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 August 24, 2017

Hosts: Jim Brown and Karen Gordon

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

JIM BROWN: Hello I'm Jim Brown.

KAREN GORDON: Good evening. I'm Karen Gordon. This is As it Happens.

[Music: Theme]

KG: Tonight

JB: Tough customer. Mike Duffy makes himself the senator of attention once again, suing the Senate and the federal government for damages he says he suffered at the hands of the RCMP and operatives of the former PM.

KG: Lip disservice. 41 years ago Alabama's Attorney General told the KKK to kiss his rear end — and now, an open letter is calling for the American people to follow Bill Baxley's example and dismiss white supremacy.

JB: If you're not fit, you're unfit. A Toronto orchestra tells its members that performers should be “physically fit and slim” but instead of apologizing after a backlash it announces its chances of continuing aren't slim — they're none.

KG: Suspect in the past, a suspect in the present. Journalist Suzanne Johanssen remembers her 2016 interview with Peter Madsen — an inventor and submarine builder who's now charged in the death of Swedish freelancer Kim Wall.

JB: The grappler doesn't fall far from the tree. When Nattie Natalya Neidhart won her first WWE Championship, she joined a fellowship of the ring that includes her grandfather Stu Hart and her Uncle Brett “The Hitman” Hart.

KG: And pain in the assets. A convenience store owner was told that he sold the 750 million dollar Powerball ticket — then experiences an abrupt sickening reversal of fortune when he's told that actually he didn't. As It Happens the Thursday edition. Radio that hears how he went from feeling extremely well off to feeling extremely well — off.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Part 1: Duffy Lawyer, Slim and Fit Orchestra, Lottery Store Owner

Duffy Lawyer

Guest: Lawrence Greenspon

KG: A little under eight million bucks — that's what Mike Duffy wants from the Senate and the government of Canada. Senator Duffy insists however, that the lawsuit he launched today isn't just about money. In a statement released by his lawyer this afternoon Senator Duffy writes that quote, “If this action succeeds in bringing charter protections to all work on Parliament Hill, this will be my greatest contribution to public life,” unquote. Lawrence Greenspon is Mike Duffy's lawyer. We reached him in Ottawa.

JB: Mr. Greenspon, let me begin by asking you, how you think Canadians are going to react to this news that Senator Mike Duffy wants them to pay him almost eight million dollars?

LAWRENCE GREENSPON: Well I think that Canadians are going to react to that by saying look, “he was put through the grinder, for in excess of four years. He was found to have not done anything wrong at all.”He was exonerated by a court after a full criminal trial, and he did nothing wrong, and he was treated very badly. He was let go — suspended, I would say expelled from the Senate without pay, without benefits — his pension was suspended as well. And despite the Senate policy to pay legal fees in these circumstances, the Senate looked at the judgment of Judge Vaillancourt at the end, and said, “We're not paying a penny. Not only that we're going to claw back seventeen-thousand dollars of expenses that were found to be justifiable — we're going to claw that back out of your salary.” So if the average Canadian looks at all of that and sees how badly Mike Duffy has been treated — and how he's suffered as a result, I don't think they're going to have any problems with Mike Duffy fighting back in this way.

JB: Now there has been some reaction to this news. I'd just like to read you a short quote from Stephen Harper's former director of communications, Andrew McDougall. He said, “by going for this grossly inflated figure of nearly eight million dollars, it just confirms what everybody knows about Mike Duffy, and that his “North Star” is greed. What do you have to say to Mr. McDougall?

LG: Well, I just hope that Mr. McDougall is never treated in the way that Mike Duffy was treated for such a prolonged period of time — and have the results on his physical and emotional health, and that of his family. It's just, hopefully it'll never be done to him because it's not something that you would wish on anybody.

JB: When Mr. Duffy says, in his statement today, that his reputation has been tarnished, is this the kind of thing he's talking about?

LG: That's part of it as well, I mean, I think it's really minimal minimizing it to say his reputation has been tarnished. Mike Duffy's reputation has been destroyed. And this lawsuit is only, at best, going to partially restore it. Unfortunately, the fact that he was expelled from the Senate and then charged criminally is what sticks with people. It's what sticks with people like Mr. McDougall, who you just quoted. For him that 300 page judgment of Judge Vaillancourt, in which Mike Duffy is completely exonerated, is meaningless. Because as far as he's concerned Mike Duffy is what he is. And on the one hand we have people like that who maintain their view of Mike Duffy, no matter what the court says. And that's really the problem that is existing in the Senate today — is that they have maintained their position that Mike Duffy has done things wrong. They don't care about the the judge, and the due process, and the full trial that Mike Duffy went through. They didn't care when they suspended him and they certainly don't care now. My, my hope is that that's not the view of the majority of right-thinking and fair-thinking Canadians.

JB: Now eight million dollars is a lot of money — substantially more than is lost pay and lost benefits. What is he alleging that he's suffered to account for this kind of a desired settlement?

LG: Well we went through in the statement of claim, which is some 50 pages long, we outline the full extent of what we call general damages, which are damages for emotional pain and suffering, psychological damage, physical health damage, damage — irreparable almost to his to his reputation. All of that in addition to the loss of salary, loss of pension accrual benefits, or the fact that he was banned from the Hill, and th complete refusal of the Senate to even consider a partial payment covering of his legal fees in a case where he was charged and acquitted at the end of the day — despite the fact that they have a policy that allows them to do just that. So when you when you add all of that together you end up with a very considerable sum and it still will not be seen as — often times people call it compensation. There's no compensating somebody in dollars for what Mike Duffy has been put through. And it's more a matter of recognition that the way he was treated was wrong.

JB: Now in your press conference today you made it clear that Senator Duffy doesn't blame the current Senate leadership or the current government for that matter. He believes that he suffered at the hands of Stephen Harper's PMO and a group of what were then powerful conservative senators. If that's the case why isn't Senator Duffy suing Nigel Wright and Marjorie Bratton and Stephen Harper?

LG: Because ultimately, what was done to make Duffy was done to him by the Senate and by the RCMP. And even Judge Vaillancourt recognized, in terms of the RCMP, saying, “Look you charged the wrong guy. The guy that should on trial are just down the hall in the Prime Minister's office.” So that's not something that you know that Mike Duffy is saying. That's something that's been said by the court and facts were found by a judge to that effect, and you know, all of this was put in motion by virtue of the Senate resolution, and by virtue of the charges that were laid by the RCMP.

JB: I don't have to tell you that in civil litigation the gloves can really come off. Things can be entered into evidence, and reported upon, that wouldn't be in a criminal case. How worried is Senator Duffy about what a new trial might do to his reputation?

LG: It's not a matter of a new trial. And if you're hinting that we're going to get into all of the expenses, and the ninety-thousand dollars, and the residency — we're not. There's already been findings and there's a doctrine in law that says those findings of fact are what they are, and they can't be subject to the collateral attack in a subsequent civil proceeding, even if it is a different proceeding than the criminal one. What the Senate has done since the criminal trial and with that decision — it really amounts to that it's a collateral attack on Judge Vaillancourt’s decision. And quite frankly I think it's very objectionable and I'm looking forward to a judge looking at the way that the Senate has responded to Judge Vaillancourt’s decision in the way that they've treated it.

JB: If this is how your client feels why is he still sitting in the Senate?

LG: He's got a duty actually, to mitigate his losses. He has a duty to try and earn income and reduce the amount that he's lost as a result of all that's been done to him. I can tell you that he's sitting in the Senate with certain people that he's not happy to be in the Senate with. I think that would be recognized by everybody. But you know, instead of going back to P.E.I. and sitting on his hands, he's chosen to try and get back into the Senate and do his job.

JB: Mr. Greenspon thanks for joining us.

LG: You're very welcome.

KG: Lawrence Greenspan is the lawyer for Senator Mike Duffy. We reached him in Ottawa

[Music: Upbeat Drums]

Slim and Fit Orchestra

Guest: Victoria Leone

KG: The members of a Toronto area orchestra we're hoping for a sincere apology from management. Instead they received an unexpected letter today saying the Sheridan casual orchestra would be disbanding for good. The group found itself in hot water earlier this week after it told its members that only quote, “physically fit and slim performers,” should take center stage at their shows. And then today a second, even more bizarre, e-mail was sent out. Sheraton Cadwell was no more. And members of the orchestra should quote, “kindly dispose of or recycle all sheet music currently under your custodial care,” unquote. Victoria Leoni was a recipient of all these emails, she's a Toronto based jazz vocalist who was briefly a member of Sheraton Cadwell, and recently performed with the orchestra. We reached her in Toronto.

JB: Hello Ms. Leone.

VL: Hello.

JB: What do you make of the way the Sheraton Cadwell Orchestra has treated you and its other members over the last couple of days?

VL: That's a very good question. I'm disappointed because, you know, you you're going to volunteer for a charitable organization for a reason — you want to benefit the community, you want to raise money for good causes. You don't want to be talking about this type of drama on, you know, a TV show or radio show. And you obviously don't want to make things harder for these types of organizations.

JB: OK well, let's back up to Monday when you've got the first email from Sheraton Cadwell. What did it say?

VL: Essentially it said that during their summer showcases there were a couple of artists — female vocalist in particular — who were not fit and slim as the rest of the girls that sing with the orchestras. And that they chose to wear dresses that were, “not suitable in a way that it's highlighted temporary physical and dietary indulgences.”

JB: Temporary physical and dietary indulgences?

VL: Yeah.

[LAUGHING]

JB: So what were they saying — that their clothing was too tight?

VL: Well, it's kind of weird — they were just saying that they would want their artists to refrain from wearing tight fitting dresses, and things that are less physically revealing, and less basically accentuating — because our image is their image.

JB: And they specifically singled out two vocalists who they said weren't slim or fit right?

VL: Correct. And the sad thing is that this went out to all of their members. I think they've had over a hundred female vocalists to volunteer with this organization. So who knows who they were talking to — whether it was me, or whether it was somebody else that I never had the opportunity to meet.

JB: And what made you think that you made it in one of the ones who was being singled out?

VL: I don't know. I think the second you read something like that, you automatically turn internally and you question like —is this about me? Should I have worn that dress? Should I have done this, you know, and especially as somebody who follows the body positive community — I used to be bullied about being a little curvy — it doesn't help when you read these types of messages singling out a couple of people that you potentially could have been, you know, so it sucks.

JB: It's an unusual e-mail on a lot of levels. I mean, at one point it mentions the fact that they don't require their instrumentalists to be physically fit and slim, because they say the musicians are essentially background wallpaper.

VL: Yeah that is so upsetting, so upsetting, and so disappointing because without them, obviously, you cannot have an orchestra. They are so fundamental to the entire organization and then they chose to belittle them in such a poor way.

JB: Had you performed for them recently in the days before the e-mail was sent?

VL: I did. So my first and only performance was with them about two weeks prior and it was at the Taste of Danforth. So I guess they went through all of the compilations of the videos that they have accumulated, and went through them and them and, I guess, picked a couple of people that kind of stood out in a negative light in their eyes, and felt the need to write this email.

JB: Ok so you received the e-mail how did you respond?

VL: I automatically sent an e-mail just explaining that I thought it was inappropriate and that I didn't want to be a part of the organization anymore.

JB: And then did they respond to that?

VL: Yes. So they responded saying thank you for being a part of the orchestra, and if I could re-read the email with select pieces that were highlighted in red. So they essentially just re-sent the email to me and highlighted the key points, which were the temporary physical and dietary indulgences.

JB: So no apology — they just highlighted in red the weird bits from the first e-mail.

VL: Yeah, yeah.

JB: Today you received a very unusual resignation letter in your inbox. Can you tell us what it said?

VL: Essentially it's said of they've been in business for 14 plus years. But unfortunately all good things come to an end. Due to “malicious and evil intent” the entire organization is going to be shut down.

JB: So malicious and evil intent on the part of whom?

VL: I would suppose myself and the other girls who have spoken out about the situation.

JB: And as a result of your actions they’re disbanding the orchestra?

VL: Yeah.

JB: It wasn't actually what you would call an apology — what you received today?

VL: Oh no, they do apologize to whomever feels embarrassed, who may have been harassed by the media response of what has been going on, but not for the fact that they sent the e-mail out in the first place.

JB: I want to read one more excerpt from the e-mail you received today. “As a corporate entity we blossomed like a transient, pretty little wild flower in the vast unforgiving Canadian wilderness over the years, and served our purpose to our creator for a long time with much humility joy and good humor. Who wrote who wrote this?

VL: I have no clue.

JB: Just signed “the management”

VL: I know, I know. I don't even know who's truly behind the management or if there is a management group. I have no idea. So I really can't even say who could have wrote it or even what the organization was like before all of this had happened.

JB: You're 23 years old, I understand, you're a young jazz vocalist trying to build your career. How discouraging has it been to know that this particular group seemed to value your appearance above your musical ability?

VL: If we're being honest it comes with the territory. I think it's unfortunate, it sucks but for whatever reason we do value the appearance of celebrities and musicians for their look rather than their actual talent. So it does suck, especially for young women — all the young girls that are trying to aspire at anything. It's so sad, but I think I've come to a point in my life where I understand who I am and I don't take this personally, because I mean, I've had my fair share of all of this and this isn't anything new, in a sense. It is quite an odd situation but it isn't anything new that I haven’t heard before. But it's just it's really sad to hear from a charity.

JB: Ms Leone, thank you once again for joining us.

VL: Thank you for having me.

KG: Victoria Leone is a Toronto-based jazz vocalist and a brief member of the Sheraton Cadwell orchestra. We reached her in Toronto.

[Music: Bells & Chimes]

Lottery Store Owner

Guest: Stephen Pound

It was the 758.7 million dollar question. Who was the winner of the U.S. Powerball jackpot? It turns out the new multi, multi, multi-millionaire is 53-year-old Mavis Wanczyk. The Massachusetts woman is a hospital worker, or I should say, was a hospital worker because she immediately called to tell her boss she wasn't coming in anymore. Here's part of what she had to say to the media today.

SOUNDCLIP

MAVIS WANCZYK: Last night was kind of like — I didn’t realize I won. Today as I'm driving here, I'm so like, “this isn’t true, this can’t be.” And then now it’s like, “I am a winner.” I'm scared but I'll be ok.

REPORTER: Have you thought about what you’re going to do with all that money —maybe the frist thing you’re going to do?

MW: The first thing I want to do is I just want to sit back and relax. I had a pipe dream, and my pipe dream has finally come true. I wanted to retire in 12 and it came early.

KG: That was Powerball lottery winner Mavis Wanczyk, who just won the 758.7 million dollars. Not everyone was so lucky. Earlier this morning Powerball officials made a mistake when they announced the name of the convenience store that had sold the winning ticket. TV trucks and reporters descended on Handy Variety in Watertown, Massachusetts. But hours later it was announced that a different store had actually sold the ticket. Sonny Singh is the owner of Handy variety. We reached him in Watertown.

JB: Hello Sonny Singh.

SONNY SINGH: Hey how are you?

JB: I am just fine. Let me start by asking you how you first heard that your store sold the winning Powerball ticket?

SS: Well my phone started ringing like 2:00 a.m. in the morning. You know, I got calls, after calls on my cell phone, on my home phone — landline. And I'm like, “what's going on here?” You know, I thought maybe something happened at the store. So, you know, I checked the cameras everything was fine at my store, and then I picked up the phone the guy goes, “I'm from CNN.” I said, “OK, you know cool two o’clock in the morning, you know, what are you calling me for?” The he goes, Oh, your store sold the big winner,” you know. And that got me all excited, so I went on the lottery website. You know, I looked it up and they say yeah Handy Variety sold the 700 hundred million dollar winning ticket. So after that, you know — my wife she usually opens up — so I told her, and she was on her way to work. When she got here and all these cameras, and lights, and all the news channels were here, you know. Then I showed up like a couple hours later you know.

JB: So, so what was it like? Describe it, — how did you feel?

SS: Man, when I heard that like I was ready to do backflips all the way to my store, man. You know, it was so, so crazy. I'm already thinking about, you know planning a vacation — and I'm going to do this with the money, I'm going to that.

JB: So the reason why you thought you were going to get some money is because the store that sells the winning ticket gets a little cut right.

SS: Yeah, yeah, yeah. They have a cap on it — they have to give you a certain percentage. It’s usually one per cent, but when it's up there that much they have a cap on it, you know, they give you a certain amount. I think it is probably going to be like fifty thousand or something like that you know.

JB: Hey not bad.

SS: Yeah, but you know, I'm happy man. You know I you know we had a million dollar one. So we’re still going to get something out of that.

JB: So. So how did you find out that you didn't sell the big seven-hundred-and-eighty million.

SS: I walked in, I guess one of the reporters — he saw it on his phone or whatever, or someone called him, I'm not sure. He goes, “You guys don't have the big winner man, it's just a million dollar hit. So you know it was like a roller coaster, you know.

JB: How many reporters were in the store at that time?

SS: Oh man, it was packed. You know, everybody — Fox News, CNN, like you name it, and they were here, you know. There were at least I think that at least 50 people outside the store, you know.

JB: And then what happened, what happened when they found out that you didn't sell the ticket?

SS: Well, I mean, everybody was kind of, you know, everybody kind of had a long face, you know. Before everyone was excited you know. They were interviewing my wife, you know, my father he came with her when they opened up. You know everything, I mean, they were on the news already you know. But then just all of a sudden — but you know, it is what it is, I have no complaints. I'm happy with what I've got. You know what I mean?

JB: So you know how much you'll be getting for selling the million dollar winner.

SS: For a million they give you 10000, which is not bad.

JB: So when you still thought you had fifty-thousand dollars coming to you — tell me about the plans. I understand your kids had some ideas.

SS: I was thinking about taking a vacation, you know, paying off my car, pay some bills, and you know, save some money, man. That was the plan basically.

JB: Well what about your kids. What do they want to do with the money?

SS: They wanted to go to Disneyland, so, you know, I woke them up and I said, “Listen I said next we we're going to plan our trip, and they were just jumping up and down when they heard that.

JB: Hey you know you can still take them to Disneyland for 10 grand.

SS: I can still probably do it, you know.

JB: So how did this happen? How did the lottery company mess this up?

SS: I guess they can get confused somehow, I don't know. They were supposed to — because we had a million and the big one, the other place was a store called I forgot the name, it’s in Chicopee. You know, they had a million and the 700 million. So they have — same store had two winners. We had a million dollar, qnd there's another store in Dorchester, they had another million dollars, so there are like so many, you know, like three or four at the same time. So I guess they got you know kind of confused with that. So that's why, you know.

JB: Now your customer who won a million dollars — you know who that is yet?

SS: No not yet. I mean that lottery is trying to find out, you know, what time the ticket was sold. So once I find what time, then maybe I can, you know look on my camera and see who it is, probably you know. So still working on that.

JB: So are you selling a lot of lottery tickets today?

SS: Yeah it's been it's been busy. You know, people see some new faces a little more traffic. It’s good for us.

JB: You might have the lucky touch.

SS:I hope we do, man. I know this the second time it happened — we had the same thing happen with mega millions a couple of years back, it was off by just one number — it would have been like 500 million. Hopefully next time I'll keep my fingers crossed we will get the whole thing.

JB: Well Sunny we appreciate you talking to us. Have fun in Disneyland.

SS: Thank you buddy.

JB: Thank you. Bye bye.

Sonny Singh is the owner of Handy Variety. We reached him in Watertown. For more on this story go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih

Back To Top »

Part 2: "Kiss my ass" Attorney General, Kim Wall journalist

“Kiss My Ass” Attorney General

Guest: Bill Baxley

KG: In 1976 Alabama Attorney General Bill Baxley sent a message to the Ku Klux Klan. The Klan was furious that Mr. Baxley had reopened the investigation into the Birmingham church bombing that killed four little girls. But the Klan shared its feelings with Mr. Baxley, and a KKK grand dragon, named Edward Fields, Demanded Mr. Baxley respond, and so he did. His letter was blunt and a touch crude. Now dozens of former attorneys general are urging Americans to follow in the footsteps of Mr. Baxley by unequivocally condemning white supremacists. Mr. Baxley now works as a defense lawyer. We reached him in Birmingham, Alabama.

JB: Hello Mr. Baxley.

KG: Hello Jim.

JB: Now could I start by asking you to tell us what it was you wrote to that Klan Grand Dragon back in 1976?

BILL BAXLEY: Well, it had just gotten public that we were investigating the bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church here in Birmingham that had killed those four little girls when they were attending church. I started getting a series of letters — several of them coming from this group Fields was with. So finally I got a letter from him that is really hacked me off. And he demanded a response, and so I just sat down and wrote him a letter, and said Kiss “A-blank-blank.”

JB: Rhymes with glass.

[LAUGHING]

BB: And I tell you the irony is that I would never have released the letter — I didn't release it, I didn't tell anybody about it, never would have told anybody. I thought well my mother found out about she'd be mad at me for using a bad word. But the Klan put the letter out of it. They thought it would hurt me. And so it's popped up several times over the last three or four decades — but it never would have come to public light if it hadn't been for them, themselves releasing it.

JB: Well that says something about the times if the Klan felt you would be hurt politically by being seen to be against them?

BB: That's right. That's exactly what they felt.

JB: What was it like to confront the KKK back in Alabama in the 70s?

BB: Well I never gave it much thought. I got quite a bit of letters. I still got a pretty good stack of hateful letters.

JB: Were you concerned for your safety?

BB: Not really. I didn't have enough sense to be, I reckon. I was young and single, and I never gave it much of a thought.

JB: Now I know it's been a while, but can you remember what was going through your mind as you sat down and typed out that short and blunt response?

BB: Yeah I didn't type it — I dictated it to my secretary. I mainly didn't want them to think they were going to [unintelligible] me, or threaten me, or intimidate me in any way — politically, or physically, or any other way. So that's what was going through my mind when I wrote it.

JB: Now you didn't just confront them with words, you also acted. As you say, you reopened the investigation into the Birmingham bombing. Those confrontations— both verbal, and confrontations that involved the action — that involved looking for culprits. What was the effect of it all?

BB: Well we ended up convicting the ring leader of the bombing, a guy named Robert Chambliss, and he he was a bad, bad character. He, was responsible for, we think about 40 bombings in Birmingham alone. All of them aimed at black segments of the population. And we convicted Chambliss, but then I went out of office and the biggest regret that I ever had for anything in my public life was, that when I went out of office, I wasn't able to finish bringing the other people involved to trial. There were four of them that planted the bomb — the new people that came in as Attorney General after me wouldn't touch it with a 40 foot pole — because they thought it was politically unpopular. And so I had a regret that I wasn't able to finish the job and those people that killed those little girls we're still walking around. What I didn't realize at the time was, it was a kid in law school. And he cut class and came to that trial every day and sat up there on that balcony and watched it. And nearly 25 years later that kid became the United States attorney for North Alabama, and he picked that case back up and ended up indicting the two that were still alive. And one of them’s still in prison and the other one died in prison. So if I’d known that kid was up there watching that, and then decades later he was going to come finish that job, I would have had better sleep some nights

JB: 40 years ago you were forceful and blunt to white supremacists. What do you think of the way your president responded to white supremacists in Charlottesville last week?

BB: I don't think any public official ever ought to condone, in any way, what these neo-Nazis do. I think that any anybody, in any office, that condones that kind of behaviour or equates it with legitimate dissent, or difference of opinion, and a right to express themselves — those people ought to be required to read about what happened in Nazi Germany, and how Hitler came to power, and what he did, and he and his henchmen did. And then they ought to be required to sit down and talk of what the remaining few heroes, veterans we've got in the United States and Canada. But what they had to do in World War II, and they ought to realize what what these neo-Nazis and groups like them are actually advocating and supporting. That's not that's not protected speech, that's criminal behavior. No public official ought to condone that ever. And the gratifying thing to me about what these ex Attorneys General did in passing that resolution about my little letter, is that it was Republicans and Democrats — it was nonpartisan. And this kind of speaking out on matters of hate has got to be something that's nonpartisan and thank goodness, by and large it is.

JB: How did it feel? I mean, as you just mentioned dozens of former Attorneys General, from both sides of the political divide, are calling on Americans to follow in your footsteps. What's it like to have that 40 year old letter brought up now today?

BB: Well I'm thankful that I lived to see it. I’m very, very appreciative to my fellow guys that were A.G.’s, and knew what it was like to hold that office. I'm grateful to them, and I'm appreciative, and I'm touched and moved by it.

JB: Of course, I guess there's another side of this as well. Could you have imagined 40 years ago that these sorts of statements would still be necessary today?

BB: No. I thought we were on the verge of getting past that. But unfortunately it hasn't happened although, I got to say, we are, when you step back and look at it — we are a much better society than we were back then, but still got a long way to go.

JB: Mr. Baxley thank you very much for joining us.

BB: Jim, thank you.

KG: Bill Baxley is the former Attorney General of Alabama. We reached him in Birmingham. There's more on that story on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih

[Music: Blues Guitar]

Wrestling Champ

KG: She hit the turnbuckle hard. She was barely conscious when Naomi launched herself off the top rope to lay the final smackdown. But somehow at the last second Natalya mustered a counterattack she blocked the smackdown, spun around, and turned Naomi's legs into a pretzel — locking her into a “sharpshooter.”

SOUNDCLIP

[CROWD CHEERING]

ANNOUNCER: Natalya saw it coming. And now right back to it, another sharpshooter on Naomi. Is the champion going to submit? A shartshooter at Summer Slam. That’s it, that’s it. Natalya has won it. Wow.

RING ANNOUNCER: Here is your winner by submission, and your new Smackdown Women’s champion.

ANNOUNCER: Natalya says she’s the best there is, the best there was, and the best there ever will be.

KG: That's how it sounded on Sunday night when Canadian Nattie Natalya Neidhart beat Naomi to win the Women's Smackdown championship at the World Wrestling Entertainment Summer Slam 2017. It’s the first WWE Championship title for Ms. Neidhart, but certainly not the first for her family. Ms. Neidhart is the granddaughter to Stampede Wrestling icon Steve Hart, and niece to former World Champ Brett “The Hitman” Hart. Here is Ms. Neidhart speaking to the CBC's Jennifer Keene, guest host of the Calgary Eyeopener about her big win.

SOUNDCLIP

NATALYA NEIDHART: I’m trying to take it in. I haven't slept in like days. It was just a surreal feeling to win my first ever women's championship — and to do it for the entire world. WWE is not just a live crowd. The WWE is in over 180 countries. So anybody that was watching Summer Slam on the WWE Network, well on pay-per-view could see me win the championship. I also feel like I'm following in my family's footsteps. And we all share this past that’s very, very cool. It is surreal to carry the torch that the passed to me.

JENNIFER KEENE: Now growing up as a part of that family — the Hart family which we here in Calgary know so well — was it inevitable that you would get into wrestling? Or did you have to persuade your family that you were meant for the ring?

NN: A little bit of both, you know, it's definitely a family tradition, but there was never a woman in the Hart family that wrestled. And so I’m the first female in my family that wrestled. You know, when your uncle is Bret “The Hitman” Hart, your grandfather is Stu Hart. You know, my father was the two-time WWE Tag Team Champion, and I just always felt like I had to be amazing. But one thing I learned, especially working with the WWE, is that I’m blazing my own trail as a woman. And there's the emphasis right now on women and women wrestling, and just being a female superstar in this company — that the the timing is just perfect. My father was very apprehensive about me being a wrestler when I first started wrestling because my dad knows how physical it is. He just, like, he didn't want me to get hurt. He's like, you know, “It's a tough business.” But then when he saw my first match he was like my biggest cheerleader, and he was like, “You're great.” You know, he's been behind me ever since.

KG: That was Nattie Natalya Neidhart speaking to the CBC's Jennifer Keene guest host of the Calgary Eyeopener. On Sunday Ms. Neidhart won the women's Smackdown title at the World Wrestling Entertainment Summer Slam 2017.

[Music: Ambient Hip Hop]

Kim Wall Journalist

Guest: Susanne Johansson

KG: She disappeared earlier this month and now, to the horror of her friends and family, she's gone. On yesterday's program we spoke with a friend of the late Kim Wall — the Swedish freelance journalist who vanished two weeks ago after boarding an amateur submarine belonging to inventor Peter Madsen. Ms. Wall was working on a piece about him. Yesterday, Danish investigators confirmed a torso found earlier this week was that of Miss Wall — Mr. Madsen is charged in her death. Today, there are reports that Danish prosecutors will upgrade that charge to the equivalent of murder. Mr. Madsen has said Ms. Wall died in an accident and he buried her at sea. Susanne Johansson is a journalist with the Danish newspaper BT. She interviewed Mr. Madsen last year and went on his submarine. We reached her in Copenhagen.

JB: Hello Ms. Johansson.

SUSANNE JOHANSSON: Hi Jim.

JB: I'd like to start by asking you just how much people in your country are talking about Peter Madsen right now?

SJ: it's pretty massive, I would say. It's like everywhere you go people are constantly on their phones checking news. I don't think I've seen anything in recent years — in the last decade — seen people so obsessed with a case like this one.

JB: Why do you think that is?

SJ: I think it's because it's one of the most shocking and horrifying crime cases we've seen. And because there's so many like unanswered questions — that people are just dying for any piece of news that can put this piece together.

JB: How well-known was Peter Madsen before this story?

SJ: He was not like a major known figure, but he was — there was news about him once in a while because he's one of these, you know, crazy guys who has crazy ideas about the submarine, and the rocket he's building, and he's doing it for no money, and he's just obsessed with it — and people kind of get fascinated by that that that type of person.

JB: Now you met him last year — you wrote a story about him. Why did you decide you wanted to write about him?

SJ: Well because I was fascinated about him as well. And at the time I did the interview there was this documentary coming up called “Amateur's In Space,” which was about his rocket project, and about he and his partner — the director had followed them for quite some time — and it ended up being the story of their break up, because these were two guys that was so totally different. And I thought I thought it was a very fascinating story.

JB: So there was something about him that intrigued you. What what were your impressions of him when you met him?

SJ: I would say that he was — there’s no doubt about that — he was a very, very dedicated person. But he was also, like, manic, and you could feel all that he was short-tempered. Everything had to go exactly as he had planned it and everybody had to be in line, you know. There was a lot of respect from the people that surrounded him — from his employees.

JB: There was a piece about him in Agence France-Presse that described him as quote, “an eccentric inventor,” and then it went on to say he was, “fanatical and foul tempered.” Did you see any of that?

SJ: Well yeah, I would say I saw all of it. I mean, some of it just in small bits and pieces, but that nails him down, I would say.

JB: Now as part of your story about Mr. Madsen you went on his submarine — the same submarine that Kim Wall was on. What do you remember of that experience?

SJ: Well, first of all, I remember it was on land, I should say because they had to fix some technical details of the engine and stuff like that. So it was on land and he was — that day when I when I did the interview he was going to test one of his engines for the rocket. So the submarine was actually where me and my photographer and his flight director were going to sit during the test, to be in safety, to be safe. So that was why I was in the submarine and we did the interview there. He went out afterwards, but it was a very, very — I mean it was very, very basic submarine, and I remember thinking I would never, ever go into the water in that submarine.

JB: Why.

SJ: Because it was so basic. I mean, first of all, it's not very big. It's like two and a half metres wide and everything was just so raw and unpolished and finished somehow. And I know that he has actually slept in the submarine — at the bottom of the sea many times himself. And I really can't imagine why. Well I would I wouldn't do it because it definitely didn't feel like a comfortable place to be.

JB: Now there's another element to this story. Kim Wall was working as a freelance journalist when she was doing this story about Mr. Madsen — what do you think this says about the risks that freelance journalists particularly, women face, when they're out reporting?

SJ: I know that there has been a lot of discussions about this, and I don't totally agree with the danger of being bigger for women. I mean, I don't think that female journalist would have to be extra careful right now. I mean, especially since we don't know exactly what happened on board that submarine, but in where ever, what whatever assignment you do, you should just make sure, no matter who you interview that environment is safe. I mean, I never, I never felt any kind of danger or anything like that because, first of all there were a lot of people around me. Secondly, I had my photographer with me so I never had any reason to feel any kind of danger. And I don't think that you as a female journalist should all of a sudden be paranoid about doing assignments because — not until we know what happened, at least.

JB: Thank you very much for joining us.

SJ: Well, you're welcome.

KG: That was Danish journalist Susanne Johansson. We reached her in Copenhagen. You can hear that interview again, and last night's interview with the friend of the late Kim Wall on our website www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Spanish Guitar]

Astro Bling

KG: Heads up everyone I'm going with Uranus. I know there's another way to say the name of that planet, but just say that one to yourself and get it out of your system because this is a great story, we’ve got to move on. So now on Uranus and Neptune it doesn't rain water and it doesn't rain on the surface — it rains diamonds, thousands of kilometres below the surface. That's the theory anyway, because the interior of those planets is made up of hydrocarbons, water and ammonia. The pressure deep below the surface splits the hydrocarbons, which forms diamonds. Now here on Earth, after years of trying, scientists have sort of recreated the intense conditions on, or in, those two planets. Their solution — they fired lasers at polystyrene. I know it's so obvious when you hear it out loud. Apparently the lasers heat at the surface is polystyrene to the point where they produce two shock waves of different speeds. Those shock waves smashed into each other producing tremendous heat and pressure, just like the inside of Uranus — and voila! —the conditions produced diamonds. Sure the diamonds were just a few nanometres wide — that's a few billionths of a metre, and they survived just for a few femtoseconds — a wee bit of a second, whereas the ones on those two planets are believed to take thousands of years to form, and be enormous. Still, it's progress — and so is our collective ability to discuss, like adults, the enormous diamonds produce deep within Uranus.

[Music: Roots Reggae]

Tony deBrum Obit

KG: He was known as a warrior in the battle against climate change — a man who fought fiercely to keep his homeland from drowning under the rising seas. Tony deBrum, the former Foreign Minister for the Marshall Islands died earlier this week — he was 72. Mr. deBrum was a vocal champion of the 2015 Paris climate agreement, and for good reason. There are hundreds of Marshall Islands, and the majority of them are six feet above sea level — or less. Climate change wasn't an abstract concept for him, as he told The New York Times quote, “We see the damage occurring now. We're trying to beat back the sea,” unquote. In September of 2014 Tony Broome attended an oceans and seas conference at the UN's headquarters in New York. Here's part of what he said there, for the record.

SOUNDCLIP

TONY DEBRUM: It is a story told in the Marshalls of a beach where a small sparrow was walking along the beach and a great big whale came up to the shore and started scare him — a fifty ton whale making noises like scaring this little bird. And the bird said to this whale, “Please, you're making, me nervous you're making me scared.” The whale says, “I'm the biggest guy in the ocean and I can do anything I want.” So the bird called on the other birds and they send the message out to all the other birds throughout the world — around the world. And each bird swooped down on the ocean and took one drop of water. And the ocean dried up — and the ocean dried up and the birds held the water. Until the whale said, “I give up.” And they spat it back on and maintained the balance. But they won, they won the contest. From that story comes a Marshallese saying.

[SPEAKING IN MARSHALLESE]

The ocean is made up of drops. Each one of us is responsible for a drop of ocean. You take care of that drop, and he takes care of his drop, and she takes care of her drop — we can take care of the world.

KG: For the record that's the late Tony deBrum speaking in September 2014 at an oceans and seas conference at the UN's headquarters in New York. Mr. deBrum a former Foreign Minister for the Marshall Islands died this week — he was 72 years old.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

August 24, 2017 episode transcript

More Stories Like This