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 2019

The AIH Transcript for August 27, 2019

Hosts: Helen Mann and Ramraajh Sharvendiran

Helen Mann: Hello, I’m Helen Mann, sitting in for Carol Off

RAMRAAJH SHARVENDIRAN: Good evening, I'm Ramraajh Sharvendiran. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

Prologue

RS: Tonight:

HM: Pusher and pushback. An Oklahoma judge fines Johnson and Johnson for its role in the opioid crisis — and tonight, a lawyer tells us how his little team helped secure that hugely important ruling.

RS: Charity ends at home. Jair Bolsonaro turns down 20 million dollars in aid from Western countries to fight the Amazon fires and a Brazilian-born author tells us a lot of his countrymen might agree with the President's tack.

HM: Learning curves. The halls of a new high school in Michigan won't be straight — not for aesthetic reasons, but so any school shooters will have a harder time finding their targets.

RS: True colours. After a man shot paintballs at a staff member on Saturday night, Lethbridge's supervised drug consumption site braces itself for more violence and threats from the community.

HM: Over-covered cop. There are dozens of recorded versions of the '70s ballad "Wildflower" — the lyrics to which were written in 15 minutes by a man who also happened to be a BC police officer.

RS: And...a capital idea — but not a good one. Our guest is not impressed by the Indonesian government's decision to relocate its capital city, Jakarta, to a place that's less polluted -- and less likely to sink into the sea.

RS: As It Happens, the Tuesday edition. Radio that feels it's easier to find a place to settle down when the place itself isn't settling down.

[Music: Theme]

Part one: Oklahoma opioid crisis, Indonesia capital city move, Lethbridge safe injection

Oklahoma opioid crisis

Guest: Brad Beckworth

RS: The legal team wanted a fine so huge it would send a message. They didn't get it. But they're still hoping the message is clear. Yesterday, a judge in Oklahoma ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay 572-million US dollars for its part in the opioid crisis. The state had been asking for 17-billion. The judge ruled the company's, quote, "misleading and dangerous marketing campaigns" caused "exponentially increasing rates of addiction [and] overdose deaths." Unquote. Johnson & Johnson is appealing the ruling. But now, people are waiting to see what this could mean for similar cases around the U.S. — and in Canada. Brad Beckworth is one of the attorneys for the state of Oklahoma in the case. We reached him in Oklahoma City.

HM: Mr. Beckworth, what does this ruling mean for families in Oklahoma who've been affected by the opioid crisis?

BRAD BECKWORTH: This ruling is a first step on the long road to fixing the problem in Oklahoma. For more than a decade, we've had pharmaceutical companies and their lobbyists saying that this was a problem of abuse by bad people doing bad things. We now have proof that the bad people doing bad things was Johnson and Johnson.

HM: How much effort did you put into this case?

BB: We were about 13 people vs. a team of probably 50 to 200 lawyers. So it was a true David and Goliath effort. In fact, in our trial office, we had a big poster of David and Goliath that said the king thought Goliath was too big to fight. And David thought Goliath was too big to miss. And that was kind of our motto. Our team, we all moved here for the better part of a year. Five of us lived in the office on mattresses that we pulled into offices. We worked on average 18 to 20 hours a day for seven days straight. Many of us went 30 to 50 days at a time without going home to see our families. So it was a lot of sacrifice. But there's a lot of people who lost their lives to this crisis, and the Attorney-General directed us to get this case ready for trial in the shortest time possible, and we did it.

HM: How many members of that prosecution team have been affected in some way by the opioid crisis?

BB: My co-counsel, Reggie Whitten, lost his oldest son to opioid-related problems. Mike Berge, my co-counsel, lost a niece to opioid overdose. I lost a very close friend and business partner. I don't want to use their names without their permission, but we have at least three others on our team who have lost immediate family members — including one who lost a child during the last month or two before trial started.

HM: Wow! Despite the fact that they lost this case, Johnson & Johnson stock went up yesterday on news of the decision. You have to wonder how seriously the company and other pharmaceutical producers are going to take a decision when it appears to not immediately affect their bottom line?

BB: Well, there's more to that. It's a very intuitive question. What you have to look at is how the U.S. stock market works in an efficient market. When we started the opening statements of this case on May 28^th, Johnson & Johnson stock price was trading above $1.40. And the trail that happened over the next 48 hours, Johnson & Johnson lost almost 25 billion dollars in market capital because the world saw what was never known before, which was they were a root cause of the opioid crisis. When I did that opening statement with the Attorney-General my colleagues, we put the number of 17 billion dollars out there. So that was factored in. Johnson & Johnson has had incredible earnings over the last two months and despite that, their stock has gone up and down. So, in my opinion, the way the market works here is that the drain of our case on their stock price is already factored in.

HM: As briefly as possible, can you tell us what it was that you argued in court against Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary, Jansen?

BB: We used Oklahoma law to allege that they were a cause of a public nuisance — conduct that affects the Liberty, health, and safety of a large group of people in the community. The judge found that we proved our case. He found that their conduct was egregious. And that they created a true menace to Oklahoma that caused a lot of people to die and a lot of people to suffer. We showed at trial that Johnson & Johnson was more than just a company that sold pills, or in their case, pills and fentanyl patches. We allege that Johnson & Johnson was what we called the kingpin of the American opioid crisis.

HM: How is that?

BB: Well, it's fascinating. So Johnson & Johnson claim that they were a small-bit player; that their pills and patches represented about 1 per cent of the U.S. market. We showed that starting in 1994, Johnson & Johnson was working to create a new poppy plant with Purdue Pharmaceuticals that was more potent, so more of it could be grown in less acreage, and bad growing conditions. They then started working with Purdue to become Purdue’s supplier for something which comes from concentrated poppy straw, and is used to make the base ingredients of many pharmaceutical opioids. So, for example, you hear about produce Oxycontin. Oxycontin is a brand name for a base ingredient called oxycodone Johnson & Johnson makes 60 per cent of the oxycodone that's sold in the United States of America. So they've denied responsibility for their pills and their patches, and they completely ignore the fact that they are the number one supplier of the U.S. opioid market.

HM: In a statement in which it indicates that the company plans to appeal in this case, they argue that they always followed the rules in an effort to help people manage pain. What responsibility do doctors, medical bodies, state regulators, and government bear for not managing the problem properly?

BB: I don't know if you have children, but I do. And you know children are a product of our environment. If you raise a child to speak French, they're going to speak French. And if you raise a child to speak Spanish, they're going to speak Spanish. When you teach somebody something, and you place into their environment information, they're going to absorb that. What happened here was prior to 1996, doctors were taught a language. And that languages that opioids are bad. Through the history of mankind, when you have a big supply of opioids, people die. In 1996, Purdue and Johnson & Johnson changed that message. So it would be one thing if doctors simply got these drugs, they had a label that said they're addictive, and doctors told their patients the wrong thing. That's just not what happened.

HM: What does this mean for similar cases in the U.S. and in Canada?

BB: I think it means a lot of things. One, it takes a lot of courage to do what Judge Bachmann did here. Let's not forget this is one of the most powerful, influential companies in the world — certainly in the United States. They put out a pervasive attack on the Attorney-General of Oklahoma, on state leaders. And for this judge to take a stand, and say look, I don't care how powerful you are. I'm just going to go straight down with the law and what the facts are to hold them accountable. I hope that empowers and encourages other judges to actually take their time and let cases go to trial and hear all the facts. Secondly, I think that the Attorney-General of Oklahoma was dedicated to making sure that he held these companies accountable on behalf of the most unfortunate, the least able to fight here in the state. I hope other Attorney-Generals will follow their lead. And to all the other lawyers that are out there and hopefully listening, we've got Johnson & Johnson's number. We know where all the bones are buried. And my little team of Davids will dedicate their entire futures to making sure this company doesn't evade responsibility. And I and these others will go anywhere any time to take Johnson & Johnson head on because we're not scared of them one bit.

HM: That's a pretty big commitment you're making, Mr. Beckworth. I appreciate very much for taking time to talk to us.

BB: You bet. Thank you.

RS: Brad Beckworth is one of Oklahoma's attorneys in its case against Johnson & Johnson. We reached him in Oklahoma City. As mentioned at the end of that interview, British Columbia is also pursuing a case against pharmaceutical companies. The untested suit alleges that companies falsely marketed opioids as less addictive than other pain drugs. And while the cases are different, the province's Attorney-General David Eby responded.

SOUNDCLIP

DAVID EBY: This decision is based on very similar facts that are argued by British Columbia and our litigation — a litigation that's being backed up, supported, and joined in by other provinces across Canada. I think it would have been a more difficult situation had the court in Oklahoma said you know we don't see any liability here. But to have a judge say yes, we do see that there is a serious problem here with how this company conducted themselves. And we do feel that they do need to be paying money out because of the way they marketed these very addictive and harmful drugs is a very positive sign for our litigation here in Canada.

RS: That's was BC's Attorney-General, David Eby. This afternoon, NBC News reported that Purdue Pharma, which makes OxyContin, and the Sacklers, who own the company, are offering to settle thousands of lawsuits.

[Music: Ambient]

Indonesia capital move

Guest: Jasmine Puteri

RS: Sometimes, when things get really, really bad, you just need a fresh start. That's the Indonesian government's solution for the serious problems in its capital city. Jakarta is one of the most polluted cities in the world. Also, it's sinking into the Java sea. So Indonesian president Joko Widodo has announced that the government will build a new city on the island of Borneo — and relocate the capital there. Not everyone is excited about the move to move. Jasmine Puteri is a senior forest campaigner with Greenpeace Indonesia. We reached her in Jakarta.

HM: Ms. Puteri, this sounds like a massive undertaking. Why does the government say it is moving the capital of Indonesia?

JASMINE PUTERI: The government's said their reasons are mainly because of economic, social, and environmental issues. Because Jakarta is seen as not environmentally sustainable anymore and also because the government said that they want to see more equality in Indonesia in terms of social economy. That's why the government is thinking to move the new capital in the sector of Indonesia geographically.

HM: The government says it has been studying this for about three years. It seems to be offering some solid arguments. What did you think when you learned of the plan?

JP: Well, unfortunately, I must say that there hadn't been any public consultation, no inclusive process. That's why Greenpeace is quite disappointed with the process. And as we know, Borneo Island is well known for its Indigenous people communities and groups. They should be involved in the discussion.

HM: And Borneo is where they're planning on putting the new city. This is an area that's environmentally rich. What kind of concerns do you, Greenpeace, and other activists have about this?

JP: Yeah, the indicative area is between to conservation areas. That is one of our main concerns because in the north part, it is very close to the conservation area. while into the south part, it's very close to forest conservation areas. So this is very concerning for us.

HM: This conservation area is well-known for its protection of orangutans. What happens to them in this plan?

JP: Greenpeace is currently still doing in-depth analysis. But we know that there is this certain areas which is designated for the wildlife habitat. And we believe this could threaten the species — especially orangutan.

HM: The Indonesian government is arguing that this will be a smart green city — that they will build it in a sustainable way. Do you think that that's possible? Would you change your mind if they were able to do that?

JP: Well, honestly speaking, the government also stated that they will require 180,000 hectares. And we believe this is a very huge area. And we believe there will be land conversion. And it will be inevitable that this will cause environmental problems. So yeah, it will be stated that it will be a green sustainable city. But it seems from Greenpeace perspective, we are not really convinced.

HM: You are a Jakartan, so I wonder how this solution that the government has come up with makes you feel.

JP: I have a very mixed feeling because as in Jakartan, it feels like we are being neglected because Jakarta is facing a lot of environmental problems from air pollution. Jakarta is the the most polluted city in the world now currently. And then we have this water crisis, the land subsidence, we have massive traffic jam. Also, we have other environmental problems. And we are afraid what the Jakartan’s are facing now. If the governments are not really having any plan to overcome these issues, then the same issues will happen as well in the new capital city.

HM: It seems the government is arguing though that those very problems — the land subsidence, the water table issues are the reasons it feels it needs to move the capital. The capital is threatened in its current form. I mean is there a way to address those problems in Jakarta and maintain the capital there?

JP: Honestly speaking, there are regulations. And enforcing the regulations are the main key that the government can do. Because currently, Jakarta is surrounded by three coal power plants, which Greenpeace believe as one of the main source of pollution in the city, as well as the private transportation or private cars are also contributing to this pollution. So I think it's very, very vital for the government to really shut down the coal power plants that's surrounding Jakarta, and start doing energy transition as well as regulating the private cars usage in the city. Because people can be stuck in the traffic jam for two or three hours one way, and it's just doesn't make sense at all.

HM: What are the people in Borneo, presumably a range of interests, a range of different voices, what kind of things are they saying?

JP: I think the local government is very happy with the news because it means that they will have more access on the budget. There are people who oppose it, but there are a lot of people also are very happy with this news.

HM: Ms. Puteri, I appreciate very much you telling us what's going on. Thank you very much.

JP: You're welcome.

RS: Jasmine Puteri is a senior forest campaigner with Greenpeace Indonesia. We reached her in Jakarta. And we've got more on this story on our webpage at: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Piano]

Lethbridge safe injection

Guest: Stacey Bourque

RS: The staff at the ARCHES facility in Lethbridge are no strangers to threats or animosity. When you run one of the biggest supervised drug consumption sites in North America, unfortunately, it seems to come with the territory. Still, what happened on Saturday night was something they had never experienced before. Stacey Bourque is the Executive Director of the ARCHES supervised consumption site. We reached her in Lethbridge, Alberta.

HM: Ms. Bourque, what happened outside your facility on Saturday night?

STACEY BOURQUE: We had a white Dodge Ram pickup truck that came to a slow roll outside the facility by a staff member and a couple of clients that were standing outside, crack the window down, stuck the barrel of a gun out the window, and then began firing paintballs shots at the staff and clients. All of the paintball shots that landed hit the staff member in the face, in the neck, the chest, the arm, her leg, her back, and her buttocks.

HM: How's she doing?

SB: She's rattled, frustrated, obviously that somebody would take this action. And then, of course, now she's bruising, and she's got a couple cuts; one on her face, and one on her hands. But the welts are starting to form now all over her body. You know like she indicated, the most terrifying part was you know right before they realized it was a paintball gun. Nonetheless, I mean paintballs hurt, if you've ever been hit with one — especially if you have no protective gear on.

HM: A suspect has been arrested now in the case. Does that make your employee or any of the rest of you feel any safer?

SB: I mean certainly you know where we're happy that you know the police found the suspect in this particular incident and have been able to charge him with a number of charges — including assault with a weapon. I think at this point you know there's a large amount of opposition in the community — loud opposition — to the service itself, and ARCHES as an organization. And a lot of the comments that we're seeing on some of those social media platforms and pages are advocating for more hate and more violent action to be taken against staff and clients.

HM: What kind of things are you seeing on social media?

SB: People should freeze the paintballs next time. The next time they should use a real firearm to ensure that people are dead. People asking if they could buy him a drink, and saying you know that there will obviously be more incidents like this if things don't change in our community.

HM: You are the Executive Director of ARCHES. I guess in some ways you're the public face of the organization. Do you personally feel threatened?

SB: There's certainly been times where I have felt unsafe. People are taking inappropriate actions, whether it be verbally or through social media threats and lots of name calling verbal abuse. And essentially laying blame at my feet for you know the drug crisis in general, increasing homelessness in our community, which is absurd.

HM: ARCHES supervised consumption site has been in the news in Lethbridge in recent weeks because of a debate at city council. Can you tell us about that?

SB: So last week, there was there was a vote. It was a two-part motion that had been brought forward by Councillor Blaine Hyggen. One, to ask the province to demand that ARCHES stop distributing clean syringes. And the second, so that the province defunds the supervised consumption service part of ARCHES. That motion was defeated six-to-three. But prior to the debate and the vote, there was a rally that was held outside on both sides of the issue. So I think things have been escalating certainly up to the point of that vote. And then after the vote occurred, we definitely saw an escalation of behaviour both in community and online.

HM: Can you give us a sense of the scale of need in the community in Lethbridge for the services that you're providing?

SB: So between February 28^th, 2018 when we opened our doors to July 31^st, 2019 we saw over 268,000 visits. So we are extremely busy as a facility.

HM: And that business comes in a city that's relatively small. Do you think that the scale of users and the number of people who live in the city that might be part of the reason there's so much animosity?

SB: I think it's very challenging. We just reached over 100,000 in the last census. And certainly in a city our size by rate, we obviously have a significant issue in our community. And it's you know with the opening of the facility, I think as time has gone on the issue has come to the forefront of a lot of concerns of community members. It’s become very visible in our communities. And that certainly is causing a lot of the frustration in the community. I think a lot of people are grieving the loss of their small town community that they believe Lethbridge to be. And you know we're seeing because of the drug crisis you know there's increasing crime rates — especially around petty crime. You know, unfortunately, people who you know are listening to the misinformation circulating or the baseless accusations that are being thrown around, they're very focused on blaming a health care service in the community, which just happens to be us.

HM: But do you think that some of the people who are worried have legitimate cause for concern? I mean they complain about needles in public spaces, possibly the attracting of drug users to the site. You know not to dismiss the fact that you're facing this violence and these threats, which is obviously awful. Could they have legitimate worries?

SB: Oh, absolutely. I mean no one is dismissing you know that we have concerns in our community that we have challenges that need to be addressed. You know in terms of the needles, for example, since the SCS has opened here Lethbridge, needle distribution has actually dropped 70 per cent, and return rates have increased 83 per cent. In terms of crime, you know is crime increasing? Absolutely, it is in our community. But it was prior to the SCS opening. If you look at the crime severity Index of stats Canada put out, so yes, we are having challenges in the community. People are absolutely frustrated. Are the valid concerns? Yes, but we need to focus our energy on implementing the appropriate services that are actually going to tackle the concerns. Not putting forward motions or asking for facilities to close that are, in fact, assisting to combat the issues that we're experiencing in the community — whether people see it or not.

HM: Ms. Bourque, it sounds like it's been a very difficult few days for you. Thank you very much for talking with us about it.

SB: Yes. Thank you for having me.

HM: Okay, bye.

SB: Bye-bye.

RS: Stacey Bourque is the Executive Director of the ARCHES supervised consumption site. She was in Lethbridge, Alberta.

[Music: Sombre]

“Wildflower” writer obit

RS: There's an odd sentence in the Victoria Times-Colonist's obituary for Thomas David Richardson. Quote, "Richardson was born in Pembroke, Ontario in 1942, and by the age of five had decided he wanted to be a police officer and a songwriter." Unquote. Well, five-year-olds have a lot of big ambitions. But what's unusual is that Mr. Richardson would go on to spend 30 years working for the Saanich, BC police department — and to write the words to a song that is basically the sound of AM radio in Canada in the 'seventies. Thomas David Richardson — who went by "Dave" — died on Sunday. In 1970, Mr. Richardson was dating a nurse. One day, she was upset because two of her patients had died. Exhausted after a hard day, she fell asleep while they were preparing to go out. Dave Richardson carefully put a blanket over her, went home, and wrote a song about her in 15 minutes. He called it "Wildflower". Sometime after that, he passed the lyrics along to a guy he knew who had a band called Skylark. The guy's name was David Foster. Yeah, that one. The guitarist in Skylark gave it a melody. David Foster gave it an arrangement. And Dave Richardson became the only police officer in Saanich with a giant hit song. And to realize two big dreams he'd had as a five-year-old. Right now, you may be thinking "I don't know a song called 'Wildflower'." Oh, but you do.

[Music: Guitar]

Part two: Amazon sovereignty, shooter school

Amazon sovereignty

Guest: Chris Feliciano Arnold

RS: Jair Bolsonaro doesn't want their pity, or their money. Brazil's President has rejected more than 20 million U.S. dollars pledged by leaders of the G7, to help fight fires raging in the Amazon rainforest. He has accused French President Emmanuel Macron of treating Brazil, quote, "as if it were a colony." And yesterday, the President's chief of staff said, quote, "we appreciate the offer, but maybe those resources are more relevant to reforest Europe." Unquote. The international spat has raised questions over Brazil's sovereignty in the Amazon. And Brazilian-born writer Chris Feliciano Arnold says it's a dose of deja vu. He's the author of "The Third Bank of the River: Power and Survival in the Twenty-First Century Amazon." We reached him in Concord, California.

HM: Chris, we know Brazil's president is turning up his nose at 22 million dollars, but what about Brazilians? What is your sense about how the majority of them feel about this gesture?

CHRIS FELICIANO ARNOLD: Well, I think that one of the things that this diplomatic snafu has revealed is that Brazilians in general, and I believe across political lines, really see the Amazon as a source of national pride and as a national treasure. And there's a strong sense across Brazilians of all political stripes that the Amazon is theirs, but it's their sovereign territory. And that the country has the ingenuity, the creativity, and the resources to manage the rainforest as it so chooses. But I think that for many Brazilians this notion that the Amazon is the lungs of the world. Or the French president's comment that, quote, our house is burning, right? that it's somehow a global territory strikes many Brazilians as a violation of their national sovereignty, and for good reason in some cases.

HM: So some Brazilians and to President Bolsonaro something that carries a whiff of colonialism. Is that what this may be rooted in, this resistance?

CFA: Well, we can go back to the very earliest days of settler colonialism in the Amazon. And the region has always been a place where there's been many territorial disputes, many accusations of spying and espionage and sabotage of what many Brazilians and people across the world have considered traditionally a region that is rich in national resources. There's been a sense that the Amazon is something that needs to be defended. And it's a vast and enormous border that to this day is very porous. It's also very militarized. And for many Brazilian military leaders and policymakers, it's a highly strategic region, and one that needs to be kept a close eye on, and as well as defended.

HM: So you said that people kind of they don't like this characterization of the Amazon as the lungs of the planet. But we are talking about possibly 20 per cent of the world's oxygen. So the rest of the world is looking at this as something that perhaps goes beyond an issue of borders. What is your sense of people's appreciation that this is not just rooted in national interest, but in global interest?

CFA: Well, I think across the world, global powers and global citizens have every right and every reason to be concerned when they see these really alarming and really arresting pictures of rainforest burning. And yet, I also believe there's a sense among Brazilians that people who are observing the rainforest from a great distance have very little understanding of the day-to-day realities of people on the ground in the Amazon region. And even within the borders of Brazil, there are people in the southern cities of Brazil who've never actually set foot in the Amazon rainforest itself. And so I think what we're seeing is a great divide between people who are witnessing and looking at what's happening to the Amazon from afar. And holding in their minds this view of the Amazon as the sort of pristine, untouched rainforest that must be protected and conserved at all costs — versus the 30 million people who live and work and farm in the greater Amazon basin who see the region very differently.

HM: It's interesting though because Brazil's own National Space Research Institute is the agency that's pointed out the problem with the fires this year saying there's an 84 per cent rise compared to last year. You would think that would compel some sense of urgency on the ground?

CFA: Well, and this is where things are very much different this year. What we know to be true is that fires in the Amazon, and slash and burn agriculture in the Amazon has been going on for decades. But the idea that there are large and widespread fires during the dry season at this time of year it should surprise no one. What is different though is the scale and the intent of the burning here, which many people have rightly criticized President Bolsonaro for emboldening farmers with his strong rhetoric about development in the Amazon. And what we have seen as a result of that is farmers doing more to organize burns this year as sort of a show of solidarity for all Bolsonaro pro-development rhetoric in the Amazon.

HM: Some are even accusing Bolsonaro of ecocide. You know if the world has a feeling that that we all have responsibility to protect the Amazon, how do you deal with someone who is political rhetoric and whose resistance to international help or criticism it may put the Amazon in even for the risk?

CFA: I think that when we see international pundits sort of talking about ecocide or labeling Brazil a rogue state, not only is that counterproductive to the conversation in Brazil because there are elements there who will only further entrench themselves in this sense that their sovereignty is under attack. But to label Brazil a rogue state or a state that's committing ecocide also doesn't do justice to the fact that there are many developed nations in the global North or in Western Europe who are taking environmental actions that are counterproductive to the health of the global climate as well. I mean not least of which fossil fuel policy. And so I think there is an urgent need for world powers, for international leaders to sort of refresh their understanding of the challenges facing the Amazon, and sort of come up with new and constructive and less polarised approaches to resolving their problems there.

HM: You were born in Brazil. You spent a lot of time there. You’re talking about people rushing to make a decision. But are you yourself not worried that time is running out to protect the Amazon — especially given the urgency of this current situation?

CFA: Yeah, I am very worried about the long-term health and sustainability of the Amazon. I'm very worried about the systematic way in which the Bolsonaro administration has dismantled the already tenuous environmental protections that his predecessors have put in place. But what worries me more actually is that this rush of global attention, this sense of urgency will be temporary. And that when these fires are inevitably extinguished, that the global community will move on to the next crisis. This has to be an issue and a part of the world that people dialing to commit themselves to learning more about. I don't think that rushing to condemn Brazil and rushing to label Brazil a rogue state is the way to have a more constructive conversation in the long run. However, I remain as alarmed as anyone by these fires, and as well as by the just repeated and reprehensible comments that Bolsonaro makes about his fellow Brazilians and Indigenous communities in the Amazon.

HM: Chris Feliciano Arnold, thank you for talking to us.

CFA: Thank you very much for having me. I appreciate it.

HM: Okay, bye-bye.

CFA: Bye.

RS: Chris Feliciano Arnold is a Brazilian-born author, who wrote a book about the Amazon rainforest called "The Third Bank of the River." We reached him in Concord, California.

[Music: Electronica]

Epstein accusers

RS: They will never get to see Jeffrey Epstein face trial. But today, before a judge in New York, some of the women who accused him of abuse had a chance to speak. Chauntae Davies told the court she was raped by Mr. Epstein several times over a period of years. She said that his death in prison earlier this month had initially prompted a feeling of defeat. She said, quote: "It took me a long time to come forward. Every public humiliation that I endured, I have suffered, and he has won." But, she continued, "I have found my voice now. I will not stop fighting." Unquote. Jennifer Aroaz also says Mr. Epstein raped her, when she was a teenager. Here's what she said outside the courthouse today.

SOUNDCLIP

JENNIFER AROAZ: It was so powerful. And they're hearing all the other victims, and very similar stories that I have endured. I wanted to thank the judge for letting us speak. I’m having some closure. It's still gonna be a rough road, but I also wanted to thank all the survivors that had reached out to me as well, and telling me their stories. It really means a lot. I'm here for anyone that went through something similar. I thank everybody.

RS: Jennifer Araoz speaking outside a courthouse in New York today. Lawyer Gloria Allred represents five of the women who accused Jeffrey Epstein of abuse. Here she is speaking to reporters earlier today.

SOUNDCLIP

GLORIA ALLRED: It took a lot of courage for them to write the statements, and to have their voice heard. And I really commend them for being here. Because Jeffrey Epstein's death does not end the case. It does not end their fight for justice. It does not end their feeling that they were manipulated and victimized. And that they were child victims. I think all of them were very happy that the court afforded this… well, I'm going to call it a unique opportunity for the victims to be heard. Usually, there's a victim impact statement after there’s a prosecution, after there's a conviction either by way of plea or by way of a judgment a court of law. Here, the prosecution was aborted because of the defendant’s becoming deceased. So it was wonderful as far as they were concerned to have this opportunity to be heard. I just received an invitation from the court last week — late last week — and I was just amazed. Because I've never received that in 43 years of practice to please come to New York, and bring any clients that you represent who are victims of Mr. Epstein who would like to be heard. You know any victim who wanted to have their voice today. So, of course, some came. Not all could come that I represent because some had to be elsewhere. It was short notice. But that was great. We were so happy that they had that opportunity.

RS: Gloria Allred, a lawyer representing some of Jeffrey Epstein's accusers, speaking in New York today.

[Music: Ambient]

Shooter school

Guest: Bob Szymoniak

RN: There have been at least 17 deadly mass shootings in the United States so far this year — almost one every 13 days. That horrifying statistic helps explain why a Michigan school district is taking drastic measures to protect students and staff. Specifically, the district is building a high school specially designed to make it harder for potential shooters to get at their targets. Bob Szymoniak is the superintendent of Fruitport Community Schools. We reached him in Fruitport, Michigan.

HM: Mr. Szymoniak, can you walk me through some of the security features that the new Fruitport high school will have?

BOB SZYMONIAK: In the design of the new construction, we curved the hallways. And the reason we did that was to reduce the sightlines if God forbid we had an active shooter in the hallway. We also built wall wings we're calling them. These are cement block walls that are perpendicular to the hallway walls that jut out into the hallway about four feet to further reduce the sightlines of an active shooter. And they also provide refuge for students who would be in the hallway should an active shooter be in the hallway. And these walls are built adjacent to the classroom doors. So if need be, a student behind the wall could get help immediately from within the classroom. And then once the students are in the classroom, there is what we call a shadow zone where we have built another wall wing into the classroom that cuts down dramatically the sightline into the classroom. So if I'm an active shooter and I'm in the hallway, and the students are in that shadow zone, and I look into the classroom, I can't tell anybody's there. We're also putting impact-resistant windows film on all of our windows.

HM: What about in terms of locking kids into certain areas?

BS: So all of our doors district wide we'll have access control where we can lock all of the doors with the push of a button from a cell phone.

HM: How did your school district come to the decision to work these features into the new school design?

BS: It was a combination of factors. The architect that we employed has experience in building security design elements into a project like ours. And so given the nature of our country these days, the number of school shootings that we have, and they just don't seem to stop. It seemed responsible and appropriate for us to factor in as many security elements into this design of the building as we could.

HM: I guess I want to know who's driving this decision too? Is this something that's coming from you specifically, coming from the board as a whole?

BS: It's really coming from the design team that included teachers and board members and administrators. And, of course, engineers and architects. So it was it was really team-driven. And it just makes sense. It’s just responsible thing to do.

HM: What kinds of conversations are you having with parents about the new design?

BS: The feedback that I've been getting it's been very positive.

HM: Have there been any parents who have resisted or had complaints about this?

BS: Not one. You also need to understand that these design elements don't look like security design elements. If you didn't know you were looking at a security design element, you would think you were looking at a modern, attractive, functional school.

HM: Have you though had any discussions are given any thought to the impact this may have on young people going to school in a building that is specifically designed to protect them from a shooter?

BS: Like I said, if you walk into our building, you wouldn’t know it was designed to do that.

HM: But will you be having those discussions with students?

BS: We do. Unfortunately, we have to do active shooter trainings with our students. And so they will learn what those security elements are. But my sense is that they will appreciate the fact that they're there to keep them safe.

HM: Do you know if there are any studies on anything like this on these kinds of security features and the psychological impact they may be having on young people?

BS: I do not.

HM: Okay. You mentioned that the design firm behind this is used to building secure facilities. As I understand it they also design prisons, is that right?

BS: That's my understanding, yes.

HM: So have they designed significant number of schools before this?

BS: They have, but I don't know that they have designed any with the security elements that we have. This is likely unique across the state. But I would imagine that these types of design elements will become the new norm in school construction.

HM: The prison construction industry is a pretty big business in your country. Do you have any concerns that they might be looking at schools as a way to make money going forward?

BS: So I don't know that the building of prisons is big money, and so I would have no way of knowing how to answer your question.

HM: As an educator for as I understand it more than 30 years, did it ever occur to you that one day you might be involved in helping build a school designed to protect people from mass shooters?

BS: It's one of the saddest aspects of my career having to come to terms with that. But this is not new. Since the Columbine shooting in 1999, school safety and security has been on my mind, as it has been the minds of probably every school administrator in America. And over time, we have done more and more to ramp up the security of our buildings. For example, about five years ago, we created security vestibules and all of our buildings so that our buildings are completely locked during the school day. And you have to be buzzed, and we have a camera system to tell who wants in just to help secure our buildings.

HM: Right. And as you say, it's not something that you ever hoped to see. In terms of the kind of work you do in education, how much do you think it might detract from some of the larger issues that teachers and superintendents should be looking at that they have to spend so much of their energy and their thoughts thinking about the potential danger to students?

BS: I would say that it goes beyond that. Education has changed so much in even the last ten years that there's a lot of different reasons to be anxious in this line of work. But we do what we absolutely can to keep our students and staff safe. And it's just the state of affairs in our country.

HM: What do you think would have to change for it not to be the state of affairs for schools in the country to have to go to these lengths?

BS: I would have no way of knowing how to answer that question.

HM: Mr. Szymoniak, thank you very much for joining us. I appreciate it.

BS: My pleasure.

HM: Bye-bye.

BS: Bye-bye.

00:44:38 - SPEAKER: M4

RN: Bob Szymoniak is the superintendent of Fruitport Community Schools. He was in Fruitport, Michigan. And if you want to see the layout and design drawings for the school, head to our webpage: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Indie rock]

Al Haynes

RS: The aviation world has lost a reluctant hero. Decades before Captain "Sully" Sullenberger touched down on New York's Hudson River, Captain Al Haynes made a dramatic emergency landing at an Iowa airport. Footage of the crash landing played over and over on TVs across the country. And Captain Haynes was praised for saving the lives of dozens on board. It was July 19, 1989 and he was piloting United Airlines Flight 232. It was carrying 285 people from Denver to Chicago when the tail engine failed, triggering a series of failures in the DC-10 aircraft. It was up to Captain Al Haynes, his Second Officer, and two other flight crew to figure out what went wrong — and to do something about it.

SOUNDCLIP

AL HAYNES: It was very shortly after like this that we realized that we had more than just an engine failure. It was apparent to us that we had lost all our hydraulic fluid. And when I asked Dudley for the procedure for that, he said there isn't one. So we made it up as we went along. We were just going to go in and land, and that's what we tried to do.

[Sound: Lots of camera clicks.]

RS: That was Captain Al Haynes on the CBS Evening News on July 25th, 1989. Six days earlier, he and his crew crash-landed a plane at the Sioux Gateway Airport in Sioux City, Iowa. As the aircraft touched down, its right wing broke off. The plane burst into flame and cartwheeled down the runway before it finally stopped, upside-down, in a corn field off the end of the runway. Captain Haynes saved the lives of 184 passengers and crew — but 112 people were killed and dozens more injured in the fiery crash. Still, the pilot shied away from praise.

SOUNDCLIP

AH: There is no hero. There just a group of poor people who did their job. Well this is a happy day for many of us, we must not forget that 111 people perished in this accident. And to their families and their friends, I would like to say that this crew, and in fact the entire industry, is dedicated to finding the cause of this accident.

00:47:12 - SPEAKER: M4

RS: Capt. Al Haynes was 57 at the time of the accident. He flew for two more years before he retired. He spent his later years umpiring Little League games, and serving as the announcer for high school football games. Al Haynes died on Monday. He was 87 years old.

[Music: Sombre piano]

Unicycle Dave

RS: One man. One wheel. And one long, tricky balancing act. Dave Cox left Victoria, B.C. back in May. He was planning to pedal across the entire country, ending up in St. John's, Newfoundland. Now he's in the home stretch, having reached the Rock a few days ago. And he's done it all by unicycle. Mr. Cox spoke with CBC's Krissy Holmes this morning from Burgeo, Newfoundland.

SOUNDCLIP

DAVE COX: I really just wanted to see Canada, and this is one of the best ways to do it. Just at a really slow pace, and some way that attracts attention, so you can meet everyone along the way. I make friends everywhere I go.

KRISSY HOLMES: How do people react to when you tell them what you're doing?

DC: At this point, it's mostly disbelief. I have to say. [laughs] Usually, I tell them I'm riding across the country. And they're like oh, well, you know you got a couple of months to go. And I'm like no, no, no, it's actually been almost 9,000 kilometres to this point here.

KH: I mean how are you holding up at this point?

DC: I'm in great shape. I'm just like I can go all day long and not really notice anymore. I’ve actually ridden with some bike tourists on this trip, and I'm usually faster than them uphill. But when it comes to the downhill, I have to pedal the whole way because it's a unicycle. The pedals always move. And they can just free wheel down the hills. So I have to pedal back down every mountain that I ride up. That's the big challenge.

KH: And what do you hang on to?

DC: Oh, I have some handlebars, but they're just for comfort. But you know you can ride with your hands if you want. So I've been known to brush my teeth going down the road. Probably about 8,000 kilometres in, I was in Antigonish, and I hadn't had any coffee yet that morning, and I grabed my brake wrong. And yeah, I fell on my leg there, hurt my back a little bit. So I've hurt myself once or twice. But so far so good. So hopefully now it's just another 400 kilometres of St. John's.

RS: That's Unicycle Dave — otherwise known as Dave Cox — in conversation with CBC St. John's host Krissy Holmes earlier today. Mr. Cox has been unicycling across the country since May, and says he expects to reach St. John's by September 1st.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

August 27, 2019 episode transcript

More Stories Like This