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

The AIH Transcript for September 26, 2018

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello, I'm Carol Off.

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

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight…

CO: His enemy is the state. He has just awakened after two weeks unconscious in the hospital. But even after his alleged poisoning, Russian-Canadian activist Pyotr Verzilov is not shy about criticizing the Kremlin.

JD: Questioning the questioner. An Arizona prosecutor will interview Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford tomorrow in Washington. And our guest wonders why she has agreed to do the bidding of Republican senators.

CO: Attention to new detail. More women have come forward with allegations about Judge Kavanaugh — a former U.S. sex-crime prosecutor says they must be permitted to speak.

JD: Show against force. Yesterday Marines in Mexico suspended every single one of Acapulco’s 700 police officers — and a journalist tells us the city is actually much safer as a result.

CO: Award in edgewise. She'd spent the day working her cleaning job and trying to get her 14-month-old to nap and then Irish author Caitriona Lally learned she'd won a major literary prize.

JD: And…Getting away without murder. Every year thousands of crows descend on the city of Nampa, Idaho to poop and caw and roost until spring. But this year the city is fighting back with a Crow Patrol. As It Happens: The Wednesday Edition. Radio that prepares for an unwelcome crowth spurt.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Part 1: Pyotr Verzilov conscious, Kavanaugh latest, Irish writer

Pyotr Verzilov conscious

Guest: Pyotr Verzilov

JD: Pyotr Verzilov says he has emerged from a black hole. For two weeks the Russian-Canadian activist and a member of Russian protest group Pussy Riot was unconscious. He was hospitalized in critical condition earlier this month after a suspected poisoning. Mr. Verzilov is a frequent critic of the Kremlin. He was arrested in the summer for running onto the field during the World Cup to protest Russian police brutality. And at the time of his alleged poisoning he was also investigating the recent deaths of three Russian journalists. We reached Pyotr Verzilov in Berlin.

CO: Mr. Verzilov Have you made a full recovery?

PYOTR VERZILOV: Well, you can see that the condition is drastically better, especially given the fact that for the better part of last week I was completely unconscious, not understanding where I am and basically my mind was separated from my body. So if you think about what was happening last week you can say that the present condition is just super. But the only serious effect which stayed on is eyes not functioning very well. And my eyesight really did go down a bit during the period.

CO: What do you understand put you into that condition?

PV: Well, we have an understanding that this, first of all, it was done by Russian security services. The only question is what agency specifically worked on this.

CO: What do you base that on? What you what have you learned? What do you know?

PV: Well, essentially no one in Russia — very few people in the world in fact — have knowledge of these poisonous nerve agents, which have an unpredictable effect because it was interesting to see how 20 or 30 doctors at this huge hospital in Berlin were trying to get any sense of what this could look like.

CO: But the doctors in Berlin say that you were likely poisoned but they can't say definitively. So why are you so sure?

PV: They've went through all the possible combinations and versions of what could happen to me. And obviously they can't say without having solid evidence, they can't claim that this particular poisonous act took place. But at the same time, no one is denying that what happened is very strange and it's just not something that is readily available for use on anyone.

CO: It does fit a pattern — that's what you're leading to — is that there have been these other poisonings and this is consistent with those?

PV: Exactly, yes to this is another argument for that, yes. If you look at the other cases like in Salisbury in the U.K. with the Skripal poisoning, it took British law enforcement several weeks to actually pinpoint and come forward with the name of an agent they believe was responsible for that.

CO: You are still in Berlin. Now out of hospital. The German police are protecting you, is that right?

PV: Oh, yeah exactly. The German police actually deployed quite a sophisticated unit of officers and they drew logistical plans to move around Berlin. So yes, they are definitely quite worried and helping secure us.

CO: Based on what? What do the German police — what do Berlin police say about your security at this point? What threats do they perceive?

PV: A person in our party basically who also flew down to Berlin to support me and to help recover and work on the case — at one point he started seeing men and this particular car which was following him wherever he went in Berlin. So he applied with this information to the Berlin police and they said yes this is a legit cause to provide security and just try to find out what is happening.

CO: And let’s get to why you might have been poisoned. And you have a lot of enemies, don't you, a lot of political enemies, a lot of people within political circles unhappy with your activism, with Pussy Riot with political theater. What are your theories as to why somebody might want to poison you?

PV: Essentially there are two options. One option is the very high public visibility which happened after our action of the World Cup. And option number two is that because a close friend of mine, one of Russia's best documentary filmmakers, Alexander Rastorguev, he was one of the murdered filmmakers and reporters in the Central African Republic at the end of July. And we, because he's my friends because this is like a case which we felt is very close to us, we announced that we will also be working on our own independent examination of what has happened in Africa.

CO: Okay, this is quite a broad range, isn't it? From the World Cup in Russia to possibly the motivation coming out of the Central African Republic. Let’s just start with the World Cup incident. You did a protest on the pitch, you dressed as a police officer, it was a stunt to bring attention to what? What was the point of that protest and why might somebody want to kill you for that?

PV: It was evident that the way the action took place when we demanded freedom to political activists, political competition and other things, the way actions were structured that it was seen immediately by millions and millions of people — and Putin himself. So that might be enough to bring some punishment towards me.

CO: I want to move onto the — we have many questions about that part — but this particular case about Russian reporters who were working in the Central African Republic. You were going to take part in that investigation, you were going to join those journalists. What were they investigating?

PV: They were the on film trip to make a film about Russian mercenaries opening up their operations in Africa, particularly various groups connected to the so-called Wagner Group.

CO: What they were trying to find out, was the Wagner group, as you say it’s a private army linked to the Russian Ministry of Defense, and it is under the control of Yevgeny Prigozhin. Is that right?

PV: Yes, exactly. But the sole presence of the Russian army in those regions, there’s nothing illegal in it because even the Central African Republic government alongside with the UN — it actually officially acknowledged that Russia can come in and work on security there. It's more of a certain type of hate that people connected with the Wagner Group have towards journalists, towards activists, towards anyone shedding light on the way they work.

CO: And we should point out that the businessmen who is in charge of that or considered to be operating the Wagner Group is Yevgeny Prigozhin, who has been indicted by the Mueller investigation in the United States, into Russian interference in the U.S. election. So he has quite a case, doesn't he?

PV: Oh yes, exactly.

CO: And so you were going to join this investigation but those three journalists who you were going to join, what happened to them?

PV: On day two of them being in Central African Republic in very, very suspicious conditions — and you can imagine in Africa in the middle of the jungle it's really hard to collect evidence and see what happened — their or a car was ambushed. The three Russian filmmakers and journalists were killed.

CO: You would have been killed with them had you joined them at the time you were expected to?

PV: Yes, chances are I would have been killed.

CO: Is one of your suspicions that you may have been poisoned because of your support, because of your involvement with those journalists?

PV: Mostly because we've publicly announced that we will be working on an investigation into what has happened. And we, in fact, have received some progress, we're still working on it. But groups tied to the Wagner were definitely very unhappy about that.

CO: Do you have any plans to go back to Moscow?

PV: Yes, definitely. I mean, all our work is tied to Moscow and we always had a strong stance of not leaving Russia but instead working on it and asking other people to sort of work into making Russia a better place. So definitely we will return and continue.

CO: But you're also a citizen of Canada. Would you consider taking refuge here?

PV: I feel it as a duty to myself and to my friends and to my murdered friend to actually work and see what has happened. And it's obviously much more effective if you can do that from Moscow.

CO: Do you fear for your life?

PV: No, actually, you know, when you live your whole life in Russia and you're very outspoken and you do a lot of political activities you kind of stop fighting for your life and you just know what you have to do and you keep on doing it.

CO: You know the police after you did the World Cup protest, the police made remarks, indicated that they would like to have done more than just arrest you.

PV: Oh, yes. Well, obviously they say that but at the same time there are limits. They're often limited to what they can do and what they can't do. But as we see in Africa, if it's a bit far from Russia anything's possible.

CO: We will leave it there Mr. Verzilov, but we'll keep in touch. And thank you for speaking with us.

PV: Thank you very much.

JD: Pyotr Verzilov is a Russian-Canadian activist and a member of the Russian protest group Pussy Riot. We reached him in Berlin. And for more on Mr. Verzilov’s suspicious case go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Military March]

Kavanaugh latest

Guest: Shan Wu

JD: Another allegation was leveled against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh today. In a sworn affidavit released by lawyer Michael Avenatti, another woman has alleged sexual misconduct by the judge when he was in high school. Julie Swetnick claims she witnessed Mr. Kavanaugh behave abusively at parties. And she says he was present at a party where she was gang raped in 1982. Mr. Kavanaugh released a statement saying quote “This is ridiculous and from the Twilight Zone. I don't know who this is and this never happened.” End quote. And this afternoon U.S. President Donald Trump spoke in support of Mr. Kavanaugh. Here is what he said at a press conference.

SOUNDCLIP

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: This is one of the highest quality people that I've ever met and everybody that knows him says the same thing. And these are all false to me. These are false accusations in certain cases, and in certain cases even the media agrees with that. I can only say that what they've done to this man is incredible. Everybody wants to be a federal judge, not just a Supreme Court judge. I'm talking about a court of appeals, I'm talking about District Court. I don't think they're going to want to so much, I'll be calling people, and we'll have people calling people that do this and people are going to be scared because we could say it about you. Thirty five years ago you met — and you might not know what's going on. What is going on? Why did they wait? Why didn't they bring this right at the beginning during the hearing? This is a big con job.

JD: That was the president of the United States speaking at a press conference earlier today. Despite the new allegations, only Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh are set to testify tomorrow before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Shan Wu is a former federal sex offense prosecutor. We reached him in Alexandria, Virginia.

CO: Mr. Wu, how can these hearings go forward as planned tomorrow given the new allegations?

SHAN WU: They really should not go forward as planned tomorrow. The way that they may go forward anyway is because the Republican senators who control the Senate Judiciary Committee, they are artificially turning it into a ‘he said, she said,’ by refusing to allow any other witnesses to testify other than Dr. Ford and the judge.

CO: For those who have not heard, can you summarize what the new accuser of Brett Kavanaugh, Julie Swetnick, what does she allege?

SW: She’s alleging, by way of a sworn affidavit, that she had been at a party and that she had either become too drunk to be able to consent to sexual relations, or she also suspects that she may have been drugged — and that she was then sexually assaulted. And also that Judge Kavanaugh as well as his friend Mark Judge were both present. And both of them, according to her, were actively involved in encouraging women to drink to the point of being incapacitated. Now she does not specifically say that either Kavanaugh or Judge took part in the assault upon her, but she does place them at the event.

CO: And she says that at these events there was — well she refers to gang rape.

SW: Yes, that is one of her allegations, indeed.

CO: And is she blaming Brett Kavanaugh for that?

SW: I don't know that she is blaming him for being the instigator, but she's certainly alleging that he would have been aware of it by his presence. So that obviously is very much a contradiction with a number of statements that Judge Kavanagh has put out denying being in any type of incident which might be improper or in any way even resembling sexual assault of a woman.

CO: And these new allegations they also go back to high school, which is what Ms. Ford is going to testify about. And the other example is of someone who alleges that Kavanaugh was involved in offensive activities at Yale University, is that right?

SW: That's correct. The second woman who came forward, Deborah Ramirez alleges that it was at a dorm party at Yale where Judge Kavanaugh allegedly exposed himself to her and she ended up having to make contact with his genitals and that was unconsented to. And I think when you look at the overall pattern that's emerging, without opining on whether it happened or not since we really aren't in a position to say that, what we can say, and what I can say as a former sex crimes prosecutor, is that all of these allegations are very serious and credible enough on their face that were I the prosecutor looking at the case it would certainly require further investigation. That's really a no-brainer. I mean, it's ridiculous not to take that pause right now and to look more carefully at the instances.

CO: So you're saying that it appears to be a pattern?

SW: It certainly appears to be a pattern. And if a person is a sexual offender, in my experience, that is not a one-off instance. It tends to emerge in a pattern.

CO: The Republicans argue that there is a pattern, and it's a pattern of the Democrats trying to smear Brett Kavanaugh and they point out that Michael Avenatti, who brought this latest claim forward, is somebody who has actually declared that when they go low, we’ll go lower. So how credible do you think claims are? I mean, is there something to be said that possibly these are these are smears against Kavanaugh?

SW: There's no question that this is heavily political. I mean, the very nature of a Senate confirmation hearing is by nature political, it's a political body. So, of course, there are intents on either side which are pure politics. But when you look at the particular allegations you have to look at the specifics of those facts being alleged. And when you look at those facts being alleged, those are not extraordinary facts. Those are very common situations where there's drinking, Dr. Ford was 15 years old at the time, and it's extremely common for children that age to be very reluctant to come forward. So there's nothing out of the ordinary about her not having told anybody about it at the time. Those are all rather commonplace factors that happen with survivors of a sexual assault.

CO: You said that this is just — tomorrow’s hearing is reduced to ‘he said, she said’ and how limiting that is. But what's wrong with that? Why shouldn't it be a ‘he said, she said’ situation? Doesn't seem to be that?

SW: The term ‘he said, she said’ is a pet peeve of mine as a former prosecutor. It's a fiction that is created and oftentimes is used as a sexist sort of stereotype that he is more believable and that she said is merely the female claiming something. In reality, when an investigator or a prosecutor gets an allegation which begins with one person accusing the other person, it's never really just a he said, she said, because other people saw those people for example before the instance occurred and after the instance occurred. There will be other pieces of evidence that will corroborate what happened. It may be something that is told, as in Dr. Ford's case, many years later but not at a time when there would be any motive to fabricate. So when you look at all those pieces in any individual instance, it really never is just that he said, she said and that's why I say it's a fiction and why the Republican senators seem very determined to try to make it as much of that fictional encounter as possible. Because for whatever their reasons are, which are probably political, they are afraid of other evidence coming forward which could tend to corroborate what Dr. Ford is saying.

CO: But in the end this seems that tomorrow it will just be a piece of theater, and that this vote will proceed on Friday as planned.

SW: I don't know if it will be just a piece of theater because I think it's very important people, the Senate, the public gets to hear and see and assess the credibility of Dr. Ford. But I certainly hope, and I think many fair-minded people are hoping, that they won't do that tomorrow — that either they postpone the hearing altogether or they don't finish it. Let Dr. for testify, let Judge Kavanaugh respond to that and then they need to hear from the other people who have come forward as well.

CO: All right, we will leave it there. Mr. Wu, thank you for your insights.

SW: You're very welcome. Thanks for having me.

JD: Shan Wu is a former federal sex offense prosecutor. He is now a criminal defense attorney. We reached him in Alexandria, Virginia earlier today. And later on the program we will profile Rachel Mitchell, that is the Arizona prosecutor recruited to question Christine Blasey Ford on behalf of Senate Republicans.

[Music: Oboes]

Irish writer

Guest: Caitriona Lally

JD: Caitriona Lally studied English at Trinity College Dublin and clearly she has a fondness for her alma mater because she works there now as a cleaner. She is also a published author. And last night she was awarded a prestigious award for her 2015 debut novel Eggshells. It is called the Rooney Prize for Irish literature, and it is awarded by Trinity College Dublin to an emerging Irish writer. It is worth ten thousand euros, which is more than fifteen thousand Canadian dollars. We reached Caitriona Lally in Dublin.

CO: Caitriona Lally, big congratulations.

CAITIONA LALLY: Thank you so much. It's lovely to hear that.

CO: What was it like getting that call about this prize?

CL: It was amazing. I was having a fairly mundane day. I had worked like cleaning job early in the morning and then I mind my daughter for the full day on a Monday, and I got this phone call to say you've won the Rooney — and I had no idea what the judge was talking about, I had to ask what a Rooney was. So when he explained I was just absolutely agog. I couldn't believe it. So it made my day.

CO: You had to keep this a secret until last night, I understand?

CL: Yeah, for a couple of months I had to keep it a secret it was only announced last night. So that was tough, I could tell immediate family but warned them not to put on social media.

CO: This day you said that was so hard and then you had this call. You work as a cleaner at the university you went to, at Trinity College Dublin, didn't you?

CL: Yeah, exactly. I studied English there about 15 years ago and while I was studying there I spent my summers working as a cleaner to earn money for travelling and fun. So then when I find myself laid off years later in the recession in 2011 then the cleaner friends I've stayed in touch with state they told me when the cheating jobs opened up again and I came back three-and-a-half years ago now. So I'm working there since 2015.

CO: And raising a child.

CL: And raising a child, yes.

CO: How old is she?

CL: She's 14 months, called Alice. She's a great little girl. It's an active age.

CO: You have Alice, you work as a clean cleaner at Trinity College and you're trying to be a writer. So how did you find time to actually write Eggshells?

CL: Well, I think I started writing when I was laid off from the job and when I was unemployed — I spent a year in 2011 unemployed. So I think that like the character of my book Vivian in Eggshells she came to me while I was unemployed and feeling that kind of sense of isolation and not belonging. And so I kind of capitalized on that sense in writing this character. I took all the notes for that book then and then wrote them up. Once I kind of got the confidence to write I was back in full time employment and I wrote then before work and after work — whenever I could get a few minutes.

CO: Tell us a bit more about what Eggshells is about?

CL: Vivian is this main character and she believes that she's a changeling, so she thinks that the fairies came in and took the original child and replaced her with the fairy child. So she's wandering around contemporary Dublin and she's looking for this portal to another world. So I think it's just that she doesn't belong. It's this ultimate sense of ‘Where could I belong? Where is this world where I could belong?’ And she's looking for codes and meanings and significance in street signs or maps or anything.

CO: And what kind of attention did the book get when it first came out?

CL: It got some lovely reviews in Ireland. It got shortlisted for a couple of awards. That was back in 2015 when it came out. But then it came out last year in the U.S. and in Canada the Melville House in New York they took it on, so it's available there. And then it kind of went quiet in Ireland. And so I had kind of given up on Eggshells to be honest and was just concentrating on writing the second novel until this prize came and then Harper Collins took me on and gave me a UK and Ireland deal. So I'm delighted, it got a reboost, which is brilliant.

CO: What does it mean to you then to win this award?

CL: It's a massive boost to my confidence. It's just lovely to be recognized, you know, like to feel that your hard work has been acknowledged and that you're on the right track. Because since I've had Alice my daughter, I put her in daycare three mornings a week. So after I finish my cleaning job at 9:30 then I have kind of a few hours to write while she's in daycare and it's really expensive in Ireland. So to try to justify paying for us while writing, you know, you don't know if this writing is going to go anywhere or not. You know, I've doubted myself so much over the past year so this this prize has given me a boost and made me think ‘Well, I'm on the right track. I'm doing what I should be doing.’

CO: That's just lovely. And that's what awards are supposed to do. One curious thing, first of all, you graduated from Trinity College Dublin, you are working there as a cleaner, and it's the same university — it’s Trinity College that actually gives this award, doesn't it?

CL: Yes, full circle, isn't it.

CO: Did anyone remark on that when they called you to tell you had won? Keep your day job, but here’s the big prize.

CL: Yes, they did. Yeah, they were all talking about it, and that the award ceremony last night was in the Provost's House, like the kind of the college president's house, and I was saying I used to clean there when I was a student. I've cleaned this very room. So it's amazing to be there to be celebrated and not cleaning.

CO: What are you going to do with the 10,000 euros that you win from this?

CL: Oh, this is a very boring answer. I wish I could say Vegas or something exciting but it's practical. Mostly, it's bills and daycare care fees and very mundanely, we need a water tank for the attic. So that's the first thing on the list.

CO: And no trips? Nothing special? Nothing for yourself?

CL: We'll see, if there's any money left over we’ll see. Mortgages are expensive in Dublin and so hopefully we will have time for a treat when things calm down a bit.

CO: Caitriona, I look forward to your writing, seeing what else comes out of your of your career. And it's just lovely to talk to you. Thank you.

CL: Thank a million, Carol. Lovely talking to you.

CO: Bye.

CL: Bye-bye.

JD: Caitriona Lally is the author of Eggshells, and the winner of the 2018 Rooney Prize. We reached her in Dublin.

[Music: Xylophone]

Back To Top »

Part 2: Rachel Mitchell profile, Crow town

Rachel Mitchell profile

Guest: Joseph Reaves

JD: Tomorrow. Christine Blasey Ford will finally get to tell her story to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. Ms. Ford will answer questions about an alleged attempted rape by a Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh when they were both teenagers. Judge Kavanaugh will also be questioned. But in a surprising twist the Republican senators on the committee will not be asking any questions. The GOP leadership has announced that it has turned over that role to a respected Arizona prosecutor by the name of Rachel Mitchell. Joseph Reaves is a former reporter with The Arizona Republic who has watched Ms. Mitchell aggressively prosecutes sex offenses. We reached Mr. Reaves in Scottsdale, Arizona.

CO: Mr. Reaves, what did you think when you heard that Rachel Mitchell had been chosen to question Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh?

JOSEPH REAVES: I was having dinner with my wife and watching television when the name came over and I grabbed my head and said ‘Oh my god, Rachel.’ The reason I reacted that way is because I had known her when I was covering the sexual abuse trials here in Phoenix of the Catholic Church. And Rachel was incredibly empathetic to the sexual abuse victims. She would hug them and console them and talk them through the judicial process. And when I heard she was going to be the person questioning a sex abuse victim for the Republican Party I was just stunned.

CO: Why do you think the Republicans chose her?

JR: Well, she has 26 years in the field. She is a Republican, although in all the time I knew her I never saw any overt political activity. But she does serve 26 years in the field of sexual abuse. She is a Republican. Obviously they want a woman to be their face. I just think she turned out to be their choice.

CO: The feeling has been that Ms. Blasey Ford is going to be brutalized in this. We saw what happened to Anita Hill. People have been very concerned that she should even appear. So how do you think that Rachel Mitchell will approach questioning her?

JR: I think she will be incredibly tough. But at the same time, as I've mentioned, she does have an empathy for sex abuse victims and I think she will be on her best behaviour. But I think at the end both sides are going to have a tough time with Rachel's questioning because it's going to be very tough.

CO: Rachel Mitchell is also going to question Brett Kavanaugh. How do you think that's going to go?

JR: I think she's going to be very tough on both of them. She is a pointed questioner. In the past she's had sex abuse cases that she has been, I believe, fairly convinced that the victim was victimized but did not bring the case to trial because of discrepancies in timelines and other such things that would have hindered a successful prosecution. So I think she's going to be very, very focused on timelines for both sides of the story. And I think that will be one of the key things to watch tomorrow.

CO: Do you think that she will be approaching this — well in the shadow of this other quite extraordinary accusation that's come out against Brett Kavanaugh from yet another woman who says things, quite horrendous things happened in high school involving Brett Kavanaugh and other boys. Do you think that that will enter into her questioning of him or do you think she'll stay focused on this one case?

JR: I believe the latter. I think she'll stay focused on this one case. That's her fiat. That's what she's been hired to take. Obviously the other events today are hovering over everything. But I think Rachel will stay focused on Blasey Ford.

CO: What do you think we'll learn from this?

JR: That's a great question, Carol. I don't know. Because it is going to be a ‘he said, she said’ thing I don't think we're going to learn much. I think a lot of people are going in with preconceived notions of both sides and it's hard to believe that one or the other — Dr. Ford or Brett Kavanaugh — will be so persuasive that they will tip the balance of people who've gone in with the preconceived notions.

CO: Well, given what you know about her approach and how she operates in the courtroom, do you think she'll be in this hearing and what do you think what will be her her M.O. do you think?

JR: I think she'll be very focused and very, very pointed, as I said. I think she will make a strong effort to pick apart timelines of both people — and particularly since she's working for the Republicans and clearly Judge Kavanaugh is bringing his calendar as a defense, I think quite a bit of the day will be spent focused on timeline activities.

CO: At the same time this is not a trial. There is a certain burden of proof when that's involved. And so it's not being pursued as a criminal probe of any kind. I wonder what the standard of proof is? What is the burden of proof for a case like this? Because you mentioned how Rachel Mitchell in other cases she wouldn't even bring a case forward if she didn't feel she could get a prosecution. She's not seeking prosecution here. So how does that change things for her?

JR: As I said at the beginning, I'm stunned that she even took this case and so I don't know how she's going to — what the outcome is for her other than to protect the Republicans on the committee from having to ask tough questions themselves.

CO: So you think you think this is going to be just for show? Do you think she's just working for the Republicans? They’re putting her forward as some someone who's independent, who's going to be doing this in a professional way. But do you think that she in the end working for the Republicans?

JR: They are paying her way, yes. I think the Republicans on the committee will say that Judge Kavanaugh's has proved his innocence. And the Democrats will say the opposite and e’lll be just about where we are right now.

CO: And is that her job to get us to that point by the end of tomorrow?

JR: Yeah. I think basically her job is to shield the Republicans on the committee from having to ask those tough questions and be seen for what they are. You know, 11 white men trying to attack a woman who has come forward with sexual abuse allegations. They don't want to do that questioning so Rachel’s sole job is to ask the questions that won't look politically insensitive coming from a woman.

CO: And to give the appearance that there has been a real inquiry?

JR: And to give the appearance there has been a real inquiry. Yes.

CO: All right, Mr. Reaves, thank you.

JR: Carol, thank you very much.

JD: Joseph Reaves is an author and former reporter with The Arizona Republic newspaper. We reached him in Scottsdale, Arizona. And we have more on this story on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Arpeggiated Tones]

John Gibbons leaving blue jays

JD: You know it's fall when the sun goes down that little bit earlier and the air is a little cooler, the leaves start turning colour — and the baseball managers start updating their resumes. Today, ahead of the Toronto Blue Jays final home game, the team made a long expected announcement — manager John Gibbons will not be returning next year. After years and years in the major league basement, the Texan provided a steady hand at the helm for a team that came within inches of a World Series in 2015. And then it all just kind of collapsed. Star players got old or were injured or were lost to free agency or trades. And still Mr. Gibbons remained — until today when he said goodbye to Blue Jay fans across Canada. Here are some of what Mr. Gibbons had to say.

SOUNDCLIP

JOHN GIBBONS: I really can't fairly probably explain what's happened around here as far as the support we've gotten. You know, in first year here, even when I was a coach before I started managing everybody always said, you know, looking back in the 80s, you know, when this place first opened there was, you know — nobody ever drew four million people, you know. They always say if you put a good team on the field, a competitive team that's in the end the people who show up. It took a while, it took some years and finally everything came together in 2015 and that's what happened. They started showing up in droves. You know, we caught fire as a team and that helped and that we were there in the end. And we go out to Seattle, you know, they see us on TV most of the time. But, you know, when they get a chance to come out they go out there once a year, you know, they show up in force and it's pretty cool. But, you know, one team in one country, you know, a big country — it's pretty cool. Big league sports — we’re in baseball — it's all about winning. You know, when you don't win the change happens. That's just the way it goes. But when you — and I think it's been 23 years of I'm not mistaken the exact time — but it all came together. We finally became relevant baseball again. You know, it had been a long time. You know, just to be a part of that because we hear it every year. You know, when 's the team going to do this, that — what have you. But to do that, you know when you are the manager of the team since that is the ultimate goal. That's probably — that's what stands out. But I've had so many good memories of this place, you know, in good times and bad.

JD: Longtime Blue Jays manager John Gibbons addressing fans today after the announcement that he will not be returning next season.

Crow town

Guest: Robert Sanchez

JD: There is an annual ritual in the city of Nampa, Idaho. It is not a festival. It is not a celebration. It is not even necessarily a joyous occasion. It's more of an invasion by thousands of birds — a murder of crows — perhaps even a massacre. This year city officials have decided to get ahead of those crows. As they anxiously await the arrival of that cawing, pooping horde, they have started setting up Crow Patrols. Robert Sanchez is the chief of staff for the city of Nampa, Idaho. And that is where we reached him.

CO: Robert, first of all, what does it look like when the crows descend on your town?

ROBERT SANCHEZ: It looks like something out of an Alfred Hitchcock movie. You know, the crows this last season we estimated were in the numbers between 8 to 10,000. They would congregate in the downtown area and some of the residential areas along the periphery of downtown in kind of a swath that was about three miles in length right through the middle of the city. But they would come as the sun was coming down and so you'd see these huge flock of crows converge on the city and then they would go to the rooftops of buildings or to the trees that were in the downtown area and they would stay there until morning time when they would go back out to the farm fields or their outlying areas to gather and collect food. So you'd see this big influx come at night and then as the sun was coming up you’d see them depart in large numbers.

CO: You say 8 to 10,000 — that's not a murder of crows that's like it's like a division of an army of crows showing up.

RS: Yeah. What we don't know is exactly where they go to or where they come from. We believe that they go out to the farm fields. In the bigger picture, we don't know where they're migrating from exactly, and so we're looking forward to this season where we can partner with some organizations that can help us to answer that question. So it's kind of exciting to anticipate their return, but to do it in a way that is going to help us to gain an understanding and clarity on what the crow migration looks like and what to expect during the crow roost season.

CO: Now what goes on in Nampa at night? What’s the night life like that it attracts so many crows to show up?

RS: Great question. We think that they come here because this interesting combination of natural and man-made features — the trees and the buildings provide the protection from the elements that they're looking for. We also believe that the ambient lighting or the downtown lighting serves as a source of attraction for them. And the last but not least, is just the food sources that while it may not be as abundant as the like may be in a farm field there are areas along the railroad tracks where they seem to gather during the night time as well.

CO: And what do people think of this in Nampa?

RS: Well, we'll have just as many perspectives and opinions about crows as we do people. And we have those that absolutely love the crows that say, you know, we need to respect nature and cohabitate with the crows in a way that also protects our homes and our businesses. Then we have some folks that really don't care much for the crows at all, that they're looking for ways to deal with the crow challenge so that the crows never want to come back here again.

CO: And so what's the crow challenge? What's the problem?

RS: The crow challenge is that as they come into the downtown area and some of the residential areas they'll be a nuisance because of the noise. It will create kind of a hazard because of the crow droppings or there'll be some damage that they'll do to trees, potential damage to cars or structural damage to property. And so the challenge is, how do you put into action in a series of practices that will mitigate any kind of damage to property or mitigate any kind of health risk to a community while being respectful to nature and our environment? So that's the challenge. This is our first time here in the city of Nampa where we had a very deliberate and methodical crow management plan in place. And like anything, we know that it's not going to go exactly as planned and that we're going to learn things as we go, and we'll tweak the plan as we go.

CO: But you're going to politely ask these crows to depart — or not to come at all? What's the strategy?

RS: Well, the first strategy is to inform and educate our public and to share with them critical information such as the fact that these crows are protected by federal law — the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Then we're going to shift gears into what we call the ‘treatment phase’ or the ‘pre-treatment phase,’ which is to in advance of their arrival to put decoys or devices in the trees that will discourage them from wanting to roost in a specific tree or group of trees or buildings. And the larger answer to your question about the crow challenge is we're not really sure how they're going to respond to that. What we're told by the experts that study crows is that they're very intelligent species and they adapt and adjust. After the treatment phase it's a season of displacement. Can we move Bruce from one location to another, using non-lethal approaches, such as noisemakers — whether it's whistles or air horns or handheld laser devices? And how effective will those techniques be? How adaptive will the crows be to those methods? And then how far can we move crows? Can we move them simply just from one building to the next or can we move them from one street to the next, one block to the next, or can we move them into — and here's the final step that we're experimenting with — and that's to establish a safe haven or a tolerance zone if you will where we can have manmade features embedded in a natural habitat that may seem attractive to crows so that, given the choice between downtown or kind of like going to established crow safe haven that there are manmade features and natural habitat that would be equally, if not more attractive to them, and so they'll go there instead without creating any nuisance to our public or population.

CO: Well, watch for the crows to outsmart you, but good luck with your plan, Robert and we'll talk. Thank you.

RS: Bye-bye.

JD: Robert Sanchez is Nampa's chief of staff and we reached him in Nampa, Idaho. And you can see a video of the crows in Nampa at www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Trance Bass]

Quebec snoring tenant

JD: People dream some pretty weird and awful and disturbing stuff. Do we blame them for, say, showing up for a high school biology exam pantless on a Pegasus donkey? We do not, because it is not their fault — they are asleep. And yet we do get extremely salty with people about another common sleep activity — snoring. Now admittedly, it is louder than dreaming, yet they are not conscious of doing it because they are not conscious. When they wake up however, everyone's mad at them. It is confusing and embarrassing — and the landlords of a building in Quebec City took that into consideration. In September of 2016 they began getting complaints about a new tenant and her high decibel snoring. And when they went to talk to her they went bearing gifts — two boxes of products meant to curb snoring. And the next day they supplied, according to today's Canadian Press article, quote “A suggestion of a doctor to consult, a container of unidentified liquid and a greeting card.” Well, maybe it was the unidentified liquid, probably it was just the humiliation — but the tenant was not happy about the intervention. Relations deteriorated quickly and just four months after she'd moved in, the landlord's terminated her lease. She responded with an official complaint seeking a rental reduction and damages. Well, Quebec’s rental board has made its decision. A board commissioner wrote quote “As the tenant did not want to address her acute snoring problem and the situation created a loss of enjoyment to other tenants, the landlords were fully justified in initiating a lease termination proceeding.” Well, okay, I guess she didn't do anything to try to improve things, which meant she was a little more bulldozer than dozer — but still she has my sympathy all she did was snooze and lose.

[Music: Jazz]

Angry elk attack

JD: An angry aggressive elk did not take too kindly to a perceived interloper. Despite, or perhaps because of the fact, that that interloper was a pickup truck. Jasper National Park recently shared a photograph that clearly depicts the dangers of getting too close to male elk during rutting season. Photograph shows a Parks Canada truck with four holes punched in the passenger side — big holes. Steve Young is a spokesperson with Jasper National Park. He spoke with David Gray, host of the Calgary Eyeopener.

SOUNDCLIP

STEVE YOUNG: The truck was actually out and about around Jasper and a staff member was driving the truck as they should, and slowing down coming up to that stop light and he wasn't even stopped at the time completely, when a large bull elk just near the side of the road decided he didn't want that Parks truck in that particular location and expressed his feelings rather clearly.

DAVID GRAY: Expressed his feelings.

[LAUGHTER]

DG: Have you talked to the person who was in the truck at the time? I’m wondering what that expression felt like?

SY: Well, that's a story he had to bring back to supervisor and I'm sure everybody in the entire building would just kind of be looking at you a little sideways.

DG: A mature male elk, so people know, weighs about 300 kilograms. I think I'm pretty close with that.

SY: Yeah, they're big.

DG: And we should make it clear to people at this time of year an elk moving — it’d be like a hormonal teenager racing at you or a freight train — it would be a terrifying moment is what I'm trying to say here. Is this a common thing in Jasper?

SY: No, we've never had, to my knowledge, we've never had this kind of damage to a truck before as a result. You had a very key word there — focused on one thing. And at this time of year, basically from near the end of August till October after Thanksgiving weekend, they are focused on one thing and that's girls. Girl elk are their number one thing. You'll hear bugles in the town site. I noticed them starting this year around 9:00 at night just before it got really dark. You'll hear this really weird sound and that's an indication to all Jasper residents that the mating season has begun here in Jasper.

JD: That was Steve Young with Jasper National Park speaking about the dangerous situations that can happen in this time of year when male elk are hunting for companionship. And obviously now you need to hear a male elk bugle.

SOUNDCLIP

LOUD HIGH PITCHED SOUND

JD: Perhaps not quite what you were expecting, but now that you're prepared, here it is again.

[Music: Trumpet]

Back To Top »

Part 3: Mexico police, Germany sex abuse

Mexico police

Guest: David Luhnow

JD: As of yesterday there are no local police officers left to patrol the streets in Acapulco, Mexico. They are not on strike. The entire police force was rounded up and disarmed by Marines. All of the city’s 700 officers are under investigation for possible links to criminal gangs. Two commanders have been arrested on suspicion of murder. David Luhnow is the Latin America editor for The Wall Street Journal. He recently returned from Acapulco where he was documenting the violence and crime. We reached him in Mexico City.

CO: David, how do you go about shutting down and disarming an entire police force of 700 people?

DAVID LUHNOW: That's a good question. It takes the Army and the Navy and the Federal Police. They usually do these kinds of operations at a change in shifts so they can get the cops that are coming off their shift and all the ones coming on their shift. And they basically storm the different police headquarters around the city, they take away everyone's guns. They take away their cell phones to be investigated and they sent most of them to the state police academy to have lie detector tests and other kinds of vetting procedures. And in this case, they took police commanders and the head of the police force to detention — basically to the Marine barracks. Two were being charged with murder and links to organized crime and the police chief is being held, for now, no formal charges brought against him.

CO: Extraordinary. And so did they have any warning at all that this raid was going to happen?

DL: No they don't. These raids happen from time to time in different parts of Mexico. The city of Veracruz, on the Gulf Coast, also had something similar happened a few years ago. Usually it's when the situation is just really out of control like in Acapulco. Murders are rising, there’s lots of evidence the local police are just completely overwhelmed, complicit and bought off by different local gangs that basically use local cops as foot-soldiers, as lookouts, as killers for hire. So in many ways the federal government seems to think that it's better not to have this police in some of these cities, to have them there.

CO: And now any sense of the extent of corruption within this police force in Acapulco?

DL: Well one offence would be that a local congressman complained six months ago that the head of the police force, Max Sedano, had failed his lie detector test. Those tests are carried out by the federal government or the state governments and the results are kept secret. This congressman says he saw the result but the police chief had failed his test, meaning he was very likely coopted by organized crime and that he was still on the job. About three years ago most of Acapulco's police officers were taken for testing and the healthy majority — I would say the vast majority — failed their tests as well. They went on strike, most of them kept their jobs. So when I was there I spoke to a 17-year veteran of the force who quit in disgust last year and he said most of the force is corrupted by one gang or another — often two the time. And that there was actually a local police commander, he said, was a member of organized crime, wasn't even on the police roles, but he was a commander and had 17 men under his watch.

CO: Who will conduct this investigation? Because, as we know, when there are challenges to these highly structured, very powerful gangs that there are many threats. I mean, it's quite frightening to try and probe the levels of corruption and crime within a ring like this. So who's going to do it?

DL: That's a very good question. I think it will be sort of a joint effort between the state government, which itself isn't very strong and it's also vulnerable to corruption from organized crime and the Marines. The Mexican Navy, the Marina as it's called in Mexico, has the best reputation in the country as the most effective force. It's the one that works most closely with the U.S. It's the one that has the most military intelligence — and it's the one that does sort of the heavy lifting whenever there's a big operation to be carried out against the cartels. So their intelligence is considered the best. They will be doing it, likely coordinating with the U.S. and seeing what comes up. But usually what comes up is that, you know, a lot of these cities are better off without police forces than having them.

CO: That is an extraordinary statement, David — to say that they're better off without a police force given the levels of criminality. How is it possible that Acapulco would be better off not having the police on duty?

DL: Well, because when police are a part of the problem, when your police are actually working for the bad guys, you know, you're better off not having them. And it's not just like that in Acapulco. I would argue that the majority of the local police forces are not worth it. There's a lot of statistical evidence to suggest that a lot of these places are actually better off without police. They should have fewer, far better paid, far better trained state police or federal police there, and that would actually do more to cut down on crime.

CO: You say this has been done before in other cities like Vera Cruz. So what happened afterwards? I mean, was it just business — do they all go back to work and make it business as usual or were there any consequences?

DL: Usually a variety of things. I mean, in some cases it takes two or three years before full force is reconstituted. In other cases, you get a force being reconstituted and two or three years after that it's the same problem all over again because they haven't really fixed the underlying problem, which is the lack of training, lack of pay, lack of really a career path for these guys. And so, you know, sooner or later the temptation of money from organized crime is just going to overwhelm these very fragile institutions. So the net result is it's a spectacular move, people talk about it for a couple weeks. We'll see if in three years’ time it's made any difference in Acapulco. I kind of doubt it.

CO: Well, we know that there's a new mayor who takes office in Acapulco five days from now. So is this just theater, is this does show to make it appear that they're taking action?

DL: Well, she's an interesting character. She was on the state Supreme Court. I interviewed her a couple of months ago. She's tied to the leftist nationalist party. So they've never taken power in Acapulco before. She told me as a member of the court she had received multiple threats. She was deciding on cases involving criminals that lived near her house and that she knew there was no protection for people like her. So she's well aware of the problem. She also said she's gotten death threats a few days ago.

Basically messages saying you mess with the police and there will be shots. So she's under attack. We'll see whether she can make any headway in this. But it's going to take probably not just political will at a local level, but at a state level and at a federal level as well.

CO: We know that Acapulco has the highest — one of the highest murder rates in the world right now, highest crime rates among most cities. So what are people in Acapulco saying about this? Are they feeling that the crime rate might go down?

DL: I think they're probably generally relieved that this happened. I'll tell you one telling detail. When I was there I spoke to about 20 or 25 families who had lost an immediate of the family to murder. The vast majority did not report that murder to authorities. They got the body, they buried the body, they did not go to the police to report the murder because they don't trust them at all. And so they would rather just bury their loved ones and not even go to the authorities that to go to the police.

CO: Extraordinary. David, thank you for telling us about this.

DL: I would say it's a pleasure, but you’re very welcome.

CO: All right.

JD: David Luhnow is the Latin American editor for The Wall Street Journal. We reached him in Mexico City.

[Music: Industrial Bass]

Opera couple

JD: It is kind of a dramatic time for Etienne Dupuis and Nicole Car. Husband and wife are both opera singers. He is a Canadian baritone, she is an Australian soprano — that has a lot of passion to pack into one marriage. Plus they've got an 18-month-old whom I reckon has a set of pipes that could stop just about any show. However, there will be no stopping the show this week in New York. That is where Mr. Dupuis and Ms. Car are making their debut as a couple at the Metropolitan Opera's production of Puccini's La Boheme. He is playing Marcelo the bohemian painter, she is starring as Mimi the tragic seamstress. But if you're wondering what the family sounds like here's a clip of it Etienne Dupuis and Nicole Car — minus the 18-month-old in a dress rehearsal at the Met.

SOUNDCLIP

OPERA SINGING

JD: Sounds a lot like my house — not. That was real life husband and wife Etienne Dupuis and Nicole Car at the Metropolitan Opera in New York. They are making their own stage debut as a couple there this week in Puccini's La Boheme.

[Music: Violins]

Talkback: Medically assisted death

JD: Last week we spoke with Audrey Parker, a Nova Scotia woman with cancer who has been approved for a medically assisted death. Ms. Parker told us about her drastic decision to die earlier than she'd wanted to because she is concerned that if she waits too long she will lose the ability to consent. And then on Friday we spoke to Jocelyn Downie. Ms. Downie is a professor of law and medicine at Dalhousie University, and she sits on an expert panel that is currently reviewing Canada's legislation on medical assistance in dying. Professor Downie told us about some of the debates happening in Canada around allowing advance requests for medical assistance in dying. And after that interview we received a response from Tom Koch, a listener in Toronto. Mr. Koch is an ethicist, writer and a researcher specializing in bioethics and medical assistance in dying. He's also served as a consultant to justice Canada. Here is what he said.

SOUNDCLIP

TOM KOCH: I do wish when you were dealing with topics like medical assistance in dying, which is complex and which is divisive, that you would talk to people on both sides. There are very good reasons why we have and request at least two assessments before someone is terminated. One of them is that people when they receive an adverse diagnosis, when they have an injury which is the limiting, are depressed, they often think they can't live a different way. They can't live a life like this. They find with care and treatment that a different life is not necessarily a bad life. And that's one reason why we insist that people have two assessments. I've worked with fragile people for over 30 years now in a number of situations — including seniors with dementia, people after neurological, people who have had auto accidents — everybody is depressed. Many people say they can't live. But what we can do with palliative medicine and social support is give them a life worth living if they're willing to take it. And that's why we wait, and that's why some of us are very cautious about the policies which would liberalize even further medical terminations.

JD: That was a call from As It Happens listener and bioethicist and writer Tom Koch. Mr. Koch was in Toronto. Thank you for your call.

[Music: Trance Bass]

Germany sex abuse

Guest:

JD: The men who run Germany's Catholic Church say they're quote “dismayed and ashamed” by an internal report released yesterday. The report details 3,677 cases of sexual abuse by clergy members — most involving children under the age of 14. But Matthias Katsch's case was omitted from that report, along with an unknown number of other cases. And that is because the abuse that Mr. Katsch endured took place at a Jesuit run school. And the report only considered cases that the Church itself had documented within its parishes. It did not include anything that happened at its schools or its institutions for women or anything that church officials did not write down. Matthias Katsch is now the head of a survivors’ advocacy group called Squared Table. We reached Mr. Katsch in Cologne.

CO: Mr. Katsch, what's your main concern with this report?

MATTHIAS KATSCH: The main problem we have is it's not starting from what the survivors are telling to the public but only what remains in the files of the church, and this is not reflecting reality. This is showing the interest of the institution.

CO: Do you think that the German Catholic church does not want to know the full scope of the abuse within its ranks?

MK: And more, they don't want to know the scope and they don't want to get to know who is responsible for that. Because this study was done anonymously and so you have no location, you have no perpetrator names, you have no one who is responsible you don't know which Bishop in which period did something wrong and covering it up. So the whole design of the study was to protect the hierarchy in Germany.

CO: And why do you think — I mean, we can guess at some of the reasons why. But is part of it what we've found in other countries, is that not only were these abuses going on but that they were known at the time and that they were covered up? Is that part of it?

MK: For sure. I mean, even with all the limitations the scientists in this study telling us very clearly that for them this was a systematic approach. It was a system of cover up and hiding and lifting the priests from one parish to another and sending them to the other diocese or sending him even outside the country and in other parts of the world. So they are protecting themselves and they are protecting the church because they know that as an institution they have failed.

CO: You know this personally because of what happened to you, and you also know, as you as you've spoken about, that you were passed on, weren't you? I mean one priest had his way with you and then moved on to the next person and so and then you discovered how many more young boys were suffering that.

MK: Well, we are talking about more than 100 victims of these two perpetrators alone — and they are still leaving their pensions from the church. One is living in South America now and the other one is very near to me in Berlin, and they know that under the statute of limitations nothing will happen to them and the church is not interested to punish them and to cover to end the cover up operation and to come forward and make them feel the consequences of what they have done because they are involved in it. And that's one example, but there are hundreds and thousands, probably, similar cases in Germany and we will not know about it until we have, finally, a real investigation. We need the state to act now. The government has to act now. We can't let the church alone try to deal with this crisis.

CO: The church, the Catholic Church in Germany is an extremely powerful organization, isn’t it? It’s very wealthy, it is more wealthy than the Vatican. Do you think it's possible for the German government to say ‘Yes, we're going to investigate what happened in the Catholic Church?’

MK: The problem is under our Constitution the church has a very special position. And they know it and they are, not only wealthy, but they are powerful because they are very well connected in society. And the legal basis of it is in the federal constitution. So, of course, it would be helpful if the church would be willing to agree to such an investigation. But before this, the public and the government has to push for it, because the church reacts only under pressure. We have seen this during all these years, not only here in Germany, but in other places.

CO: As we learned about the numbers of victims and they come forward, there has been some forms of compensation paid, very small amounts. You received something called a ‘recognition fee.’ What does that mean?

MK: Well, in 2010 the church was saying ‘We are not responsible, legally we are not responsible for what happened to you. We don't pay compensation. We pay a recognition fee symbolic amount of money to show that we are feeling very sorry for you, but it wasn't us.’ Now, eight years later, with this study we have a proof that it was a system and that the church is responsible for what they did. So that's why we demand the church now to come forward with a real compensation plan.

CO: In other countries, including Canada, the church has cried poor. But in Germany it has billions of dollars, doesn't it? It’s the richest Catholic Church in the world. So what do you think the church should be paying in the way of compensation to the victims?

MK: I think knowing that the abuse of a child and of a young person is having an effect on the whole life of this person, I think we have to talk about six-digit number — at least. Because it is just re-compensation for the life damage they caused by not acting in favour of the victim, but acting in favour of the perpetrator.

CO: May I ask you how much you received in your recognition fee?

MK: I received 5,000 euros from the Jesuit order. And I was lucky because I know the average recognition is about 3,000 euros per victim.

CO: We've just heard from the German Bishops Conference Cardinal Reinhard Marx, the chairman of the German Bishops Conference. He described the findings in this report as shameful. What word would you use?

MK: It's a catastrophe for the victims, for their lives. And the report cannot reflect this catastrophe in the personal life of the person. It is a crime and I want them to realize that they are responsible for this crime and that they now finally have to come for that kind of offer something real not only the feelings of remorse and shame, but to offer something helpful for the victims.

CO: Mr. Katsch, I appreciate speaking with you, thank you.

MK: Thank you.

JD: Matthias Katsch is the head of Squared Table, an advocacy group for the survivors of sexual abuse within the Catholic Church. We reached him in Cologne.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

Sept. 26, 2018 episode transcript

More Stories Like This