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

The AIH Transcript for November 20, 2018

Hosts: Carol Off and Jeff Douglas

CAROL OFF: Hello, I’m Carol Off.

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

[Music: Theme]

Prologue

JD: Tonight:

CO: Trial, and error. Dennis Oland was being tried again for the murder of his wealthy father, Richard Oland — but now, the judge has declared a mistrial, citing a major mistake by a Saint John police officer.

JD: Frost in translation. Montreal columnist Patrick Lagacé usually writes in French — but today, he switched to English, to chide his Anglophone colleagues for their indifference to what he says are the Ontario premier's attack on Francophone’s rights.

CO: Trauma centre. Dr. Tamara O'Neal had dedicated her life to treating injured people. She died yesterday, when her ex-fiancé shot her outside the Chicago hospital where she worked.

JD: What struck him was that nothing struck them. A doctor who's examined Canadian diplomats suffering from "Havana syndrome" says they have post-concussion symptoms — without any blow to the head.

CO: A baubly personality. An Arizona woman is trying to find a home for the friendly pigeon who showed up in a fancy rhinestone vest — and to figure out how it got so stoned.

JD: And...wool-endowed. Iceland's list of most eligible rams — the "Ram Registry" — is hot off the presses -- and we'll speak with one sheep farmer who got four hunky specimens in there.

JD: "As It Happens", the Tuesday edition. Radio whose guests are on the rampage. Several ram pages, actually.

[Music: Theme]

Part one: Oland mistrial Patrick Lagacé, Iceland eligible rams

Oland mistrial

Guest: Alan Gold

JD: The second attempt to try Dennis Oland for the murder of his father has hit a major snag. Today, a judge in New Brunswick declared a mistrial, after ruling that a police officer conducted improper searches on potential jurors in the case. In 2011, the prominent businessman Richard Oland was found dead in a pool of blood in his Saint John office. A jury originally found his son Dennis Oland guilty of the murder. That conviction was later overturned. Mr. Oland has always maintained his innocence. Now, the trial will proceed with no jury, and be decided by a judge alone. Alan Gold is Dennis Oland's defence lawyer. We reached him in Saint John.

CO: Mr. Gold, your client Dennis Oland and his mother, were all smiles as they left the court today. How did your client take the news of this trial?

ALAN GOLD: He took it very well because if it leads to a judge-alone trial, which we had wanted and applied for and been unsuccessful because the law did not allow it without the Crown's consent. So yes, we're happy.

CO: And you say because of what happened. Tell us maybe in layman's terms what this police officer did that led to this mistrial?

AG: Certainly. The Supreme Court of Canada has emphasized in 2012 in a series of cases the importance of juror privacy. So when people come forward, and they're willing to serve on a jury they have a right to privacy, and we're not allowed to investigate them the way it's done in some American courts. And so there's very strict limits on what information the police can look at in connection with prospective jurors. They can look to see if they have a criminal record, or if there's some other qualification that excludes them from jury duty. But you're not allowed to research each and every contact they may have had with police officers.

CO: And is that what the policeman did?

AG: And that apparently is what the policeman did in this case. He didn't tell a body too afterwards. He then told the Crown, who of course had to tell us, and that led to the successful motion for a mistrial.

CO: Why would it matter though? I know you're limited in what you can say, but what would knowing how much contact, any previous contact or feelings about the police, what impact would that have?

AG: Okay, it might give an impression that the prospective juror might favour the police, or might disfavour the police. For example, suppose they had just hypothetically an unpleasant experience with the police. Well, that's not something that we're entitled to know about.

CO: You have though in this case, you have said that the police have mishandled the case from the start. So maybe just give us a sense again as to what you think they did wrong in investigating this murder?

AG: Well the evidence at first trial simply reveals considerable number of missteps. They're supposed to secure the crime scene so that people don't wander in and contaminate it. The evidence at this trial will reveal, as it did at the last trial, for example, there was an exit door that was the more likely place for the actual killer to have exited. They didn't even photograph that door. It was like they didn't even notice it. They took over 100 photographs of everything else in the location, except this exit door. They never checked that door for fingerprints. The crime scene was visited by people that had no business being there. A crime scene like this is very challenging for a police force to make sure that every bit of evidence is found that might help solve it. And I think the challenge was just too great for this particular police force.

CO: But Dennis Oland was found guilty by a jury already, and that verdict was later overturned — as you well know. Why do you think that you can convince a judge this time that Dennis Oland had nothing to do with his father's murder?

AG: Well again, we don't have to do the convincing, the Crown does. But the case is a circumstantial evidence case of involving some really quite extraordinary puzzles. There's a lot of smoke. And the question is whether there's fire? And a judicial mind — a legally trained mind — who understands how appearances can be deceptive, who understands you have to be careful not to jump to conclusions, that's the kind of mind that can accurately and reliably look at this case.

CO: One of the key pieces of evidence as you know during the first trial was the jacket — a brown jacket — that belonged to Denis Oland that had small bloodstains and DNA that seemed to match his father. Is that again going to be a key piece of evidence for the Crown do you think?

AG: I think in many ways it's the key piece of evidence, and this is exactly the kind of evidence that I'm talking about because at first blush, you think oh my gosh how could that happen? But the trial itself is going to bring forth evidence that you know these kinds of stains, the transfer of stains is not uncommon. And the trial will also put forth all of the other evidence on which there were no blood stains. All of the other clothing — the shoes, etc., which were carefully examined — so this is this is the point that a judge can look carefully at all of the evidence and not just be focused on one or two pieces of evidence that seem to suggest guilt.

CO: Does your client, does Denis Oland, have any theories as to how his father was killed?

AG: We have no idea. And it would be virtually impossible for us to have an idea because Dick, he had certain aspects of his life that were kept secret from his family. We don't have a police force. We're not there investigating the crime scene within minutes of the body being discovered. So no, in the real world I think it's almost impossible for outsiders to figure out who did it. That's the police's job. And we say they didn't do it properly in this case.

CO: As we saw this morning Dennis Oland’s mother has stood by him during all of this. Have you ever seen her loyalty, her belief that her son did not kill his father waver?

AG: No, no. Never, never, never. She's an absolutely wonderful woman. She, like the rest of the family, does not deserve this tragedy to be visited on them. It's been over half a decade they've been living with this. And she doesn't deserve it. And her faith in her son has never wavered for an instant.

CO: Just out of curiosity, there are obviously other cases where this police officer had done the same kind of search before the jury selection. Is it possible that there are other decisions, other cases that will be reopened?

AG: Certainly. If I was a lawyer who had a jury trial in this jurisdiction, I would at least demand disclosure to find out if the police had done improper jury vetting during the selection process.

CO: We'll leave it there. Mr. Gold, thank you.

AG: You're very welcome.

JD: Alan Gold is the defence lawyer for Dennis Oland. We reached Mr. Gold in St. John, New Brunswick.

[Music: Sad piano]

Patrick Lagacé

Guest: Patrick Lagacé

JD: Usually, Patrick Lagacé does not write in English. He is a columnist with La Presse, and the Quebec-based news outlet is published entirely in French, except today. Today, the headline on Mr. Lagacé’s column reads: “Guys, remember Pastagate?!” And what follows is an appeal, in English, to his colleagues in Toronto to pay a little more attention to the, quote, “one-two punch” that Mr. Lagacé accuses Ontario's government of delivering to its Franco-Ontarian, citizens. We reached Patrick Lagacé in Montreal.

CO: Patrick, why did you write your column today in English?

PATRICK LAGACE: Because I wanted the commentariat in Toronto and the Toronto press to understand what's going on under their very nose, which is Francophone’s rights in Ontario are being trampled. And these people in the commentariat out they are not paying attention, and they're not showing any kind of outrage, save for Chantal Hébert in the Toronto Star.

CO: And why do you think that's hypocrisy?

PL: Because when you do have linguistic spats in Quebec, these same very newspapers, and I pointed out the Toronto Star, pointed out the Globe and Mail, and National Post are very keen on commenting on what's going on. You know especially when the Quebec government is perceived as the villain in the story, they will publish very passionate and pugnacious opinion pieces. And I use the “Pastagate” controversy from a couple of years back as an example. I mean you've found numerous pieces attacking Quebec and the Quebec government for its treatment of the Anglophone minority here in these very newspapers. But these newspapers concerning what's going on with the French university and concerning the commissioner for French services in Ontario they are missing in action.

CO: Okay, and that's what Premier Ford in Ontario has cut. But he says that hasn't reduced any services. That these are just the services that used to be part of the French language commission's office would now be done elsewhere. So he says basically nothing's changed. What do you say to him?

PL: Well, I'm saying what the francophone community in Ontario is saying is that these do look like ideological cuts. Because when you look at the commissioner's office, all of its employees are going to be merged into the ombudsman's office. So if one fails to see what financial gain is going to happen.

CO: And you also point out that the French language university that's scrapped as well by Premier Ford.

PL: That's an old dream of the Franco-Ontrarian community. I'm a graduate of the University of Ottawa, and even at the time, talks and dreams about a fully Franco-Ontarian University were going on at the time. And now, it seemed on the verge of becoming a reality. And it's being cut. And again, I come back to the treatment of the Toronto commentariat, as I call it, regarding the treatment in Quebec of the Anglophone minority, which is not perfect, but which as institutions that are publicly-funded by the Quebec government. So I'm wondering where is the world-class francophone hospital in Ontario? Like you have a world-class hospital in Montreal that operates in English. Where is the French university, as I said? You have three publicly-funded universities in Quebec that are operating in English.

CO: But it was covered, right. I mean the Globe, the Star, the Post the CBC all covered Premier Ford's decision to scrap the French language Commission and the university. So you're saying it's the commentariat — it's the columnists and editorialists — who failed?

PL: There you go, and that's why I used examples in my columns about “Pastagate” — this linguistic controversy from 2013 in Quebec. And going back to this opinion piece in The Globe and Mail at the time, it started with a quote from Frederick Douglass, the well-known anti-slavery activist from the United States. And then the first paragraph of the piece said you know you read this and you could almost apply that to what's going on in Quebec today. I think that's a bit harsh and I think that's a bit exaggerated. But it just goes to show that you know when it concerns the rights of the Anglophone minority in Quebec, this very same Toronto press is very keen on publishing. But there is an injustice going on under their nose, and they're nowhere to be found.

CO: Okay that does sound a bit extreme to compare it to slavery. But at the same time, I mean you wrote with outrage about “Pastagate”. You described it as overzealous, and this is on the part of the Office of the French Language going after an Italian restaurant for putting Italian words in its menu. I mean come on! It was more than just in Canada. Around the world people said this was absurd.

PL: Look, by coincidence, I was interviewed at that same time by the late Anthony Bourdain when he came to Montreal to do a show. And most of our conversation pertained to “Pastagate”. I'm not saying that “Pastagate” was not a well-deserved black eye for Quebec, and what some people call “The Language Police” in Quebec. I'm just saying these newspapers in Toronto, who dictate you know a big part of the agenda, they were very keen on publishing these pieces — and rightfully so. But I'm saying right now, there is an injustice going on regarding a linguistic minority in Ontario, and they are nowhere to be found.

CO: I wonder though what that's based on? I mean Doug Ford's cuts perhaps reflect that voters don't care, or he's perceived that voters don't care. And maybe the columnists that reflects that they believe that the readers don't care? Maybe it's apathy and not hypocrisy behind all this?

PL: You know part of my intellectual and journalistic training was done in English. And I remember a very good axiom of the Anglo-Saxon journalism: its comfort the afflicted, and afflict the comfortable. And in this case, the afflicted are the Franco-Ontarians. And there's an injustice going on under their very nose and they are nowhere to be found. I found that appalling.

CO: But maybe it's because they are reflecting the fact that the public doesn't care?

PL: You know in Quebec, you'll find a majority of people who are against reasonable accommodation. Who will find that you know if you work in the public sector, you should not wear this Islamic veil — the hijab, for instance. A majority of Quebecers will find that. Well, there's some of us in the press who go against this public sentiment. I don't think that journalism should be reflecting the will of the powerful. I don't think that journalism should be about just reflecting what the general public thinks. You have to go with what's right. And sometimes an injustice and that is an injustice. And there is one in Ontario right now. It's been going on for years, by the way. It's been going on for years. I think that the suppression of francophone’s rights in Ontario, in this country, is a great untold story.

CO: Well, Patrick, I appreciate speaking with you, and hearing about it. Thank you.

PL: Always a pleasure. Take care.

CO: Take care. Bye.

JD: Patrick Lagacé is a columnist with La Presse. We reached him in Montreal.

[Music: Up-tempo]

Iceland eligible rams

Guest: Snaedis Anna Porhallsdottir

JD: The catalogue of Iceland's most eligible bachelors is hot off the presses. And it doesn't hold back. On page 32, Raxi is, quote, "generous, broad, well-stocked... and abdominal." Unquote. A few pages later, you've got Gudni. He strikes a "broad" figure and rocks some luscious locks. This is the Ram Registry. In Iceland — at least among sheep farmers — it is a hotly anticipated catalogue. And it's extremely competitive: out of thousands of handsome rams, only forty-four made the cut this year. Snaedis Anna Porhallsdottir hit the jackpot. She's a sheep farmer who has four rams featured in this year's Ram Register. We reached her in Borgarfjordur, Iceland.

CO: Snaedis, how exciting is this year's crop of Icelandic rams?

SNAEDIS ANNA PORHALLSDOTTIR: It's pretty exciting. The publishing of this catalog is always very exciting for Icelandic sheep farmers. We like what we see so far.

CO: And I understand you have some very eligible rams. Just can you tell us about some of your prizes?

SAP: We have four rams this year in the catalogue; three that are in their first year, so they were born 2017. So they are very young. And then we have one brown one who’s very nice. I like him, and we’re proud of him to be in there.

CO: So do you think your rams will get some action?

SAP: Well, it's really more of like a sperm bank. So they don't really get to meet any ewes. They just produce their donation, and then it’s sent to the farms.

CO: The descriptions of the rams in the catalogue, they kind of read like dating profiles. Your ram, Fjalldrapi, how is he described in the catalogue?

SAP: So they usually start with that description just off their look. So they describe him, firstly, that his horns are good that they are not like growing inwards towards his face. And then they describe that he is muscular around his shoulders, and he has good muscles on his back, and a good thigh muscles. And then they describe the wool, and then he describes his temperament as well. They say that he is useful and nicely built and calm. And then they do like an average calculation for his offspring.

CO: I wonder why it matters that they're good looking? I mean if you're not going to meet any ewes, why does it matter that they've got nice faces or their horns are in the right place?

SAP: Well, it’s maybe not that they're nice looking so much. But like with the horns, farmers don't want to breed maybe horns that are growing towards their face, and are going to end up enduring the ram. And it's pretty important to have a good picture of them in there because the picture says a lot. And it's nice if they are standing tall and are looking good in the photo that is put in there.

CO: Well, I'm looking at a few pictures. They are really quite handsome fellows, aren't they?

SAP: Yeah, they are.

CO: There is one described as an experienced ram, who is grey and hornless, has as short head, a dapper ram with a calm manner. Is that fairly appealing?

SAP: He is actually in there as a wool ram, so he is not in there for his muscle quality or carcass quality really. He is in there for farmers that are breeding for the wool.

CO: There's another fellow who is really quite dashing, and has the colour of Arctic fox. And I like this: “Is aware of his environment, and knows exactly what's expected of him.”

SAP: He is a leader ram. It's a special breed within the Icelandic sheep breed. They are really useless for meat production because they are always very skinny; they never gain any muscle no matter how much you feed them. But they're much taller than the other sheep, and they're very smart. And they have this quality of knowing like when the weather's going to change, or if there's danger coming or something like that. So when they say that he knows what's expected of him, it probably meant that like when they're herding the sheep, he knows like okay we're being herded home. I'll go in front and I'll lead the others home.

CO: There's also a beautiful black and white Ram in here by the name of Nikulas.

SAP: Yep, Nikulas is from the north of Iceland, and he is described as tall and respectful, and carries his head high. He has like an open eyes everything that goes on around him. And he is well-behaved and calm, but he is suspicious or careful when taking like cuddles from strangers. He likes to know who it is that is trying to cuddle him.

CO: Is that in the catalogue that he does he doesn't like cuddles?

SAP: Yeah, that's a direct translation from the catalogue.

CO: And he sounds respectful too. I like this in a ram.

SAP: Yeah, he's very beautiful.

CO: Now what kind of reaction do you get to this annual publication of the ram catalogue? I mean do people think it's kind of funny?

SAP: For us you know that our farmers, we don't think it's funny. We just think it's completely normal that it shows descriptions. We don't see anything funny about it. It's just what we expect from the ram catalogue every year. Like if there is a ram that they put in there and they don't mention anything about his temperament, we're like oh, why didn't they put it in there? Like, we want to know everything about them.

CO: I guess when you look through this catalogue it explains why Iceland is world famous for your sheep?

SAP: Yeah, I guess so. We're pretty happy with them at least. It's a breed that's never been mixed with any other breed. We've had a lot of advances in our breeding for the past 25 years.

CO: It is competitive, right? I mean not everybody gets the ram in the catalogue. You've got four great Rams that made the cut. So how chuffed are you about that?

SAP: Yeah, we're very happy with that. We've been running this farm for three and a half years. It's an old breeding farm. But yeah, we're very happy. We got two in there last year, and four now, so we're very happy with that. I think they're all very eligible rams.

CO: With lots of sex appeal.

SAP: Lots of sex appeal definitely, especially this time of year they can smell the ewes going into heat, and they're very agitated this time of year.

CO: Okay, well, I’ll let you get back to work. Snaedis, thanks for speaking with us.

SAP: Thank you.

CO: Bye.

SAP: Bye bye.

JD: Snaedis Anna Porhallsdottir is a sheep farmer in Iceland. We reached her in Borgarfjordur. To check out some of Iceland's most eligible bachelor rams, go to our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Rhinestone Cowboy by Glen Campbell]

Bedazzled pigeon

JD: Glen Campbell, with, of course, "Rhinestone Cowboy" — a song about a struggling artist who yearns to be a star in a shimmering outfit. And, in a way, that song is about the mysterious stranger who showed up last week at Jody Kieran's house in Arizona, wearing a gorgeous jewelled vest. His past is a mystery. But, clearly, he’s a star. And he's already getting letters from people he don't know — and offers comin' over the phone. Jody Kieran runs a bird rescue centre called "Fallen Feathers" in Peoria, Arizona. She's used to calls from strangers about birds. She's not used to calls about pigeons wearing rhinestone-encrusted vests. But she did get one. And when the caller brought the pigeon over to Ms. Kieran's place, sure enough, it was wearing a "flight suit", which is a fancy name for a diaper you put on domesticated birds when you let them fly free. Usually, however, they are not covered with jewels. Now, since pigeons are quite bad at using glue guns, Ms. Kieran surmised that the pigeon belonged perhaps to a human. Or, as she told the website Gizmodo, quote: "...normally wild birds arriving with clothing is enough proof to me that this bird was owned and loved." Unquote. And that checks out. Now, we don't yet know who owns him, but everyone loves him: lots of people have offered to take the rhinestone bird-boy, if no one comes forward to claim him. Which is generous, but do be warned: the bird himself is free. But you'll need to invest in vests.

[Music: Acoustic guitar]

Part two: Chicago shooting, Cuba doctor

Chicago shooting

Guest: Sneha Topgi

JD: Dr. Tamara O'Neal went to work to help people in distress, some in life-threatening situations. Instead, the ER physician ended up in the care of her colleagues. They could not save her. Dr. O'Neal was shot dead yesterday in the parking lot of Chicago's Mercy Hospital. The attacker, Juan Lopez, also shot and killed a police officer and a pharmacy resident — and died during the rampage. According to reports, until a few weeks ago, Dr. O'Neal's fiancè. Today, Dr. O’Neal’s friends, co-workers, and family are in mourning. Among them is Dr. Sneha Topgi. We reached Dr. Topgi in Brooklyn.

CO: Dr. Topgi, first of all, I'm sorry for your loss.

SNEHA TOPGI: Thank you.

CO: You work in an emergency room. I'm sure you've treated gunshot victims yourself. Did you ever imagine one of your own friends would become a victim?

ST: No, I never imagined. Yes, we do treat gunshot victims all the time, and I've had a lot of dead bodies and bleeding hearts. But it's a little different when it’s someone you're close to, someone you can relate to. I saw myself in her, and we've been friends for a couple of years, so it's a little different. It still hurts. It always hurts when someone dies in your arms, but I can't believe this happened to her.

CO: And she herself, Tamara O’Neal, would have probably have treated gunshot victims as well?

ST: Yes, that's true. It's very common in our field to treat gunshot victims. She works in Chicago, where it's very prevalent as well. I trained in St. Louis, and I'm here in Brooklyn, and we see it a lot.

CO: I'm so sorry to hear that.

ST: Thank you.

CO: How did you come to know Dr. O'Neal?

ST: So we met at a retreat during residency a couple of years ago. We hit it off as friends immediately. We led very similar lives. We’re both women trying to get our career going. We’re women of colour also. And the emergency ER field, when you meet someone that does the same thing as you. That is saving lives literally; we're on the front lines. You really relate to them. You get along. And she just had this amazing humour, always smiling, and that was just so attractive.

CO: So she was professionally really important to you, but she was also your friend, wasn't she?

ST: Yes, she had a great sense of humour. She was so caring, she's always smiling, and that's what I noticed when I first met her a couple of years ago. That’s how I’ll always remember her.

CO: What do you think motivated her to be an emergency room doctor?

ST: I think it's similar to a lot of what motivates a lot of us ER doctors. You feel like you're actually making a difference. It's very fast-paced. You have to think on your feet. It's not boring. It's very rigorous. And it's a challenge. Every day is a challenge. You never know what's going to walk through the door. You don't know what you're going to deal with. And the funny thing about all this is we know this. And then something like this happens to our friend. And it's just really getting to me. It's like I know things like this happen all the time, but when it hits close to home, it’s just a little different.

CO: And she was shot and killed by a man she had been engaged to; Juan Lopez killed her and two other people. And you had been invited to a wedding at one point that was going to be between Mr. Lopez and Dr. O'Neal, is that right?

ST: That's correct. She started talking to him a couple of years ago when I first met her. And then she had a bridal shower in August, and the wedding was in October. I don't know the specific details on why it got canceled, but she notified me to cancel the plans, and that the wedding was called off. I tried to inquire and be there for her to find out you know does she need anything? What's going on? But I didn’t want to push her because if she needed to talk to me, I let her know that I'd be there.

CO: She never gave you any indication that she might fear for her life?

ST: She never did. All I heard during the years was how much she loved this man, and how much she was excited to have finally found someone, and to get married, and to have kids. She was so excited about her future.

CO: And then it was suddenly canceled?

ST: Yeah, now it ceases to exist.

CO: Did you ever meet Juan Lopez? Did you meet this man she was engaged to?

ST: I actually never did. I was going to meet him at the wedding. I am in New York, and she's in Chicago, but I never got to meet her fiancé.

CO: Such a tragedy.

ST: I know.

CO: It's interesting that this comes at a time when doctors are trying to tell the world that gun violence is something that they are dealing with all the time. And as you know the National Rifle Association was saying stay in your lane to doctors who were talking about the gun violence and what it was doing.

ST: Right.

CO: What do you say to the NRA today after what happened to your friend?

ST: I say I challenge you to step in my shoes — my bloody shoes — and see how you feel when you have these gun victims in your hands. And I’ve treated so many young adults and so many innocent people where I'm holding their heart or holding their dead heads in my hands. And it makes me so angry because this could have all been prevented. And I just challenge them to step in my shoes and see how you feel. Because I see this all the time, and it hurts — because I'm the first person that sees these people when the ambulance brings them in, or when other friends drop off or a gunshot victim friend into our E.R. and run.

CO: What difference do you hope speaking out about your friend, and speaking with us today might do?

ST: I just want everyone to know how wonderful Dr. Tamara O'Neal was. She was a great friend. And that we lost someone so amazing because of gun violence. And that I hope it questions to everyone where is safe? What is safe now? This happened at a hospital. Like, what should we do now? When it the change going to happen?

CO: Dr. Topgi, I really appreciate that you would talk to us about your friend, and she sounds like an amazing person, and a huge loss. Thank you.

ST: Thank you so much.

CO: All right. Bye bye.

ST: Bye

JD: Dr. Sneha Topgi was a friend of Dr. Tamara O'Neal, who was shot and killed yesterday at her workplace, Chicago's Mercy Hospital, along with two other people. We reached Dr. Topgi in Brooklyn. A few hours after the shooting in Chicago, there was another, in Baltimore. A five-year-old girl named Amy Hayes was caught in the crossfire and seriously wounded, she is expected to survive. But that girl's half-sister, Taylor Hayes, was shot and killed while sitting in a car this summer — Taylor Hayes seven years old. Today, Baltimore's interim police commissioner, Gary Tuggle, addressed the shootings.

SOUNDCLIP

GARY TUGGLE: It just goes to show you that some individuals don't care who gets hurt. And it's got to stop. At the end of the day, when people pull guns with reckless abandon, to harm other people, and they don't care who gets hurt, that's an issue. That's an issue because it's just, first of all, senseless. But then secondly, it really shows that there are some individuals that just don't care. They don't care who they hurt, and they have to be removed from the street.

JD: That was Baltimore interim police commissioner Gary Tuggle, speaking to reporters this afternoon.

[Music: Sombre piano]

Esi Edugyan

JD: Last night was the 25th anniversary of Canada's richest literary award, the Scotiabank Giller Prize. And for the second time in a quarter-century, the winner was Victoria-based Esi Edugyan, who took home the Prize and a hundred thousand dollars for her novel, "Washington Black". Ms. Edugyan first won the Giller in 2011, for "Half-Blood Blues". Her new novel follows an 11-year-old boy by the name of Washington, whose relationship with his master's brother takes him from a Barbados plantation on a surprising journey around the world. Recently, Esi Edugyan spoke with Michael Enright about her latest book, on CBC Radio's "The Sunday Edition".

SOUNDCLIP

ESI EDUGYAN: It seemed that the book eventually was about this attempt to break free from the psychological tethers of slavery. You know, I think people who've been through traumatic events you are still grappling with that as you continue on into your future life. And that wasn't maybe something I had read a lot about in fiction. I mean he's somebody who is essentially destined for extinction. I mean you're born, you toil, you die, and probably in a very unnatural and painful way.

MICHAEL ENRIGHT: Let me stop you there because when you were researching the whole idea of slavery, and you include in the novel some of the worst torture of these people — pouring honey, and let the ants eat them. How do you go through that kind of research without your skin crawling?

EE: I mean you don't get through it without more than your skin crawling. Every single brutality depicted in the novel is you know it's from the historical record. I didn't invent anything.

ME: It’s real.

EE: It's real, so that description of somebody being covered in honey and being staked to an anthill, and then the ant sting him to death, that was somebodies actual death. I mean that research was very difficult to do. But you know I felt I had to depict that as faithfully as I could because people did live through that. And it's important to show that. And for the reader to understand that these were real lives that were lost. And this was real pain that was caused.

JD: That was author Esi Edugyan, speaking to Michael Enright on CBC's "The Sunday Edition". Last night, Ms. Edugyan won the 25th Giller Prize for her novel Washington Black, which is also a finalist for the 2018 Man Booker Prize. And if you'd like to hear more of Michael's conversation with Ms. Edugyan, tune in to "The Sunday Edition" this Sunday.

[Music: Horns]

Cuba doctor

Guest: Shawn Marshall

JD: Shawn Marshall's patients served their country. And now they appear to be paying the price. But they aren't soldiers. Dr. Marshall's patients are Canadian diplomats, and the families of diplomats, who were stationed in Cuba. And then they came down with what's being called "Havana syndrome." That's the term being used for the unexplained nosebleeds, nausea, headaches, and mental impairment, which also struck US foreign service workers in Havana, beginning in the spring of 2017. Shawn Marshall is the medical director of the brain injury program at the Ottawa Hospital. We reached him in Ottawa.

CO: Dr. Marshall, you are a brain injury specialist, and you're looking at the brains of people who didn't suffer a brain injury. So what do you make of that?

SHAWN MARSHALL: I think it's very interesting. The patients that I've seen appear to have had a brain injury. It looked like they've had a brain injury. But you're right; we can't identify specifically what the cause of the brain injury was.

CO: There's no obvious signs of trauma? Nothing that would indicate that they'd somehow collectively got a concussion?

SM: No, definitely no obvious sign of concussion. Normally, you know when someone has a brain injury, it's pretty apparent someone's had trauma, and it's pretty evident.

CO: And what is evident? Tell us what their brains look like?

SM: Well, there's a range. So, for instance, in this population that we're talking about today, they look more like a post-concussion patient. And a concussion is someone who has an alteration in their functioning and abilities after having a direct trauma to the brains. So for instance a fall, or strike to the head, or contact in a sporting event. We also have more severe brain injuries. When we have those for people in car accidents or more serious trauma, they might have bleeding, or hemorrhaging into the brain.

CO: What kind of symptoms are they showing or are they telling you about?

SM: They're experiencing symptoms very reminiscent of patients who've had a concussion and the symptoms linger. So physical symptoms can include things such as headache problems, light sensitivity, noise sensitivity, and balance problems. They also have difficulties with thinking abilities, so they note they're slower in their thinking. They have difficulties with concentration, and they have difficulties with dividing their attention. So, for instance, they're easily distracted by you know say multiple conversations going on at once. Similarly, they can have further problems with fatigue — it's a very striking symptom, irritability, and kind of emotional dis-control. Like, their mood is up and down, and you know it's very atypical for them.

CO: The one thing they have in common, besides all these symptoms, is that they were all associated with the Canadian embassy in Havana, Cuba. And they all began to have these symptoms at about the same time, is that right?

SM: Well, that you'd have to talk directly to the patients about. So I've seen them after the fact. But there is a common link in that all of them informed me that they have had time in Havana around the same time — so again, around that time. As to whether the exact time of onset of the symptoms, I can't confirm that. I do know it's around the same time. But also, this is something that evolved. They didn't really have specific trauma, so their symptoms as they describe them were evolving, and they weren't necessarily sure why they were evolving.

CO: There's an excellent feature by Doug Saunders in the Globe and Mail. He interviewed several of these diplomats. They're all deeply alarmed by all having these symptoms, and not having any knowledge or I guess formal investigation as to how they all could have ended up having these symptoms while working in the embassy. What do you make of that?

SM: I think that as a patient with these symptoms, even patients who have had a concussion and have these lingering symptoms, is hard to fathom how you could have these symptoms. And what I make of it is that it must be very stressful.

CO: The Canadian government is not saying anything about this; they are being rather hush-hush. We do know though that the that U.S. diplomats and their families who were in Havana at the U.S. Embassy, they began having these similar symptoms, all appearing to be related to what appeared to be brain injuries. But the United States has been far more open about it. They're getting care, and there's an investigation. Have you ever been able to learn anything from the doctors who are looking at the U.S. diplomats who are suffering the same symptoms?

SM: I have been able to. I've been lucky enough, facilitated through the Canadian government, to be able to liaise with the physicians in the United States treating patients with a similar profile. Again, I don't know the details of their patients due to confidentiality and that sort of thing. But it certainly seems to be a similar pattern of what the American experience has been to the Canadian experience from what information I've learned from those physicians with whom I’ve had contact.

CO: In Washington though, they're speculating that their brain injuries were caused by mysterious energy weapon attack by some foreign power. Does that seem plausible?

SM: That's probably beyond what I can see you know for conjecture. It does seem possible in that we know that trauma to the brain and injury to the brain can be caused by, for instance, radiation. We know that tape can be caused by blast waves from bombs. Like, there's different ways the brain can have trauma or injury. So that would not necessarily be an unreasonable hypothesis. But I can't comment further and don't have any specific knowledge about that.

CO: But these are people you know that you can't say that these are people who might make things up or be a bit hysterical about anything. These are not buttercups, are they? Some of these people have been through all kinds of things as diplomats, military coups, states of emergencies, hurricanes, cyclones. They know how to cope in difficult times. So it's unusual for them to find themselves in a situation and being so worried about what's happening to them.

SM: Well, I think that based on the information I get from taking their histories, and the ability to see them and complete physical examinations, it appears evident to me that there is some pathology here that there are there are problems. And clearly, that will cause them distress, and because of not knowing what to do. I've certainly seen that with the intervention we're doing that there've been some level of improvement. Yet, there are some still persisting symptoms, which is what we see with concussion patients. But you're right. I think that something seems amiss here. That this is something’s occurred in my opinion having seen these patients in their presentations.

CO: All right. Very curious, Dr. Marshall. Thank you for talking to us.

SM: You're welcome. Have a good day.

CO: Bye.

SM: Bye.

JD: DR. Shawn Marshall is the medical director of the brain injury program at the Ottawa Hospital. We reached him in Ottawa.

[Music: Country]

Pain study

JD: I was right! I knew it! I didn’t want to be right. I wanted to be wrong, but I was right. I knew I shouldn't have scarfed that giant glob of leftover wasabi from Carol's lunch. But you know, waste not want not. At the time, I said to myself, "Jeff, this is gonna hurt." And wow, wow, was I right. That was a pain that I have not known before. But, you know, it turns out just believing it was gonna hurt may in fact have increased my blinding-white blaze of a nose fire. That's confirmed by a new study out of the University of Colorado at Boulder. Researchers there recently conducted an experiment on people's expectations of pain — and to what degree your expectations influence the degree of pain you feel. Turns out — as Tor Wager, senior author of the study put it — quote, "The more pain you expect, the stronger your brain responds to the pain. The stronger your brain responds to the pain, the more you expect." The team placed subjects in an MRI. They then measured the blood flow to their brain, while showing them symbols representing degrees of pain from low to high. For instance, the words "low" or "high". And then each subject was asked how much pain he or she anticipated. Then, they exposed the subjects to varying degrees of heat — the worst being about as intense as holding a hot cup of coffee. What the participants didn't know is that the amount of heat administered didn't correlate with the cue given just before. Regardless, the subjects reported more pain when a higher-pain cue was shown — and their brain scans likewise showed more activity in regions associated with threat and fear. Now, of course, I could've spared them all the grief. Guess I just have a nose for science.

[Music: Ambient]

Part three: Newfoundland oil spill, Tinder lies

Newfoundland oil spill

Guest: Ian Jones

JD: It's the largest oil spill in the history of Newfoundland's offshore oil industry. And now, the regulator responsible says it's too late to clean it up. A quarter of a million litres are estimated to have escaped from Husky Energy's SeaRose platform on Friday, as workers prepared to restart production despite a massive North Atlantic storm. Heavy waves have continued since then. And this afternoon, the offshore petroleum board announced that it's seen no sign of oil on the surface for two days, which sounds positive. But it actually means the spill is likely now dispersed — and thus, impossible to clean up. That doesn't sound good to Ian Jones. Professor Jones is a specialist in marine birds at Memorial University. We reached him in St. John's.

CO: Professor Jones, Husky Energy says it's only found 14 oiled birds. So why are you so concerned?

IAN JONES: Well frankly, I'm surprised that they have managed to observe any oiled birds out there. This is a really extraordinarily harsh environment where these events are going on. And making any kind of bird observations, it's extremely difficult.

CO: What do you think is going on there? Not just for the birds, but for marine life?

IJ: Well, 200 or 250 tons of crude oil is dispersing out through a system that is really one of the most greatest concentrations of marine wildlife you know anywhere in the Atlantic this time year. Fantastic numbers of seabirds, marine mammals like pilot whales and other whales and cetaceans, and especially the birds extremely vulnerable to oil pollution.

CO: And it seems that there's nothing to be done. Nothing can be done. What they're seeing from the air is that there's no slick on the water. What does that tell you?

IJ: Well, there’s very little chance of containing or cleaning up oil that spilled in this environment. So it's going to disperse out in the environment and kill things. And then eventually just be dispersed naturally. So the expectation that you're going to be able to clean this up is low. What is happening though is that birds, seabirds especially, are coming into contact. Any contact at all, any oil gets on a bird, and it's basically we can pretty much write it off as dead.

CO: So we found these 14 birds; you strongly suspect there are a lot more, and not just the birds. What's going on under the surface? What will see or probably not see about the effect of this oil spill in that region?

IJ: Well, wind and wave action is pulverizing this oil into a mouss-y substance like chocolate mousse, which basically extends the volume of this toxic material. It's starting to mix with seawater, so it's getting into other systems other than just marine birds flying around. It's getting absorbed into invertebrates, and fish, and things. The main really damages though is to the birds. And you have to understand to make observations out there it's sort of like being on a roller coaster in a snowstorm and then trying to do a bird count. So the fact that any oiled birds have been seen is suggestive to me that there must be unfortunately a very large number of them that are affected.

CO: Can you tell us what we know so far about how this came to happen? The conditions weather conditions of that day and the decisions that were made that led to this?

IJ: That's a little bit out of my area of expertise. But obviously, I've been following things closely. And what happened was last Wednesday and Thursday, we had a real mega storm both on land here in St. John's, and then also offshore. And very high seas over — 12 metres, 13 metres — and some of the oil production activity was shut down due to the bad weather. And then on Friday, as things began to subside, Husky Energy’s crew on their SeaRose platform began to make preparations to resume production. And that is when they reported that this oil spill occurred.

CO: It's recorded that at that time the fierce storm you're describing was the most intense storm in the world at that time. The other platforms didn't open up; just SeaRose did. Just Husky did. Who gets to make these decisions? Was this something that they were allowed to do?

IJ: Well, engineers on board the SeaRose platform would have made the decision. We you know we don't actually know that the cause of the oil spill relates to the weather at all. So we simply have a coincidence here that there was an oil spill that occurred after a period of very rough seas. We don't know that the weather was actually the cause. But it looks kind of bad that here they are setting things up in seas of between eight and nine metres of sea height going on. And they're tinkering with their system to reactivate their flow line.

CO: But whether it was because of the storm or not, the other operators had shut down because of this enormous storm. And Husky decided to restart there’s. So who regulates that?

IJ: You would think that the overall regulator for all of the activity, which is the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board, which I would say has very close, almost uncomfortably close, links to the oil industry. You'd think that they as the supposed regulator they have the power to make decisions. And they could have ordered a shut down. It's on this regulators own website that this is the worst storm that we've had in Newfoundland since the big disaster back in the 1980s. So they're saying in hindsight that there was this mega storm, but they didn't order a shutdown of anything out there until after this oil spill occurred.

CO: Why didn't they?

IJ: That's a question you'd have to ask them. Good luck getting an answer.

CO: And how self-regulating is this? How much of how to respond to conditions is done by the companies themselves? How much leeway did they have?

IJ: For a simple, quick answer, the oil industry here is regulating itself.

CO: So now you are trying to figure out what's going on? What's happened once again, as so what are you looking for? What is the evidence that you need to find to determine the impact of this spill?

IJ: Well, hopefully, they'll be able to find where the oil has drifted to and make their counts there. And that information then can be input into a model so we can have a scientifically defendable estimate of mortality. Now, it's not going to be an exact number. Last time this was done, the range was something between 10,000 and 100,000 birds. I suspect the kill here from this could be over 100,000 seabirds. It might be lower. But the more data we have, the better idea we'll have of an estimate of the death toll.

CO: All right, we will be watching. Professor Jones, thank you.

IJ: Thanks Carol.

JD: Professor Ian Jones is a bird biologist at Memorial University. We reached him in St. John's

[Music: Lute?]

Otter kills koi

JD: A silky, sleek, killer has claimed at least five lives — and has thus far evaded capture. A wayward otter has gotten into the Dr. Sun Yat-Sen Classical Chinese Garden in Vancouver, and chowed down on nearly half of the dozen precious koi kept in the pond there. Some of the fish are many-decades-old. Now, the park board has been called in to catch the otter, alive or...alive. Here's the garden's communications director, Debbie Cheung, speaking to CBC News, Vancouver.

SOUNDCLIP

DEBBIE CHEUNG: We can confirm that it has eaten five of our adult koi fish. This morning, we haven't seen it. So we’re here setting a trap, hoping to relocate the otter. For the garden, the kois are part of our team, so it's quite devastating for us. But, at the same time, the otter is looking for food, right? We don't want to blame the otter. And so, for us, that means that we need to look into how we can replenish the pond later, and what we're going to do, and also think of kind of an emergency plan when we have wildlife other than herons and ducks that come into the garden. When we had the pond restoration back in 2017, we lost some koi. And then a few years back, we had a major die off. So we don't have a lot left. When the kois came back out after the pond restoration, we had about 13. But now, getting five killed, and that's the ones that we can find, we can confirm based on finding bodies of dead fish basically. So that means that we are down to like eight or nine fish. And the other thing is that we have koi that are as old as a 50 something year old. Like, Madonna is our oldest koi in the garden. She’s been with us for more than 20 years, and it's very sad if she got killed in this situation. So the five that we have seen so far it's not her.

JD: Debbie Cheung is communications director at the Dr. Sun Yat-Sen Classical Chinese Garden in Vancouver. She was speaking to CBC News in Vancouver.

[Music: Indie folk]

Tinder lies

Guest: Irina Manta

SOUNDCLIP

ANNA ROWE: He used to call me his darling wife. But I could marry you. Marry me, I want you. He was like this all the time. If he'd have come to my door that night and said hands up! You know I'm not Anthony Ray; I'm actually a married guy who uses the Internet as a sweet shop to go and groom victims. I don't actually want a long term relationship. I just like sleeping with lots and lots of women. Would I have invited him into my house, let alone my life, no, I wouldn't.

JD: Anna Rowe — who you just heard there on Channel4. She is petitioning the UK government to make catfishing illegal. And in the United States, a law professor is now pushing states to outlaw lies that dupe people into sex. We reached Irina Manta in New York.

CO: Professor Manta, we just heard one woman's story. How many others do you think that are out there like Anna Rowe?

IRINA MANTA: Well, what we do know is that there is a very large percentage of people who lie on these online dating apps. So we can speculate that at least a segment of those represents serious lies. Anecdotally, one hears a lot of these stories if one speaks to people that have been using the online dating apps like Tinder and the others. And, unfortunately, there are predators out there really taking advantage of this relatively new tool to reach many more victims than they were able to before.

CO: What stories have you heard?

IM: There are a number of stories that are not that different from the one that you just played, where somebody claims to be single, and the person is actually married. That's a very, very common one. There are many individuals that are on multiple dating sites — some of them from the very beginning of a relationship, they don't tell their main partner that they're active in these other ways. And also, there are other lies having to do with employment status, or ability to have children, or whether the person already has children. So there are a number of serious lies that somebody could tell, or if the other person knew the truth, they would not choose to have sexual intercourse with the person, which really puts a big question mark on whether there was genuine consent.

CO: And now you're asking state lawmakers to punish what you call material lies online that deceive someone into having sexual relations. What are material lies?

IM: So material lies would be the kind that were to kind of make-or-break point as to whether a reasonable person, using that as a legal term, would have chosen to have sex with somebody, so the really fundamental aspects about somebody. And also I think that the types of attributes that the law should focus on are the ones that are going to cause the greatest dignitary and emotional harm. And are similarly ones that are not easy to discover in advance. So when somebody lies about their height, or their weight, or something like that pretty much everything having to do with appearances it's easy to figure out once one meets the person that information was not accurate. But there are lots of other things that are much harder to ascertain, even if you Google the person, a lot of that information might not come out. But it would have been decisive. And so I am asking state lawmakers to step up and impose a small civil sanction that could be enforced in small claims court. So we're talking five or ten thousand dollars a pop against such perpetrators.

CO: But this is online deception. How different is it from what's been going on for a very long time with dating that people, usually women, find out that the man that they thought was single is not, and that he's not telling the entire story, or she's not telling the entire story. And this is this is part of dating, isn't it? I mean it's not a great part dating; it's pretty awful one. But it goes on all the time, doesn't it?

IM: Well, I certainly don't condone lies that start let's say at a bar, there are two main differences between that scenario and the online dating scenario. The first one is scale. So individuals who want to perpetrate these kinds of harms on people now have a means to do so at the scale of you know dozens, even hundreds, of people a year, so in that sense it is quite unprecedented. The second thing though is that on the quote/unquote “bright side”, now that we have online dating apps and all the texting that follows, there is a long evidentiary trail that one can show in court. So it's no longer simply he said, she said — but rather he wrote, she wrote.

CO: This story going back to the woman we heard at the beginning, Anna Rowe. She describes how much she wanted to believe him. That this this romantic relationship that she craved, that he was he knew how to play her, he knew what to give her. But even when she started to get suspicious, she didn't want to believe it. So isn't that part of it, and that that people who are on these sites want to believe the lies?

IM: You know, I think that human psychology is complex certainly, and people's motivations and wants are going to vary. But I also think there is a lot of victim blaming going on in this area. Some individuals as you hint that are very good at this. They're very good at gaslighting other people. Many of them have these great stories about why you can't come to their home oh they have this roommate that doesn't like it when they have people over. One can actually do quite a bit with these lies. And then the other thing you know I've heard a number of people say aren’t the victims just stupid, right or they want to believe or not? But the fact of the matter is that in many areas, the law protects stupid people as well, right? Not just the savvy, not just the constantly aware. I do think that there is a minimum level of awareness that we should require, like I said, things that you should notice on the first date. But there are a number of other things where I think we shouldn't be so hard on people, and we should also ask ourselves if it was really something quote/unquote wrong with a person, how come this is happening to so many people? And do we not care about that large number of individuals that gets taken in this way?

CO: At the same time, I guess people can be reluctant to speak out because they are afraid of this victim shaming — that they're embarrassed by having been sucked in. Do you think that as they find out more and more of this is going on that will change?

IM: Yes, I think that's exactly right. I've had a number of people write to me after my Washington Post article came out you know pouring out their hearts to me, and telling me their terrible stories. I know people that these sorts of things have happened to, and they're perfectly smart and reasonable people. So you know, at the end of the day, I think the more we talk about it and also by having a legal tool we are saying look, we see your pain. We see the harm that has been done to you, and what has been done to you is wrong. You can come and speak out about it. I think we're going to see more people really kind of coming out and saying yes, this thing happened to me. And also, you know some victims might end up finding each other, and that can be empowering as well.

CO: All right. I'm sure that people have much to say about this. We'll hear from them. Professor Manta, I appreciate hearing from you. Thank you.

IM: Thank you so much.

CO: Bye.

IM: Bye.

JD: Irina Manta teaches law at Hofstra University. She was in New York. And we've posted more on that story on our website.

[Music: Percussive]

Russian scientist

SOUNDCLIP

ELENA MUSIKHINA: My family lost everything. And now you want to take away my life? You want to give me into the bloody hand from which I managed to escape?

JD: That was Russian scientist Elena Musikhina in an emotional plea to the Canadian government last month, in Ottawa. Ms. Musikhina claimed she was a target of the Kremlin, due to her criticism of the Russian government — and because of her investigation into pollution around Lake Baikal, considered the world's deepest lake. She and her husband applied for political asylum in Canada, their claim was rejected. They were to be deported back to Russia next month. But yesterday, Canada's immigration minister granted them temporary visas. Olesia Sunatori, the couple's daughter, spoke with CBC Radio's “Ottawa Morning” today. She began by telling host Robyn Bresnahan about her mother's reaction to the news.

SOUNDCLIP

OLESIA SUNATORI: She could not believe her ears. She was really relieved. We still can’t believe until we actually get the papers.

ROBYN BRESNAHAN: Because the deportation date was set for December 3^rd?

OS: Yes.

RB: Your mother was public in saying that she would kill herself rather than return to Russia. How concerned were you that she might actually follow through on that threat?

OS: Well, she knows that this wouldn't solve anything anyways. She wouldn't prove anything to anyone by this. But yeah, I know that she had those kinds of thoughts in her mind.

RB: Why was your mother so frightened to return to Russia?

OS: Because she knows what happens to people like her. There are so many examples, and she herself she was experiencing harassment and persecution for already a few years before she finally had to run away because things got really, really bad by the time. And everyone at around was telling her that there is a case being prepared to accuse her of extremism because of her anti-propaganda and anti-corruption environment protection activity. She had troubles at work for a long time. She was told that the petition had been prepared that will be signed by the students to accuse her of bringing the false knowledge about the life abroad, and ultimately expressing her views about the Russian government.

RB: What was it about your mother's research that was so controversial?

OS: She was against the exploitation of the environment around Lake Baikal that basically she was standing between the environment of Lake Baikal and the money that people who wanted to exploit it were going to get. Basically, everyone who was involved in the project she was working on, absolutely voluntarily, they died in mysterious circumstances. There were two helicopter explosions; one in 2009, and another one in 2013. And a lot of people died. In the second one, she was supposed to be onboard as well, but she couldn't due to health issues.

RB: Your parents already applied for asylum in Canada. They were rejected. What reason did immigration officials give them for refusing their application the first time?

OS: Well basically, they said that their story is not credible because they were able to escape. That was the problem. It was actually a miracle that they were able to escape. It wasn't really easy.

JD: Olesia Sunatori is the daughter of Russian scientist Elena Musikhina. She was in conversation with “Ottawa Morning” today. Ms. Musikhina and her husband have been granted temporary visas to stay in Canada. And we've posted a link to Carol's conversation with Ms. Sunatori on our Twitter stream, cbcasithappens.

[Music: Hip-hop]

Cruise promo

JD: A sail in the right direction, or just good P-R? It's fishy, either way. On tomorrow's program we'll speak with the CEO of a Norwegian cruise line, which calls itself the world's greenest cruise company. Its latest green initiative: powering cruise ships with a new bio-gas. Here's short clip of Daniel Skeldam describing that fuel.

SOUNDCLIP

DANIEL SKELDAM: Our source of biofuel is organic waste such as rotten fish, or waste from the forestry industry. So this will be a complete renewable fuel. This will be the greenest fuel which is available in shipping — considered completely climate neutral.

JD: That's CEO Daniel Skeldam. Tune in to "As It Happens" tomorrow night, to learn more about how dead fish can power his cruise ships.

[Music: Percussive jazz]

New car smell

JD: It's the smell of possibility. The smell of triumph. The smell of more than 200 chemical compounds "out-gassing" simultaneously. There's nothing like that "new car smell". Sure, it's actually a cocktail of chemicals, some toxic. But somehow, it's romantic and inspiring. And judging by the many air-freshener products you can buy to restore "new car smell" to your 30-year-old Hyundai Pony, North Americans can't get enough of it. But in China, even a little is too much. In fact, interior odour is the Number One concern for Chinese car buyers – above safety. So, given that China is the biggest car market in the world, that creates problems for manufacturers. Now, Ford has one solution. The company has filed a patent application for a process that strips vehicles of that beloved, be-loathed "new car smell". It's not just "park it in the sun and crack the windows". It's "make a car that parks itself in the sun and cracks the windows. According to the Detroit Free Press, quote: "The car would determine whether conditions are right to expel compounds, and the car would drive itself to a place in the sun and bake away the offensive odor." Unquote. Sounds cool. As long as that system doesn't automatically kick in while you're driving back from a chili cook-off or something. Ford stresses it's just one of many ideas to reduce "new car smell" for the Chinese market. Guess they're waiting to see if their odour assessment passes the smell test.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

November 20, 2018 episode transcript

More Stories Like This