mother's clothes, seeing oh is she is she going to need this or is she going to need that? No one should be packing their mother's suitcase. And I honestly don't have any words because it's just sad.

JD: That was Jackie, the 14 year old daughter of Guadalupe Garcia de Rayos, who was deported to Mexico earlier today.

[Music]

Homeland security

Guest: Caily DiPuma

JD: The next time you hit the U.S. border, you may be asked for a lot more than just your passport and the reason for your visit. Donald Trump's new Homeland Security Secretary, John Kelly, was on US public radio today. The host, Rachel Martin wanted to know what President Trump's promise of "extreme vetting" of visitors would mean. Her question stemmed from the travel ban that the administration has imposed on people from 7 countries with Muslim majorities. But Secretary Kelly didn't stop there.

SOUNDCLIP

JOHN KELLY: Someone comes in and says “I want to come to the United States.” Then we ask them to give us a list of websites that they visit, and the passwords to get on those websites to see what they're looking at.

RACHEL MARTIN: You require that of anyone who is looking to immigrate to the U.S.

JK: Well, we’re considering that, yeah. Social media, to see what they tweet. Cell phones. Cell phone conversations, or cell phone contact books, where we can run them against databases, telephone numbers, people's names. Europe, the United States maintains databases and it shares those databases. So these are some of the things we're thinking about.

RM: And you’re thinking about them as it pertains to these seven countries and places where refugees are fleeing from but also do I hear you saying it could be expanded?

JK: It could be. Yeah, it could be. It all comes down to the confidence we have in the individual we're talking to is a person who is coming to the United States for the right reasons.

JD: That was United States Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly speaking with NPR Host Rachel Martin.
Secretary Kelly's comments come after a woman from Quebec told us she was turned away from a Vermont border crossing after being questioned about her Muslim faith. So we thought it was time to find out what rights we have when we arrive at the U.S. border. Caily DiPuma is a lawyer with the B.C. Civil Liberties Association. We reached her in Vancouver.

HM: Ms. DiPuma, broadly speaking, how would you describe the rights we Canadians have when we present our passports to a U.S. Customs officer?

CAILY DIPUMA: Well in general, when you're sitting in Canada, as we all know you have a whole panoply of Charter rights. If you're on U.S. soil, you also have all of the rights under their constitution. But when you're at the border, courts in both countries have determined that your rights are significantly narrower in scope.

HM: And does the discretion about those decisions rest with individual customs officers?

CD: It absolutely does. Now U.S. customs like Canadian Customs has a whole host of policies and procedures that they should be applying every time they interact with a traveler. But even within that, an individual border officer has a significant degree of discretion to determine his or her opinion whether a person should be admissible.

HM: Yesterday we heard from Fadwa Alaoui , a Quebec woman who was turned away from the U.S. after being asked about her religion at the border. Did the border officers have the power to ask her about that?

CD: Certainly they have, they're entitled to ask all sorts of questions, including potentially your political affiliation, your intention for traveling to the country certainly is a question that they almost invariably ask. The question about religion seems to offend your kind of general sense of non-discriminatory conduct by the government. But yes without being able to demonstrate a real discriminatory intent by the question, certainly they are able to ask it.

HM: Now Mr. Alaoui was also asked for her smartphone and the password, both of which she gave them. Did she have to hand that over?

CD: Again, she could have declined to do so, but the result would have been that she would not have an opportunity to enter the country. And you know, as a matter of course, interactions with border guards are documented. They’re documented on both the Canada and the U.S. side. So it’s highly likely that she would have faced additional difficulties getting into the country if she did refuse to provide her electronic devices.

HM: So this is sort of something goes on your permanent record, as we used to hear in school, if you do something like this.

CD: It's highly likely that there would be a notation made in a report filed in relation to any person who's denied entry. So certainly it would could potentially impede her ability to do so in the future.

HM: We heard a clip just before speaking with you from the Homeland Security Secretary in the States. What would it mean if those officers start asking for people's social media passwords as they come to the border?

CD: You know people will really have to start thinking if that sort of rule is enacted and they're required to produce passwords and other things relating to their social media, about whether they want to continue to travel across the border. And from a civil liberties perspective, the biggest concern is that people will begin to self-censor on social media or in other forums electronically because of the concern about their ability to travel. And you know it's one thing to not be able to travel across the border because you want to buy some gas for your car. It's a whole another thing to say that you can't travel across the border for business, or to visit a relative.
And so for many people with connections in the U.S. it's going to put a lot of pressure on people to potentially chill their free expression in order to continue to cross the border in a way that they think might be… might be easier.

HM: What do you do when you travel to the United States. Do you take your phone with you?

CD: I do not take my phone with me because I have e-mail that is on my phone that is subject to a solicitor client privilege. So I take a laptop with me that can connect remotely to my office server so I can still have access to my e-mails, but I don't take my phone with me.

HM: Does that not maybe raise sort of the suspicions of the border guards that you don't have a phone?

CD: No I have never been asked for my phone. I think I generally have a potentially an easier time at the border when they ask me my profession. I think sometimes that makes it a bit smoother for me. But I won't take the risk with my client’s information. But at some point, you know I could be asked for the password to my phone. And certainly if I was asked for my password, I would refuse to give it, and there may be some consequences down the road for me traveling back and forth in the U.S. as a result of that.

HM: Does that predate the Trump presidency? Because you know there are a lot of questions being asked because of the change of administration in Washington and whether this stuff that we're seeing at the border is a result of that a change of administration.

CD: Even before the Trump administration, there was the discretion to ask for your iPhone password, to ask to see your phone. But I think what we're seeing now, is the reality of kind of the legal situation that had has always existed or border, which is you know, countries are generally entitled to decide who comes in and out. So this administration has certainly raised a lot of questions and concerns for people but this situation has existed and exists in Canada large part of our border for some time now.

HM: Canada's public safety minister told the House of Commons today that Canadians should report any problems that they have at the borders so that his government can bring this up with the Americans. What can the Canadian government do, if anything?

CD: I think one thing they can do is to educate the public generally about what their rights and responsibilities are at the border. I think that they can work very hard to get clarity with the new administration in the U.S. about changes that may be put in place, the impact that those changes are going to have on Canada. And I also think we should look very closely at some of the arrangements that we have with the U.S. such as border pre-clearance at our Canadian airports, because we have a situation currently, where U.S. border guards are applying U.S. law on Canadian soil. And if it becomes apparent that the law that they're applying is inconsistent with our charter, I think the Canadian government has an obligation to assess the situation and potentially disentangle ourselves.

HM: Ms. DiPuma, thank you for talking with us.

CD: Thank you.

HM: OK. Goodbye.

CD: Bye-bye.

JD: Caily DiPuma is a lawyer with the BC Civil Liberties Associaiton. We reached her in Vancouver.

[Music]

Valentine’s dance cancelled

Guest: Shelly Rivera

JD: It sounds like a remake of the movie Footloose. I know, they already did a remake of Footloose. Don't talk about it. I wish I hadn't brought it up. Why did they do that? Let's just say it sounds like Footloose. But it's not Footloose. It's a real-life story happening in the small town of Henryetta, Oklahoma – where a Valentine's Day dance was recently cancelled because of a little-known city ordinance. The problem was: their dance venue was too close to a church. Shelly Rivera is one of the owners of the venue. She is also one of the organizers of the dance. We reached her in Henryetta.

HM: Shelly, how far is your dance venue from the church?

SHELLY RIVERA: It's approximately 300 feet.

HM: And what are the rules according to this 1979 city ordinance?

SR: No dancing shall be allowed between five hundred feet between a church or school.

HM: So you're kind of out of luck.

SR: Yeah. Or residence.

HM: Or residence too?

SR: Yes.

HM: So how did you find out the dance wasn't allowed?

SR: Well we… in that community I've was born and raised here, Joni was raised in the community also, and left and came back. Her and her husband retired back into her hometown. And nobody that we, either one of us could remember, had ever been… the law has never been enforced.

HM: So nobody even knew it existed?

SR: We knew it existed but it was one of those old antique laws that had never been enforced in forty years. And the Civic Center, it's across the street. City Hall is across the street from our building in business. And if even actually closer to the church. And they have for years and years, they had many many dances in the civic center and nobody had complained. So we felt that we were not doing anything wrong and having our Valentine's Day dance. And the day that we started… the chamber was gracious enough to post that from our sit onto their site, it exploded. And Joni started being verbally attacked, cyber-bullied online.

HM: Who was doing the cyber bullying? Do you have any idea?

SR: Yes it's a lady that used to live here years ago and she no longer lives here.

HM: What's her complaint?

SR: That we're breaking the law. And Joni’'s husband is our local city attorney and she took the stand that we were being given preferential treatment because of who he was.

HM: So what does Joni's husband say about all of this?

SR: Well he is an officer of the court and it is a violation of our city ordinance. And so because there was an opposition to the dance, he advised us to cancel the dance because his integrity was being attacked on Facebook.

HM: The mayor has said very clearly the ordinance has never been used. And police in your community, say they wouldn't enforce it anyway.

SR: That is correct.

HM: So really, what's the point in canceling the dance beyond I guess, worrying about Joni’s husband's reputation.

SR: That well that's very important to us. And we don't want his integrity to be questioned because some person that doesn't even live here are so concerned about what goes on in a community that she's not invested in.

HM: How long has John been the city attorney?

SR: Just a few months.

HM: But before this, people were occasionally holding dances as you said, despite this ordinance.

SR: Everywhere. Even our school has a prom every year and has had since I can remember. So the prom was being held inside, not even a few feet away, but it's inside the cafeteria. And so technically that's illegal.

HM: What does the church say? Have you spoken to people there?

SR: I have spoken to one of my friends that attends church there. And you know he is flabbergasted. Of course he doesn't participate in dancing. They our church of Christ, our church of Christ has not had any issues or any problems with us whatsoever. Many of the church members have come over and looked in our shop and purchased things. They've been excited that a building this close to them is being worked on.

HM: Do you think any of the members of the church would object if he got the ordinance changed?

SR: No. Now I don't believe they would be. And like I said, this isn’t something that we were going to be having every week. This was just a Valentine's Day dance. And we do have a community that's very small. And the only thing… we don't have a movie theater, and we don't even have a dance school or anything like that. The only thing that we have is sports [unintelligible]. You know, our community is very sports driven and rodeo driven.

HM: What do you think of the comparisons that are out there right now between Henryietta and the town in the movie Footloose.

SR: It's very similar. It's very similar. And in the ordinance, it does say that if there's any lewd dancing, the person can be ticketed, the police chief can take care of those items. You know, it's very specific, and I'd be more than happy to send a copy of that to you. It gets into very details of what lewd dancing is or inappropriate acting out.

HM: Do you remember when this ordinance was passed?

SR: I believe I was 10 when all this happened. It all started when a discotheque, someone wanted to open a discotheque right on Main Street. Our community… we are in the Bible Belt and our community is very small. We do have many, many, many churches. So the way the ordinance was written, you almost couldn't go anywhere in town and not be close to a church. So it doesn't say you can't dance — but you can't dance close to a school or a church.

HM: What about the dance? Is it gone for sure? You're not going to move it somewhere else?

SR: We're not going to move it. We are going to try to go through the proper channels of working with our city officials. We do not encourage law-breaking. We've been called outlaws and rebels. We've been called all kinds of names.

HM: How does it feel to be called an outlaw for holding a dance?

SR: Well, we took it in jest, in the beginning. But the cyberbullying and the private messages on Facebook to Joni have been very vicious.

HM: What are sit home alone again, maybe watch Footloose.

SR: I just might. You know… we've been. A lot of people have been supportive, but I don't want people to think that it's OK to break the law. We felt and many communities across the United States have outdated ordinances on their books.

HM: Shelly Rivera thank you very much.

SR: You are so welcome.

HM: Well good luck with your plans.

SR: Thank you.

HM: Bye.

JD: That was Shelly Rivera, the co-owner of Rosie Lavan's marketplace. She's in Henryetta, Oklahoma. Ms. Rivera was forced to cancel a Valentine's Day dance, after finding out about a law that bans dancing within a certain distance of town churches.

Back To Top »

Part 2: Dam collapse rescue, dog food recall

Dam collapse rescue

Guest: Daniel Miller

JEFF DOUGLAS: He was stuck under a three ton machine for hours with only his nose above water. On Tuesday in Australia, Daniel Miller was riding an excavator on his property when it rolled and trapped him in a waterhole. We reached Mr. Miller in Newcastle, New South Wales.

HELEN MANN: Daniel Miller, how are you doing today?

DANIEL MILLER: I'm good. I'm just hopefully getting out of hospital today. That would make me very happy.

HM: And what kind of injuries have you sustained? Are you feeling OK?

DM: I've got a lot of water and diesel and hydraulic fluid in my lungs when I was in the water, so I’ve got pneumonia in my longs so I’m on a lot of antibiotics. But injury wise I'm pretty good. I’ve got a sore back as you can imagine, a little bit stiff, a few scratches, but yeah, no, I'm good. I'm walking around, I'm happy. I just so my kids for the first time, so I'm pretty happy.

HM: Take us through how you became stuck under this excavator.

DM: I was working on a small dam on my property. I moved the arm of the excavator, the boom. Pick up a rock, grab some mud out of the dam. The tracks slid a little bit, and the next thing I know, I was in the dam. I was underwater and then the machine, the bar landed on top of my back, I felt it hit my spine and start to push me down into the water.
The bottom of the dam was really muddy. It’s pushing me down and I thought I got to get out of here. This is serious.
So I wiggled my way up and then I couldn’t get past the roll bar of the excavator. Got stuck on my butt, and then the weight started to push me down. And that’s when I was pinned.

HM: How much of you was above water?

DM: I was pretty good at that stage. I had from my chin up, that’s why pushing my arms up, like a push up position with my pelvis stuck to the floor of the dam. I knew there was no one coming. The closest house is probably 500 metres away. So I thought, I've got to do something. I’ll see if I can dig myself out with my hands. But that just sunk me further down so then my mouth was in the water just my nose was sticking up.

HM: How did you hold your nose above that water?

DM: I pushed my hand into the mud. I knew that 6:00 was the worst case scenario. I estimated it was about 11:30, 12:00. I thought well if the excavator doesn’t sink any further into the mud, six hours is what I’ve got to survive and then someone will look for me.

HM: What else is going through your mind at a time like that?

DM: I promised my wife when we got married, her mother died when she was very young. I promised her that I wouldn't die first. And then I’ve got two young children, a four year old girl and a nine year old boy. I thought, [beep] if someone's going to bring them time from their after school care, because I haven’t been to pick them up, and they’re going to find me there. I couldn't let that happen. So then.

HM: How physically grueling was it for you to hold that position for as long as you did. And how long was that?

DM: I’ve surfed a lot. I’ve surfed a lot of big waves, and I know you got to stay calm, when anything goes wrong in the water. Six hours is very overwhelming to your mind. So I broke it down into 60 seconds. And I’d put my arms out wide to sixty, like a wide push-up position, count to sixty. Then I’d move my arms to a closer position and count to sixty. It’s hard to stay away from emotion and then just work out the times when opportunities to alert someone might happen like the neighbour going to pick the kids up from school at 3:00. I guesstimated those times. Fortunately that's what did it in the end. I yelled when I thought she might be going and then had a burst for about 10 minutes of just pushing myself as hard as I could to get my mouth out of the water and just yelled and yelled and yelled.

HM: Who came to your rescue?

DM: So a neighbour. Mel Cook, my neighbour. She saw her car. I was below the dam wall so I couldn't see anything but I could turn my head to the left, so I could just see her car. And I couldn't hear because my ears were full of water and hydraulic fluid. So then I saw this car coming out of the driveway as she got out and I yelled, and and she came around the corner, poor thing. I felt more sorry than myself. The look on her face was just terror. She saw that picture of my little head sticking out of the dam. Yeah, and then I knew not long and I'd be out of there.

HM: Did someone help hold your chin up once they arrived?

DM: Yeah, the neighbors when they got there, they tried to do that. But my body was so seized and spasming by then, I was actually, in certain ways, the pressure of them holding my chin made it harder. I'd almost gotten to a place where I was locked in this position in my brain had said, this is the position you’re staying to survive.

HM: How long did it take them to get you out of there?

DM: It was an hour for them to get me out. So all in all, I think it was about three and a half, four hours in there.

HM: And besides the strain and the diesel fuel and as you said the threat of pneumonia, you had hypothermia, is that right?

DM: Yeah, I had hypothermia. It's funny. When I got out, all the guys around me are sweating and there I am shivering. It’s been very hot here.

HM: What did your wife and kids say when they saw you?

DM: Everyone's happy. Everyone’s just happy to see each other, you know? That blessing.

HM: Yeah. You're coping with the aftermath well.

DM: Yeah, people keep asking about the… I don't know, if it happens, later on. But you know, I actually just feel like I've just won. It's all good. I don't feel any mental trauma or anything. People keep talking about are you going to feel some post-traumatic stress? Maybe later. But right now I'm just… I'm just so happy. I wouldn't even consider what I was doing that day as dangerous. Then just in five seconds, my life went from what it was, to could have been all over. And ruined the lives of a young family.

HM: I'm glad your life goes on and that you were able to talk with us today. It's a pleasure. Thank you very much.

DM: Cheers. Good luck to you.

HM: You too.

DM: Bye.

HM: Bye.

JD: Daniel Miller was trapped under an excavator for hours on his property in Charlotte Bay, Australia, with just his nose above water. He is now recovering from hypothermia, pneumonia, and back injuries at a hospital in Newcastle, and that's where we reached him.

[Music]

Sheila North Wilson

JD: Sheila North Wilson's understanding of the high rates of suicide in Indigenous communities isn't just profound. It is personal.
Ms. North Wilson is the Grand Chief of Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak – which represents thirty Manitoba First Nations. On Monday, she was in Ottawa. She was preparing to speak at the standing committee studying the high suicide rate. That's when she got the news: her cousin had taken his own life.
Today, Sheila North Wilson spoke at the standing committee. She also spoke with CBC News Network host Suhana Meharchand.

SOUNDCLIP

SHEILA NORTH WILSON: So I had a chance to tell them about what suicide is doing and how it’s ever present in our communities. But also I had a chance to talk to them about the real lives that are being affected by this issue including my own cousin, Gabe and Warren who took their lives. Gabe just on Monday, so I was able to you know give a little bit of a personal reality checks to the people that are there, that make policy decisions on our behalf, and I told them that things have to change to really address the root causes of why young, beautiful people in our communities are taking their own lives.

SUHANA MEHARCHAND: Goodness. You just said Gabe took his life on Monday. It's Thursday. Your heart must have been aching as you went through this meeting.

SNW: Suhana, I feel really sick right now. Physically ill. Unfortunately for me, it hits home closer as I had to make this appearance today and I didn't want to, but I had to do it because it never really goes away.

SM: You know what, Chief, it takes great strength to overcome personal trauma and try to affect change no matter what the situation. Let me ask you what the communities facing these higher suicide rates, these First Nations communities. What do you need?

SNW: Well I think Canada has the opportunity during this 150 celebration to really think of what this actually means. What are we celebrating when we talk about Canada 150? We're celebrating the fact that our Indigenous people from this own country are still living in poverty and high rates of suicide and poor health. These young men wanted a good life. My cousin Gabe finished a course on heavy duty operation. He has three children he has a wife and he made a good go of life. But how are we supposed to expect people to succeed when we don't have the opportunities to match the will to live and the will to make a good go of life.

JD: Chief Sheila North Wilson speaking with CBC News Network host Suhana Meharchand. Ms. North Wilson is the Grand Chief of Manitoba Keewatinowi Okimakanak, which represents thirty Manitoba First Nations. Earlier today, she was in Ottawa at the standing committee studying the high rate of suicides in Indigenous communities.

[Music]

Dog food recall

Guest: Nikki Mael

JD: It was supposed to be a festive treat for the four pugs – Tank, Tito, Tinkerbell, and Talula. But moments after Nikki Mael opened the can of "Hunk of Beef" dog food and gave it to her pets on New Year's Eve, she was rushing them to the emergency vet.
Now, Evangers – the company behind the food – is issuing a voluntary recall of all cans manufactured the same week as the affected can. We reached Nikki Mael in Washougal, Washington.

HM: Ms. Mael, tell us what happened after your dogs ate this Hunk of Beef dog food.

NIKKI MAEL: After they ate the dog food, within 15 minutes, they were acting drunk, like running into walls and things like that, and their limbs were going limp. They weren't able to walk. Tito was having a seizure and pedaling and then I put them in the car and I took them to the emergency vet. And by the time we got in there, they were just listless. They were still breathing, but they just weren't responsive.

HM: Do you immediately suspect that it might be the food?

NM: Yes.

HM: And what did you tell the vet?

NM: I said to the vet “I don't know. This is what they ate.” I brought the can and they were all like dumbfounded, they didn't think it would be the food. I said there's nothing else you know that they got into or anything like that. And so they basically just treated them for a poison to get it out of their system and they were in ICU overnight. Talula, of course passed away. I was able to bring Tank and Tinkerbell home that Sunday. And then Tito had to stay an extra day because he was having seizures. And I was able to pick him up on Monday.

HM: Why do you think Talula succumbed when the other dogs didn't?

NM: I think she ate the most. Her and Tito both eat a lot so I believe that they ate the most and that's why she passed away.

HM: What impact did that have on you that she had died?

NM: Oh my gosh it was horrific. It was the worst news of my life. I can't believe that my dog passed away from that. You know she should have died from old age, not poisoned dog food.

HM: So at that point what is the vet saying to you about what might have happened? Initially they were skeptical about the food. What did they say at that point?

NM: They didn't know. They were still lost. But they did suggest an autopsy for Talula and they scheduled that for me. And she said that would be something that can help, you know the other dogs if they remain sick and things like that. So that Monday my son and I and my friend took took Talula up to OSU. And they did and the autopsy on her.

HM: And what is OSU?

NM: It’s Oregon State University.

HM: OK. And they did this necropsy. Did they do a toxicology report?

NM: They did. That found the pentobarbital.

HM: What is pentobarbital?

NM: Pentobarbital is a euthanizing agent used to euthanize animals that are at their last stages of life. It's also used on death row, so terrible drugs.

HM: What did you think when you saw that report?

NM: I freaked out. I couldn't believe that something that I trusted, I thought I trusted you know, that that would be the death of my dog. It's the scariest thing ever.

HM: And this was by the way in the stomach is that right?

NM: It was found in Talula's stomach contents. It was also found in the food because I brought the can and there was little remnants in there. It was also found in the can itself and in unopened cans.

HM: Have you ever heard of anything like this being found in dog food? Had the people at Oregon State or your vet or anybody you ever heard of this before?

NM: I don't I don't believe so. I later found out after doing some research that it can end up in dog food. And that just scares me.

HM: So you've talked with the Food and Drug Administration and the toxicologist. What do you know about how this pentobarbital could have made it into the dog food?

NM: They're not sure. They think that maybe they were buying bad meat that were euthanized animals, and then putting it in their food.

HM: The company, Evangers issued a statement they say they've cut ties with their supplier, one they've been working with for 40 years. They say it was you know material that was approved by the U.S. Agriculture Department. And they say in addition to the recall, they paid your veterinary bills, made a shelter donation in Talula’s name,and that they are testing other cans for pentobarbital and they will review those results when they find out. What do you think of that response? Is that not to some degree satisfactory?

NM: No. You know, if you are a manufacturer of a product and it is in the warehouse and you are sending it out to the public to feed to their animals, you're ensuring that that is 100 percent safe. That should have never ever left the factory because my dog would still be alive. Food and Drug Administration is not done with their investigation as of yet. When they get on with their investigation, then we'll know more. But as of now, you know, they had a month to do a voluntary recall and they did nothing. Those were legitimate test results. They could have called a recall a month ago and they didn't.

HM: So the product is now under recall.

NM: Yes. I believe that the whole warehouse needs to be under recall because they obviously didn't know it was in Hunk of Beef. Who is not to say it's in all the other ones?

HM: The company says that this is the only case of poisoning that they know of at this time. Have you heard of any others? Do you have any evidence that there's other cases?

NM: Several people have been e-mailing me back and forth and saying that their dogs suffered the same things. I don't have their paperwork of course but they've suffered the same symptoms with the same dog food.

HM: Beyond the company that you're concerned about, what has this said to you about the pet food industry as a whole? Do you have broader concerns?

NM: Oh yes absolutely. It scares me. These are our family members. It just tears my heart apart. I think that there needs to be regular testing on all the dog foods. They need to be going into every single dog food company and testing different batches, making sure everybody's been compliant, and not just once, all the time.

HM: How has this affected what you feed your remaining dogs?

NM: I don't feed them dog food at all. I'm cooking for them.

HM: Wow it's really awful that you've had to go through all of this. Thank you very much for telling us about it.

NM: You're welcome.

HM: Ok goodbye.

NM: Bye.

JD: We reached Nikki Mael is Washougal, Washington. Evangers, the company behind "Hunk of Beef" dog food, issued a voluntary recall last Friday, after Ms. Mael's four pugs fell ill after eating it – one of them, Talula, died.
You can find Evangers' full statement, as well as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's announcement of the recall on our website, cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Mr. Darcy portrait

JD: In the 1995 miniseries, he strides toward Elizabeth Bennet after a spontaneous swim in a private lake on his sprawling estate. His wet, translucent shirt is clinging to his brawny torso. Elizabeth is left breathless.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: Music]

ELIZABETH BENNET: Mr. Darcy

MR. DARCY: Ms. Bennet.

EB: I did not expect to see you, sir.

EB: In the 2005 movie, he strides boldly toward Elizabeth Bennet across a misty moor. His great coat flows behind him. He confesses his love at which Elizabeth melts along with all of us.

SOUNDCLIP

MR. DARCY: If, however, your feelings have changed, I will have to tell you, you have bewitched me, body and soul, and I love… I love… I love you. I never wish to be parted from you for this day on.

JD: You get the idea. Mr. Darcy from Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice as played first by Colin Firth and Matthew McFadde,n is one sexy hunk of grade A 19th century beef.
So who is this dork. He's pallid. His hair is powdered white. He's narrow of shoulder and pointy of chin. If he went for a swim in a private lake, he would thrash around screeching and drown within a minute. If he strode across the moor, he would collapse gasping for breath and require his manservants to carry him back to Pemberley. And yet this guy, this anemic vaguely reptilian guy, this is supposedly Mr. Darcy? That is what two British experts say. They've just published a study called “The real Mr. Darcy, a dramatic reappraisal.” They worked from Ms. Austin's novel, knowledge of the social mores and fashion of the time, and an understanding of the genetics of the British upper classes of the early 19th century. And then they got an artist to create this lanky goon in a blue jacket and a white shirt that no one would ever want to see wet and translucent.
Now the experts, maybe they're feeling pride. All I feel is prejudice, because it is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of this face and hair must have been in want of a makeover.

Back To Top »

Part 3: Florida python catchers, shot-up Lexus

Spicer on Gorsuch

JD: The first clue that U.S. President Donald Trump might have a rocky relationship with the judiciary came last summer. That was when, you’ll remember, on the campaign trail, Mr. Trump suggested that an American judge of Mexican descent was incapable of being impartial because of his heritage.
So it shouldn't have been a big surprise when last week, he lashed out at a Seattle district court judge who blocked his travel ban, calling the judge a "so-called judge" in a tweet.
What was a bit of a surprise was that President Trump's supreme court pick, Neil Gorsuch, expressed his dismay about the President's tweet to a senator. That senator, a Democrat, said last night that Judge Gorsuch has told him that he found the President's tweet "demoralizing and disheartening." White House spokesman Sean Spicer had to field a number of questions about the comments in his daily press briefing today:

SOUNDCLIP

REPORTER: I want to make sure I understand what you say. Are you saying that “demoralizing and disheartening” was not specifically about the president's comments and what he said, and if so how–

SEAN SPICER: No I think the judge literally made it very clear in his comments. I understand that. Senator Ayotte, who was there, made it very clear that he was he was commenting in general about attacks on the judiciary. That was it, plain and simple. I understand that, Cecilia, I can tell you what Senator Ayotte, who has been with him on every single thing, was very clear about that. There is no… so I understand that. And that is, she has made it very clear over and over again.

REPORTER 2: Your answer about the context doesn't make sense when you think about what Senator Ben Sasse said today, this morning on TV he said that he asked Judge Gorsuch specifically about the president's “so-called judge” tweet and in response–

SS: Phil, this is like the fourth time I've asked and answered.

REPORTER 2: No but this is a different context, Sean. I understand that. Phil, I've asked him directly. I understand that and I've said exactly what Senator Ayotte said about it. I don't know how many times guys. Yeah I understand. Thank you.

SS: Phil, this is like the fourth time I’ve asked and answered.

REPORTER 2: No, but this is a different context, Sean.

SS: I understand that. Phil, I have asked –

REPORTER 2: This is directly about the President's tweet.

SS: I understand that. And I’ve said exactly what Senator Ayotte said about it. I don't know how many times you guys –

REPORTER 3: But her comment was only about Blumenthal.

SS: I understand, thank you.

REPORTER 3: Sean, I'm going to continue on this line, despite what was just happening there. Why isn’t the White House, why isn’t the President concerned about the influence or the appearance of the influence on the independent judiciary?

SS: Why isn’t he – I mean, he is free to speak his mind. Where has this outrage been for the last hundred years? There has been –

REPORTER 3: I'm not asking about the Obama administration or any previous administration, I’m talking about this President and this White House.

SS: I understand that. And the President has – part of the reason the President got elected is because he speaks his mind. He doesn't hold it back. He’s authentic. And he’s not going to sit back, I think, when he feels very passionately about something as much as the executive order. He was doing it to make sure Americans were safe. The order – the U.S. code is crystal-clear on this. I think I’ve read it for like three days in a row. And it can't be any clearer how much authority it gives the President to do what he can to keep us safe. He’s concerned that he’s doing what he can to keep this country safe, and there has been a lot of activity to stand in the way. So I’m not sure how many more times I can read the code to you. But 8 U.S. Code, 1182 –

REPORTER 3: Yes, but you and me talking about it is not how the judicial process works.

MR. SPICER: Thank you. You've asked the question now eight times.

Q One more I’d like to ask you.

JD: So that was White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer talking about President Trump's relationship with the judiciary earlier today. Judges however are not the only ones who seem to have a rocky relationship with the White House. Journalists do as well. Here's another exchange from that same press briefing:

SOUNDCLIP

REPORTER: And so I want to contrast the President’s repeated statements about Nordstrom with the lack of comments about some other things, including, for example, the attack on a Quebec mosque and other similar environments. Why is the President, when he chooses to –

SEAN SPICER: Do you – hold on – because you just brought that up. I literally stand at this podium and opened a briefing a couple days ago about the President expressing his condolences. I literally opened the briefing about it. So for you to sit there and say –

REPORTER: I was here.

SS: I know. So why are you asking why he didn't do it when I literally stood here and did it?

REPORTER: The President’s statement –

SS: I don't understand what you're asking.

REPORTER: Kellyanne’s comments were about that the President doesn't have time to tweet about everything.

SS: Right.

REPORTER: He’s tweeting about this.

SS: Right.

REPORTER: He’s not tweeting about something else.

SS: I came out here and actually spoke about it and said the President spoke –

REPORTER: I'm talking about the President’s time.

SS: What are you – you're equating me addressing the nation here and a tweet? I don't – that's the silliest thing I’ve ever heard.

Q I’m talking about an attack on Nordstrom on –

SS: Okay, I’m done. This is silly. Okay, next.

Q – and an attack on people, and you're equating –

SS: Thank you. You've asked your question. Thank you.

Q Does that not diminish the language that you're using?

SS: Thank you. Go ahead.

JD: That was White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer at a press briefing earlier today. Also this afternoon the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Court rather in San Francisco upheld the temporary restraining order on President Trump's travel ban.

Florida python catchers

JD: These snake-catchers, they’re good. And they've arrived in the Sunshine State just in time.
For the past few weeks, two men from the ancient Irula tribe in India have been in southern Florida. They're helping out with a python problem that has become legendary there. A problem the locals haven't been able to get under control.
Janaki Lenin is an Indian writer and filmmaker. She's been accompanying the snake-catchers and documenting their hunt for pythons. We reached Ms. Lenin near Princeton, on the southeast coast of Florida.

HM: Janaki Lenin, how is the hunt going so far?

JANAKI LENIN: It's been going really well. As can be imagined, we have our good days and we have our bad days and the bad days are difficult to get through because everyone gets frustrated, but the going is good.

HM: How many pythons have these two Irula tribesmen caught so far?

JL: 27 pythons now at the little more than four weeks.

HM: How does that compare to how standard snake hunting has been going in the area?

JL: Well that's hard to say. I think they'll do the tally only at the end of that period which is sometime in mid-March when they put it through the equations or whatever the biologists do. But so far, they're saying it's comparable at least, although some of the Pythons we found they said there's no way in hell they would have caught it. So they are very happy with how we are doing so far.

HM: What can you tell us about the history of the Irula tribe?

JL: We don't know how they became such good snake hunters but we do know that they have a history of catching snakes for the snakeskin industry through the 1800s and into the 1900s up until 1972 when India banned the export of snakeskins. And because we live in a very hot country, snakes don't come out very much as they would here in Florida. So these guys are literally tracking snakes on hard clay soil and they're reading tracks like Bushmen would in the Kalahari. That's how fine-tuned they are. So when they go snake hunting or looking for any sign of snakes. They're looking for scabs, they’re looking for shed skin, and they're looking for tracks. And we do not know of any other community or people in the world who would track snakes like that. So that is why the Irulas would be much better suited to hunting pythons in the everglades than anybody else.

HM: So this sounds like it would be extremely dangerous work. How do they deal with the risks this entails?

JL: Well in India they catch venomous snakes for milking them. Production of anti-venom serum. So actually, this is not that dangerous.

HM: I understand it can be messy work if the snake decides to struggle.

JL: Yeah it is. I mean pythons typically, what you say, empty their bowels when they are caught, when they are frightened. And a small snake, you don't think much of it, but if you're catching a large python, that can be literally gallons of stuff, and it's very smelly and you know there have been some ribald jokes about who allowed in a van again after a python catch. But more than that it's also the style of Irula hunting. They don't hunt along paths like normal people do. So you point them to an area they immediately head into the brush, through the thickest, thorniest, segment and they’re covered in cobwebs and dry leaves and twigs from head to toe.

HM: What did they make of being occasionally covered in snake excrement?

JL: Oh that happened when we caught one of the first pythons. And so we had told them, when you catch a python, always hold the cloaca away from yourself if you want to avoid being excreted on. Either he forgot or he didn't care. He was covered. I mean it just spewed all over him and it was on his shirt and trousers. You know, after the snake was in the black, he told me some comment about how stinky it was. And Masi, one of us hunters, said, you know you can’t be bothered about snake feces. If you get watered like that, you won’t catch any snakes, and he kind of very dramatically took a pinch of the yellow stuff from his shirt and put it on his forehead after blessing himself to catch more snakes.

HM: You say blessing himself. I understand there are actually some rumors that these tribesmen might have some special powers on their side?

JL: Like any other traditional people around the world, they have their set of beliefs, of good law, bad law, good time, what is auspicious. You know hunters typically are that way, when you can't explain why you find lots of snakes one day, and you don't find any snake the next day, you try to come up with an explanation. And very often it tends to go into the realm of superstition. So yeah. They are like anybody else.

HM: Does this effort that they've undertaken, does it encourage people that they might actually be able to get a hold on this python problem in South Florida given that they are being pretty successful?

JL: Well one of the reasons for doing this project is to see if they can teach snake hunters here their techniques so they can be better snake hunters. But we haven't yet started doing that because we've had to familiarize ourselves with surveying the different habitats. And this is one of the questions we had for the University of Florida biologist. What would be the goal for managing pythons? And they said you know, pythons are very well established now, and getting rid of them is going to be a big problem. So what they would do is try to control the spread of pythons. That is very doable. That is very achievable. So I think that would be the way it would take us forward.

HM: What do these two gentlemen, these tribesmen think of being in Florida? Have they told you what the experience is like for them.

JL: We’ve been asking because we took them to Wal-Mart and Bass Pro Shops, you know, just trying to give them a cultural experience as well, and I don't know if they're getting overwhelmed or overstimulated, but they generally say they're very happy to be here, and they've never had anyone give them free rein, and say here go and catch as many snakes as you can. Because in India, catching snakes is very regulated, and it's based on strict licensing and how many snakes per week they can catch. Here, it's the opposite. I mean there are regulations, but the goal is to catch as many pythons as you can.

HM: I wonder if Florida should maybe consider hiring more Irula to come in and deal with the problem.

JL: Possibly.

HM: When they're done in Florida and head back home, how do you think they'll be received.

JL: Like any community, there would be people who would be proud of them and they'll be people jealous of them. The entire spectrum I would imagine.

HM: Janaki Lenin, thank you for talking to us. It's been a pleasure.

JL: It's been a pleasure too. Thank you for having me.

HM: Bye Bye.

JL: Bye. Thanks.

JD: Janaki Lenin is an Indian writer and filmmaker. We reached her near Princeton, Florida – where she's accompanying two men from India's Irula tribe as they hunt for pythons. And you can go to our website for more on this story – including pictures of pythons captured by the Irula hunters. Cbc.ca/aih.

Brexit protest

JD: You know how to protest, don't you? You just put your lips together – and blow. This week, in the British House of Commons, members of the Scottish National Party protested against a bill that would allow the UK to exit the European Union. Not with hectoring speeches or table-thumping – but with whistling. And then, with song. During the vote, the anti-Brexit MPs joined together to perform Beethoven's Ode to Joy – which has been the official EU anthem since 1972. But as the choral protest turned from whistling to singing, House of Commons Deputy Speaker Lindsay Hoyle shut it down.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: whistling Ode to Joy turning to singing]

Lindsay Hoyle: Order. Order! Ms. Gibson, it’s very good that you’re a choir. But what I would say is, I personally don't mind singing, but I certainly can’t allow it in the chamber, because before we know it, we could hear other tunes and I don't want to get into that. So, you know, and some of them haven’t quite got the voice on this side of the chamber [unintelligible]. So please, I don’t want a sing-off within the chamber. It's very good of you, much appreciated, but if you just leave it a little while, it's been a very tense week already I'll just don't need that extra. Thank you.

JD: That was the deputy speaker of the British House of Commons Lindsay Hoyle ordering Scottish MP to stop singing and earlier this week MP from the Scottish National Party sang Beethoven's Ode to Joy to protest against a bill that would allow Britain to leave the EU. Despite their musical efforts, the bill was passed, 494 votes to 122.

[Music]

Shot up Lexus

Guest: Shannon Ojero

JD: Seventeen-year-old Angela Ojero was off to spend New Year's Eve in Montreal. And so, like many teenagers before her, she borrowed her mom's car. And, also like many teenagers before her, she returned it damaged. But it didn't just have a few dents or scratches in it. It had bullet holes in it. The Lexus had been caught in a police shoot-out. Now, her mom, Shannon, wants Montreal police to cough up for the repairs. We reached Shannon Ojero in Brantford, Ontario.

HM: Ms.Ojero, describe for us what your car looked like when you got back from Montreal.

SHANNON OJERO: It had two bullet holes in the bottom, in the front bumper.

HM: What other damage was done to the car?

SO: The main one was my radiator. It punctured a hole in there and like a lot of coolant was leaked.

HM: So tell us what your daughter told you about what happened that night?

SO: Well she called me pretty early in the morning on December 31^st, approximately 9:00 a.m. She was bawling on the phone and pretty scared and shaken up and I just basically assumed the worst and thought, oh you know she got a car accident or something. And no and she said no your car's been shot at. And so I was like taken in shock, like what? And so basically she said there was an incident that happened out front of the hotel and there was a gentleman who was I guess like intoxicated and somebody had called saying that he was, you know causing problems and was carrying a weapon and police had went out to go check this out. And when they arrived, I don't know the full details, but he started shooting at them in front of my car and they shot back, and they hit him once and they hit my car twice.

HM: Was she aware this was happening as it was going down

SO: She wasn't aware that it was my car right away until the next morning, but she was aware kind of that there was something bad going on, because she had got back from wherever they went out that night and it was but quarter to 2:00 a.m. she said. And she grabbed some things, went upstairs, and when they got back to the room, they heard like loud disturbances. And then when she got up in the morning, she went down to seeing that the cops were still there. And then thought “Well, I should move my mom's car.” But then she was informed that it was my car that was hit with the bullet.

HM: So what did the police say to her at that point. Beyond that the car had been hit by bullets.

SO: They just said that your car's been involved in a crime scene. She couldn't go anywhere near it. I probably played phone tag with the one BEI officer all day long. I had to send him an e-mail back stating that he could seize my vehicle. They seized it for approximately a week and a half.

HM: OK. Was the car even drivable at that point?

SO: No because the puncture to the radiator right was too big or something where the coolant was just, it was coming all out. So no it wasn't drivable. It had to be towed back.

HM: All the way to Bradford.

SO: Yes.

HM: So what did Montreal police tell you when you asked to be compensated for the damage?

SO: They basically… the one officer just basically said that wasn't his decision and he was going to look into it and forward me an email of who I would go to speak to. And he did, which this person didn't reply back to me. And eventually I had to kind of find out myself which was very hard.

HM: Did you eventually get some answers?

SO: I did. I ended up getting a hold of someone and put a complaint in, or a claim or whatever, and then she transferred it to somebody else who then transferred it to somebody else. And I got denied my claim.

HM: On what grounds?

SO: The grounds that I wasn't within the timeline.

HM: Oh, how long did you have?

SO: 15 days. And it was beyond the 15 days. It was about 25 maybe.

HM: Did they all have any other complaints, any other reason that they would deny you?

SO: Well verbally, I spoke to the gentleman that was in the letter. He said that he researched, he looked into the report, and the police were not at fault. So there was no like compensation for that, like the police were not in the wrong.

HM: So the police had to be wrong before Montreal or the Montreal Police would give you some money.

SO: Exactly. They were being shot at or so then they had to shoot back to protect themselves basically. That's what he was saying.

HM: How much were you seeking.

SO: I didn't want the full coverage. I just wanted my deductible.

HM: How much was that?

SO: A thousand dollars.

HM: So the insurance company covered everything else?

SO: Yes my insurance company was great. Up until like that part. I mean I can't fault them for that. That’s insurance companies. That's what they do. That's what they are. That's what it is. You choose to have a deductible. And unfortunately I didn't choose for my car to get shot at either.

HM: Is that an option?

SO: I know honestly I don't know.

HM: What did the claims adjuster say? Were they a bit kind of startled by this?

SO: They were a bit taken back. Yeah it's definitely an odd situation that they've had to deal with. But they were really helpful. A lot of them.

HM: Well that's good to hear. Given what you went through. So are you going to think twice before you lend your Lexus to your daughter for trips to Montreal again?

SO: You know everybody keeps saying that but it wasn't honestly her fault, it wasn't her doing. It's just the luck of the draw and it was my car that got hit.

HM: It's giving her some stories to tell anyway. Both of you.

SO: Yeah exactly. Well thank you for telling it to us.

HM: No problem. Thank you. You're welcome bye. Ok bye.

SO: We reached Shannon Ojero in Brantford Ontario.

[Music]

Paralympian retires

JD: "If you ever cheered for me, cried with me, believed in me, thank you from the bottom of my heart." That's part of what Michelle Stilwell said in a Facebook post yesterday, as she announced her retirement from Paralympic competition. Ms. Stilwell is one of Canada's most decorated athletes. She has won half-a-dozen Paralympic gold medals. She's also the first Canadian Paralympian to take home gold medals in two sports – wheelchair basketball and racing. And on top of all that, she's also a politician – she’s a cabinet minister in British Columbia's government. She’s seeking re-election later this year.
Last year, Ms. Stilwell spoke to As it Happens from Rio de Janeiro, before the Paralympic Games. Here's part of her conversation with Carol.

SOUNDCLIP

CAROL OFF: You are a gold medalist. You are a stunning athlete. But every write up about you points out your age. You're 42 years old. Is it getting more difficult?

MICHELLE STILWELL: Seriously who told them my age hey? You know honestly, I am so grateful for the lifestyle choices I've had. You know I've always been an athlete, and when I had my injury it was about changing things in the way I do them, but still being an athlete. If it weren't for my training and my strength and conditioning routine, I wouldn't be as physically able to do the things I do in my daily life.

CO: And would you tell us a bit about the accident? You were 17 years old when that happened, yes?

MS: Yes correct. I was 17 years old. Three weeks away from my grade 12 graduation, and I was piggyback riding on my boyfriend and I fell backwards and snapped my neck forward, rendering me quadriplegic at the C6 level. You know, life happens and you have to just pick yourself up and figure out other ways, alternative ways to do things. And so it was no different for me.
I won't say I didn’t or I don’t have down days where you know, things are frustrating or I wish things would be differently. I'm human and I think those are normal feelings and experiences to have. But every day is a new day and you can certainly choose how you're going to live that day and what you want to accomplish in that day, and I try to take that attitude into everything I do.

CO: From our archives, that was Carol in conversation with 6 time Paralympic gold medalist Michelle Stilwell in September of last year. Ms. Stilwelll has announced that she is retiring from Paralympic competition.

Kitten air holes

JD: Can I ask you something? When someone says "curiosity killed the cat," what do you think it means? It means the cat died because it was curious, right? And just to double-check, you've always assumed that was just an expression, right? A figurative expression? Me too. I’m glad we're all on the same page. Which is not a certain page from a certain Indian science textbook. That page has confused my understanding of that old saying. And frankly it’s horrified me more than my own memories of science class.
In some schools in northern India, primary school students use a textbook called "Our Green World: Environment Studies." It teaches the kids about the wonders of nature. It also teaches them about the senseless cruelty of science textbooks.
The publishers of "Our Green World" have just announced a recall. After receiving a complaint from a parent, they're going to revise the section called "Living Things Breathe."
It includes an experiment students can do on their own to demonstrate the importance of respiration.
Are you ready for this? You're not. But here it is anyway. "Take two wooden boxes. Make holes on lid of one box. Put a small kitten in each box. Close the boxes. After some time, open the boxes. What do you see? The kitten inside the box without holes has died.” Yeah. So you can understand my confusion and horror. The book actually suggests to kids that their curiosity should literally kill a cat. Luckily, that textbook is about to be pulped. And let's hope the next version teaches kids that they should think outside the box – not just figuratively, but literally.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

Feb 9, 2017 episode transcript

More Stories Like This