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 2020

The AIH Transcript for March 04, 2020

Hosts: Carol Off and Chris Howden

CAROL OFF: Hello, I’m Carol Off.

CHRIS HOWDEN: Good evening, I'm Chris Howden. This is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

Prologue

CH: Tonight:

CO: Uncharted territory. The U.S. Supreme Court heard its first major abortion case today — since Donald Trump appointed two conservative justices to the bench. Our guest was there. And she says Roe v. Wade means nothing if women can't access care.

CH: InComing News. A new study says Ontario's basic income pilot project had exactly the intended effects. And its author argues we're all paying a price for the program's cancellation.

CO: Whose peace? A spokesperson for Afghan President Ashraf Ghani says the Taliban's agreement with the U.S. excludes the Afghan government ... and it's putting Afghan lives at stake.

CH: It's catchy. Not the virus. Well, that too unfortunately. But more happily, a Vietnamese song about preventing the spread of COVID-19 is proving to be quite viral itself. And after giving it a listen, we can hear why.

CO: Throw a wench in it. We hear from the author of an open letter urging Oxford University Press to change its definition of 'woman' — by taking OUT a whole bunch of pretty questionable words.

CH: And... Tunnel vision. For a long time there was one theory to explain the footprints found on the ceiling of an Australian cave. But now, a chance encounter between a paleontologist and a dentist has changed all that.

CH: As It Happens, the Wednesday edition. Radio that's glad those two didn't skip the flirta-ceous period.

[Music: Theme]

Part one: SCOTUS: abortion, Afghan government and Taliban talks, O.E.D. women

SCOTUS: abortion

Guest: Kathaleen Pittman

CH: It was a significant day at the U.S. Supreme Court today. Not just for those watching the two Justices appointed by President Trump — but for abortion rights in Louisiana, and beyond. Lawyers for the Center for Reproductive Rights were in Washington arguing against a law in Louisiana that it says is, quote, "designed to shut down abortion clinics." Unquote. It's the first major abortion case the Supreme Court has heard since President Trump's appointees — Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanagh — joined the bench. Kathaleen Pittman is the administrator of the Hope Medical Group for Women. It's one of three clinics in Louisiana that provides abortions. It's part of the case. Ms Pittman was at the Supreme Court today, and also spoke at a rally. We reached her in Washington DC.

CO: Ms Pittman, as you know, this case has been making its way through the courts for years, and now before the Supreme Court today. What was that like for you to be there?

KATHALEEN PITTMAN: Well, it's been a very long six years. And had anybody told me six years ago that we would be here today, I would not have believed them at all. But, I mean, you know, we came. I think we were well-represented. And you know it's a relief to have that part of it over. And now we'll just have to wait and see what the justices have to say.

CO: You had… And you say you were well-supported. Some of the people, you had quite a number of people with you today, activists, politicians, celebrities. Can you give us a sense of the crowd? And I understand you addressed this crowd at one point?

KP: I did, yes. Actually, that part was a bit overwhelming when you look out and see this mass of humanity knowing they're here in support. It was huge. So I don't have a head count. But, yes, we definitely had quite a few supporters out there.

CO: Is your sense that the people who came to support you, the people who are out there, who are arriving in Washington, is there is there a concern or a sense that this is a major challenge to Roe versus Wade?

KP: I don't know so much as it speaks to a challenge to Roe v. Wade so much as the constant whittling away of abortion rights. I'm often asked you know what would happen or am I concerned that Roe v. Wade or Roe may be overturned? Well, with the continued passage of trap laws, the continued barriers that are erected by the state legislatures, Roe itself is to me, for me, is truly not the issue. If you don't have access, then Roe is meaningless.

CO: Tell us a bit about this law — this Louisiana law — that is now before the Supreme Court — the one that they're considering now?

KP: The law itself requires that physicians who perform abortions in Louisiana must have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic. The problem with that is obtaining the admitting privileges; as we showed at trial at district court, it's not a matter of simply requesting privileges and those privileges being granted. It's a very long process. And it is very uncommon for a physician to be granted any type of privileges when they're not active at that particular hospital. There are no incentives for the hospital to grant privileges. So we were able to prove at trial court that our physicians made every possible attempt to obtain privileges. And at that time, there were two physicians in the entire state of Louisiana that had privileges. And the one of the physicians at the clinic where I work actually has privileges. And he was quite clear at trial and since then stating that if this law goes into effect and we have other physicians that can no longer provide care, then he does not feel he could continue. First of all, one or two physicians cannot handle that number of cases in the state of Louisiana. Secondly, the closure of clinics is going to create additional wait times for women seeking care. So it's just not feasible for many reasons — one of which is also his safety. During this whole process and over the years, we've seen physicians that provide care have become increasingly subjected to harassment. It's just not something he feels he could continue to provide for us. in way with it.

CO: What would that mean in Louisiana? If that's the case, what does that mean for when the dust settles? How many abortion providers would there be in Louisiana?

KP: Possibly one or two, and that includes our physician. If the law passes, we're looking at one, possibly two physicians. I'm not quite sure of the status of the physician in south Louisiana that had privileges when we went to trial. That's something I can't speak to. So at this point in time, I know in northwest Louisiana, we have the one physician.

CO: Now, people who support this law in Louisiana, they say that these privileges — admitting privileges — are necessary to protect the women — the health and safety of the women who are seeking abortions. And to help ensure that those women have the care of competent doctors. What do you say to that?

KP: Okay, what I say to that is at trial, we were able to prove otherwise. Not only would it not improve the health and safety of women, but it would actually be detrimental. The district court found that to be the case. And the very same thing was found in Whole Woman's Health vs Hellerstedt four years ago when it went before the Supreme Court. This is basically the same case that the Supreme Court is hearing that they heard four years ago from Texas.

CO: Uh-huh, so this case has already been tested, so why is it being tested again at the Supreme Court?

KP: Because apparently, Louisiana has decided to challenge the Supreme Court.

CO: Now though things have changed since that Texas case, haven’t there? I mean, you have two other justices who have been appointed who may have different views than those who are on the Supreme Court before. Is that a concern?

KP: That's always a concern. What we are anticipating and planning on is the fact that we have precedent on our side, and that the integrity of the Supreme Court actually means something.

CO: If the Supreme Court upholds this law in Louisiana, what happens to your clinic, the Hope Medical Group for Women?

KP: There's a strong possibility that we would close.

CO: And what does that mean for the women?

KP: That means the women we serve are going to struggle even more to obtain the care they need. The women we serve — I would say 70 to 80 per cent of them — live at or below the federal poverty level. These are women that do not have access to travel, to go to New York or wherever to obtain abortion care. If we have additional clinic closures — including Hope — these women will basically not be able to access the care. And one thing I’m constantly pointing out is the lack of Louisiana's concern for women who decide to continue their pregnancies. And yet, Louisiana has the highest maternal mortality rate in the United States. So I feel like it's very hypocritical that they should be trying to interfere with women's health care in this regard. And yet, have so little respect or concern for women that do choose to continue the pregnancy.

CO: Ms Pittman, we will leave it there. And we, of course, will be following this case. I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

KP: Thank you.

CH: Kathatleen Pittman is the clinic administrator at Hope Medical Group for Women in Louisiana. We reached her in Washington, DC. And to read more about this case at the Supreme Court, visit our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Sombre]

Afghan government and Taliban talks

Guest: Sediq Sediqqi

CH: The path to peace in Afghanistan is, so far, proving to be bloody. The United States and the Taliban stuck a deal on the weekend that would see Washington withdraw its troops. Then, yesterday, there was an unprecedented phone call between U.S. President Donald Trump and a leader of the Taliban — one that the president characterized as "a very good talk." But, on the ground in Afghanistan, there is more violence. Since the deal was unveiled on Saturday, the Taliban has resumed attacking Afghan forces. Dozens have been killed, most of them soldiers. And for Afghans, that violence underscores fears that the American withdrawal plan leaves them extremely vulnerable. Sediq Sediqqi is the spokesperson for Afghan President Ashraf Ghani. We reached him in Kabul.

CO: Mr. Sediqqi, we are getting more details of this telephone conversation between Donald Trump and the deputy leader of the Taliban. Do you think that that contact was helpful?

SEDIQ SEDIQQI: We hope that whatever message was conveyed by President Trump to the Taliban was a message of the Taliban to abandon violence, to stick to the terms of the agreement and eventually accept or enter a process in which there won't be any violence in Afghanistan. So that's what we hope.

CO: All right, but we're not seeing much evidence of that, are we, because just since Saturday, the Taliban have killed about 66 people in your country. Just hours after this conversation, there was an ambush of Afghan forces. Taliban killed 15 — at least 15 soldiers. So at the same time, Mr. Trump has said that they have agreed in that phone conversation that there would be no violence. So what do you make of that?

SS: You're absolutely right. So we haven't seen any sign of the Taliban's commitment towards abandoning violence. They have attacked. They have been attacking. Now, they say that we will only not attack the U.S. — but we will be attacking the Afghan forces, Afghan people, as they have done that so for the past three days. This is very sad. This is what we did not expect. But the international community is trying to persuade the Taliban to change course and stick to those conditions in the agreement. That is, you know, keeping the level of violence low. And eventually, that has to lead to a cease-fire, and then negotiation with the Afghan government. So we haven't seen any sign of that so far. But we only hope as it's very difficult to trust the Taliban. The issue of trust is something that people in the Afghan government is so skeptical of.

CO: But the United States and its agreement with the Taliban appears to have committed your government — the Ghani government — to direct talks with the Taliban. They say that those talks, they will eliminate, and have eliminated, the barriers in the way of that. Apparently, Mike Pompeo has been given instructions to push the Ghani government into these peace talks. So do you think that you are ready for those kinds of talks with the Taliban?

SS: The Afghan government has always showed readiness to talk to the Taliban. But based on the conditions, like the Taliban has to accept a cease-fire, they has to stop killing Afghans. And they also have to accept that the they talk with the Afghan government. So one of the key steps towards this process will be the Taliban's acceptance to enter into talks with the Afghan government — which they have refused all the time. But we haven't seen any change in their position, which is again unfortunate.

CO: They say that the Taliban have not met the conditions. But there are conditions on the Ghani government, aren’t there? The first one is that you are expected to release five-thousand Taliban prisoners before you even begin talking. So is that going to happen?

SS: No, that's not gonna happen. Because the Afghan government believes that this is not logical demand. Or it should not be a prerequisite to start the negotiation. The Afghan government's position is very clear on the prisoners. It's like five-thousand Taliban who've caught on the battlefield, and their hands are stained with the Afghan blood. And these arrests were made with a huge price. You know, we lost so many people, so many soldiers, and also, according to international law and Afghan law, so they've been arrested. It's impossible to release them in a week. Or release them in return of nothing, or in return of only seven days reduction in the violence. So we want the Taliban to discuss with us, sit with us, the Afghan government. And the release of the prisoners should be one of the agendas when the negotiations take place. But if the Taliban do not uphold that commitment towards a reduced level of violence or accepting a cease-fire sitting with the Afghan government. Releasing these five-thousand people will not bring peace because they will go and join again on the battlefield.

CO: I just wonder how strong your hand is at this point, the Afghan government's hand, given that it seems that Donald Trump is determined to withdraw the U.S. troops from your country. You're up against the Taliban, that has perhaps 60-thousand fighters. Well-funded through its opium trade. Has support from strong elements within Pakistan. If you don't have the United States supporting you, what are you up against? The Taliban's claims it should be running the country.

SS: We believe that we have the support of the United States. That's why Secretary Esper and the secretary-general of NATO they were in Kabul on the same day, issuing a declaration in which they say it there will be continued support to the Afghan government. And the Afghan government is the only recognized government. So that's not what we assume right now. What we believe in is in the process, a difficult process, a complex process in which we will work together with the United States and other partners such as the EU to find a feasible way in which we can end this violence.

CO: A lot of people are remembering right now the late 1980s, and when the United States abandoned Afghanistan after its proxy war with the Soviet Union and pushed your country into bloody years of civil war. Are people thinking about that right now?

SS: Yes, absolutely. So there's always a flashback of the ‘90s — in which we had the civil war, and we had this horrible time that the country was torn apart. And our people believed that in the past 18-19 years, the international community stood with us. And this will continue. And we strongly believe that that partnership is needed so that millions of Afghans could still live in a country without fear.

CO: Mr Sediqqi, I appreciate speaking with you tonight. Thank you.

SS: It was a pleasure to talk to you as well. Thank you.

CH: Sediq Sediqqi is the spokesperson for Afghan President Ashraf Ghani. He was in Kabul. And you can find more on this story on our webpage at: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: World music]

O.E.D. Women

Guest: Maria Beatrice Giovanardi

CH: Some words you just don't expect in polite company. And you especially don't expect them in the most important English-language dictionary on Earth. They're three offensive words referring to women: "wench", "maid" — and a third one I'd rather not say, starting with "B". And what they all have in common is that — according to the Oxford Dictionary of English definition — they're all synonyms for the word "woman". Maria Beatrice Giovanardi wants to change that. She's a women's rights advocate, and she recently wrote an open letter to the Oxford University Press, asking it to remove those words from their entry for "woman". And her online petition to that end now has over 32,000 signatures. We reached Ms Giovanardi in London.

CO: Ms Giovanardi, we've heard some of the words that have been used — are used — as synonyms in the dictionary. What are some of the other phrases included as examples of those words that you have found offensive in the dictionary?

MARIA BEATRICE GIOVANARDI: Some other sentences used are like most them are basically related to a man owning women — such as like one of his sophisticated London women. Or don't be daft, woman. Or if this doesn't work, they will become women off the streets. And so forth.

CO: [snide chuckle] Those are the examples of how to use woman in a sentence?

MBG: Yeah, they’re like on the first stage as well. Like, these are the first examples you see — which is horrible.

CO: There’s one other one I’ve made note of that you didn't mention. I told you to be home when I get home, little woman.

MBG: Yes. Oh, yeah. [chuckling] There’s a lot of them like this, yeah.

CO: And in addition to this, all these synonyms we've mentioned, “maid”, “wench”, “bitch”, are synonyms of the word woman. What did you find as how a man is described in the synonyms for a man?

MBG: For example, like the sentences used for men are, a Cambridge man. Or I'm a solid Labour man. Or they're basically all about like you know men being strong or like men being men. And example phrases are like you know as one man. Be man enough to do it. Make a man out of someone.

CO: One of the definitions is man: a person with the qualities associated with males, such as bravery, spirit, or toughness. Was there anything equivalent to that in describing or defining a woman?

MBG: No. The only role that women let’s have in this entry is maid or a prostitute.

CO: This letter has been sent to the dictionary — the Oxford Dictionary of English — people. How have they responded to your drawing this to their attention?

MBG: Basically, like this campaign started in July last year. And in August, they had said, when the campaign picked up sort of like some getting some traction, they said they would investigate. But they also said that they wouldn’t just eliminate something on the basis that it was derogatory. But now, like because we also have support of like linguists and like as women's rights organizations and like influential people like they said they actually said that the definition will change in the next few weeks. I mean, I'm trying to be hopeful, but I have a feeling like they're not going to change 100 per cent. They're not going to meet all of our demands. But let's be hopeful.

CO: Well, a spokeswoman has said that, quote, “our dictionaries reflect rather than dictate how language is used. And even where it means recording at senses and examples of words that are offensive or derogatory, in which we wouldn't necessarily employ ourselves. In cases where words in use uses may be considered offensive, they are clearly labeled as such.” Is that the case?

MBG: Basically, there’s like two user cases like from like a public perspective. One is on their website — which is not like a partnership a with dictionary.com — It's called Lexical. They do label them as dated or like archaic or offensive. But, in our opinion, like labeling something offensive is not enough. The other case is the fact that like this content is licensed to all search engines, so to Google, Yahoo, Bing, etc. So when you Google like “woman definition”, their content is what comes up. Let’s say like a little boy or like a little girl goes and like looks for this definition. They just basically enter like a word without any like they're not given any context. And you know because it's not like a history book that explains the oppression of women or something.

CO: So some of the words, some of the synonyms, including is “chick”, “popsey”, “wifey”, “wench”, “maid”, and along with the others, “mare”, “baggage”, these derogatory terms. But these are words that are used in books to describe women. So is it not useful for people to know when they come across these words to find out how these are words that are used? So isn't that the job of the dictionary to let us know that?

MBG: I mean, first of all, like I think the user case in this scenario would be that the person goes and looks up for the actual word. So like we're not saying that these words has to be removed from the dictionary altogether. Like we're just saying they need to be removed from under woman. And also, like they are very outdated, and they don't reflect like current views of the word woman. Perhaps you can keep the surnames in the historical text and dictionary — which is the O.E.D. — Oxford English Dictionary — which is like many for scholars, etc. And that's the text you would use if you're let's say like writing a book about the 1920s or something. But this particular dictionary, the one that’s licenced, again, like it's in our phone, it's in our laptops, and like it's on Google. It's an everyday use dictionary that has different purpose. And that purpose is to show current use of the word. And like me as like someone who in my 20s, like I do not feel like any of these things like really represented the word woman.

CO: And what will you do with the letter that you are sending to the dictionary to get this changed?

MBG: Well, basically, our hope is to have an actual conversation, and not to be let’s say dismissed. The dictionary now said like they might be willing to meet us. And so we would actually like to have a conversation. And like start the conversation around this, and for our demands to be heard, and like for a solution to be found.

CO: All right, we will leave it there.

MBG: Yeah.

CO:Ms Giovanardi I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

MBG: Thank you.

CO: All right. Bye-bye.

MBG: Bye-bye.

CH: Maria Beatrice Giovanardi is a women's rights advocate. She was in London.

[Music: "La Cumbia Del Coronavirus" by Mister Cumbia]

Coronavirus viral song

CH: That's an artist named "Mister Cumbia". On Facebook, he calls himself "El Rey de las Cumbias Virales" — King of the Viral Cumbia Songs. And that royal title's a bit on-the-nose in the case of this one. It's called "La Cumbia Del Coronavirus". And right now, it's the biggest hit in a growing musical subgenre: songs about the coronavirus. Mister Cumbia's is instructional. In the chorus, he sings, "wash your hands, do it often", and "don't touch your face — avoid it, friends". And for a layperson, his effort to share the right facts about not touching is ... touching. There are dozens of other coronavirus songs now, and more all the time. And not surprisingly, for rush jobs by people cashing in on a global health crisis, most are terrible, if not outright sickening. But one is amazing. On the latest episode of "Last Week Tonight", John Oliver called it a "club banger". And the idea was obviously to make Covid-19 less infectious by making the song the most infectious. It's a Vietnamese PSA about preventing the spread of coronavirus. It's got a video, and a TikTok dance. Translated from the Vietnamese, the chorus goes: "Wash your hands, rub, rub, rub evenly / do not touch eyes, nose, mouth / And limit visits to crowded places / push back the virus Corona, Corona.

[Music: Electronica]

Part two: Basic income report, dinosaur roof prints

Basic income report

Guest: Wayne Lewchuk

CH: It involved thousands of people in communities in parts of Ontario. And it was supposed to run for three years. But in the summer of 2018, the provincial government announced that it would be ending the basic income pilot project early. At the time of the announcement, Minister Lisa MacLeod said the project was costly and, quote, "clearly not the answer for Ontario families." Unquote. But Wayne Lewchuk disagrees. And he says he has the research to back it up. Today, Professor Lewchuk and colleagues at McMaster University released a report about how Ontario's basic income project went in the Hamilton-Brantford area. We reached Professor Wayne Lewchuk in Hamilton, Ontario.

CO: Professor Lewchuk, based on your research, how would you say that Ontario's basic income pilot project actually went?

WAYNE LEWCHUK: Oh, I think it was a roaring success. People who are actually on basic income, what they told us is that overall their general health improved, their mental health improved, their outlook on life improved.

CO: So just maybe tell us how exactly this program worked?

WL: Okay, so the program worked, is it recruited low-income individuals and couples with low household income. And it offered them a fixed payment — no strings attached. That was supposed to last for three years. Individuals got approximately 17-thousand dollars, and couples got approximately 24-thousand dollars.

CO: And so what happens if they had jobs?

WL: So if they had jobs, then whatever income they earned from the job would be deducted from their basic income at a rate of 50 per cent — which meant that for individuals, once their income reached just under 34-thousand dollars, they would no longer receive any payments from the government.

CO: And so the criticism of it, the belief was that people, once they had this basic income, they would have no incentive to go to work. So what happened?

WL: The vast majority, they kept working. And I think that speaks to the rule of employment, as well as income, in how people define themselves. Many of those who continued working were actually able to move to better jobs, jobs that had a higher hourly wage, that had, in general better working conditions, that they felt were more secure. Certainly, there were a small number of people who moved from the employed ranks to the unemployed ranks during the pilots. About a half of those went back to school, and the expectation is that they went back to school to improve themselves so they could re-enter the labour market later at a higher level. A small number used the basic income to manage issues at home. They may have had an ill parent, or a child needed extra care or a partner. And they used the basic income to address those kinds of concerns.

CO: And so did you find any of the people that you revisited on this who just took advantage of this kickback on the couch and just didn't do anything else?

WL: We didn't have anybody reporting that. But I have to be frank, we didn't ask a question, did you spend your basic income watching the Toronto Maple Leafs?

CO: [laughoing] okay, but what you discovered was that of the ones you went back to, these are the experiences they had?

WL: Yes. So I think you know the survey — because we surveyed and interviewed people — so over 70 per cent of the people who were working before the pilot continued working during the pilot, even though they're getting the basic income. But in the interviews, what became clear is that as people move to some stability, so their health improved, their mental health improved, their outlook on life improved. You have to believe that you know that actually made them more employable. And so I think this argument that somehow this is a disincentive to work, really quite the opposite. And so basic income in many ways was an employment program, not an unemployment program.

CO: You did in-depth interviews. You got to know the stories these people had. Is there any particular one that stands out for you?

WL: I remember one individual who basically said, look, I was on the edge of suicide. I just felt that nobody cared about me. I didn't know how to make ends meet. And now, with basic income, I mean, I feel like I can be part of society. And now, I'm now looking forward to becoming a more productive citizen and a part of this community. I think you know others who spoke to us about the tensions in their household and the poverty of their households, and how basic income, which you know, they didn't get a whole lot more money. It was just enough to create some stability, which allowed them to think about participating in the community, volunteering. This is a very low-cost way of giving people the basic foundation to be part of our society.

CO: It was a pilot project that was supposed to last in Ontario for three years. And it was cancelled by the Ford government. What would it cost to do this for real, and for people who are on welfare or who are underemployed or who are not making a living wage, what would it cost a province like Ontario to do?

WL: Well, the basic income payments were about 15-20 per cent higher than the current ODSP welfare payments. So you know it's not a tremendous increase in funds. So on the cost side, yes, there would be more money directly transferred to individuals. On the other hand, if they made less use of the hospital system, if they're able to move into better jobs and they paid more taxes, the costs would be offset by those gains. So in terms of the net cost to a province, it's not monumental.

CO: But unless someone else it tries a pilot project like this, we'll never know.

WL: Well, that's the tragedy of the decision to cancel it prematurely.

CO: Any other government, any other jurisdiction, you know that was watching what was going on in Ontario that may attempt to project make this for themselves?

WL: Well, certainly, the Ontario pilot was the focus of a number of jurisdictions. There are pilots running in various jurisdictions across the globe, in the United States, in Europe. There's currently discussions underway in Canada — in both Prince Edward Island and British Columbia — to explore a basic income pilot in their provinces. And there is a committee at the Senate charged with exploring basic income. I think what we're seeing is a growing sense that there is a need for something different than the kinds of policies we have to both support individuals who are in poverty, but also to support a labour market as we see the spread of gig work and less secure employment. And even more conservative economists are beginning to become concerned about the lack of purchasing power by a growing section of the population, and how we can get money into their hands to generate more economic activity overall in the economy?

CO: We will leave it there. Professor Lewchuk, thank you.

WL: You're welcome. Bye-bye.

CH: That was Wayne Lewchuk in Hamilton, Ontario. He's a professor emeritus of labour studies and economics at McMaster University. He was originally on the evaluation panel for Ontario's basic income pilot. In a statement to As It Happens a spokesperson for Ontario's Minister of Children Community and Social Services said, “a pilot project of this size was not an adequate solution for a province where almost two million people live in poverty.”

[Music: Ambient]

Alberta attack “not guilty”

CH: Matthew Brown acknowledges he took psychedelic drugs and violently attacked a woman in Calgary. But the former university student says he has no memory of doing it. And yesterday, a judge found him not guilty on the grounds that he experienced "automatism" — a delirious state in which someone is not aware of their actions. Two years ago, Mr Brown consumed more than a dozen alcoholic drinks and took magic mushrooms at a party. Just before 4 a.m., he stripped naked and bolted outside in minus-20 degree weather. He broke into a stranger's home, and violently attacked the 68-year-old woman inside with a broom handle, leaving her with broken bones and head injuries. The victim's daughter, Lara Unsworth, spoke to CBC Calgary's The Eyeopener this morning with host David Gray. Here's how she reacted to the acquittal.

SOUNDCLIP

LARA UNSWORTH: To be honest, we were shocked. I mean, I sat through the whole trial. I knew it was a possibility, but I thought how could someone not be held accountable for doing something to someone else?

DAVID GRAY: How badly injured was your mother?

LU: She was very seriously injured. She had a very bad multiple breaks in one of her hands. She had head wounds, bruising that didn't go away for months over her whole body. And she's still in physiotherapy two years later for her hand. There's some tasks she'll never be able to do again. She's done remarkably well and worked very hard to create normalcy in her life again and get back to what she loves to do, but.

DG: So from your understanding, why was there an acquittal?

LU: It all comes down to a trial that happened earlier in last summer where he was allowed to use this defence of automatism. By allowing him to do that, it didn't matter what happened before or after. It was, was he aware of what he was doing at the time of the crime? And you know, sitting through the whole thing, it's a very hard thing to prove. He says he doesn't remember anything. But the only one who really knows if they remember anything is him.

DG: I know you've talked your mom about this. How does she feel about it?

LU: She's disappointed too. I mean, she's an educator as well. She's a university professor. She works with this age group every day. It's her passion. She's you know had someone come into the sanctuary of her home and shatter that sense of safety. We've been in this city our whole lives and never worried about anything like that. She is finding it hard to wrap her head around the lack of accountability. And it makes it feel like you know she's been such me the other day what if I had died? Would it have made a difference? With this defence, I don't know?

CH: That was Lara Unsworth speaking to CBC Calgary. She's the daughter of Janet Hamnett, a 68-year-old woman who, in 2018, was violently beaten by a man on magic mushrooms. Yesterday, Matthew Brown was acquitted by a Calgary judge, who found he was too delirious to remember the attack.

[Music: Ambient]

Dinosaur roof prints

Guest: Anthony Romilio

CH: The scene was unlikely in all kinds of ways. First of all, the footprints appeared to belong to a carnivorous dinosaur that had been walking on all fours. Which any dinosaur person will tell you is highly unusual. And second — and weirder — the footprints were on the roof of the cave. But now, the mystery's been solved, thanks to one paleontologist's chance encounter with a dentist. We reached that paleontologist, Anthony Romilio, in Brisbane, Australia.

CO: Anthony, let's start with the first mystery, how is it that there are footprints on the roof of this cave?

ANTHONY ROMILIO: Yes, well, the cave footprints were not made by dinosaurs walking on the ceiling. What these footprints actually represent are footprint in-fills. So that when the dinosaurs were walking on the lake shore, they left a normal impression into the sediment. And then that was covered over by a more resistant sediment. The lake sediment that they walked on became clay stone, the in-fill became sandstone. And the clay stone eroded a lot quicker than the sandstone, so that's why we see it on the ceiling of the cave.

CO: Okay, that mystery is solved. Now, the other mystery of the footprints on the roof [both laughing] this cave that you've been trying to figure out for a very long time is that this is supposed to be a carnivorous dinosaur like a T-Rex. And it appears that this dinosaur is walking on all fours. We know this dinosaur did not do that. So why does it appear that this upside down [laughing] no longer upside down dinosaur was walking with four legs?

AR: [chuckling] Yes, well, the idea that these tracks were made by a four-legged animal was one of the original interpretations back in the 1950s. The reason why they thought this was that there's two different size footprints oriented in the same direction, and of really close proximity. So it could have either been made by the hands and the feet of a quadrupedal or dinosaur, or it could have been made by two different-sized bipeds. But people got very excited about the idea that it was a quadruped. So that's how that idea kind of crept in over the decades. Why this mystery has been hanging for such a long time is that they are these manmade caves, but the site has been closed for a decade.

CO: So why is it that these manmade caves aren't accessible?

AR: Because the dinosaur footprints have attracted a lot of attention over the years since the 1950s. People had been visiting the site on a regular basis, but the sealing surface with the clay stone, that slowly flakes off every now and then. So it's eroding and exposing more tracks. But that same process of erosion not only exposes tracks, but it can fall down and hit someone on the head.

CO: Now, what have you now found out?

AR: Well, I've been able to — with a chance meeting — meet Roslyn Dick when I was working at a farmers market here in Brisbane, Australia. You know, I'm selling fruit and veg to her, and mentioned that I'm doing palaeontology as well. And then she mentions that her dad discovered several dinosaur fossils here in Australia. I had a moment of disbelief, until she said his name, Ross Staines. And Ross Staines is a bit of an icon here in Australia because he's found dinosaur footprints not only from the Mount Morgan site, but he's found the only Triassic dinosaur fossils in Australia.

CO: Okay [laughing], this is now mystery number three: how is it that a dentist named Roslyn Dick was able to actually solve, not just this, but a number of mysteries for you?

AR: Yes, well, Roslyn and her sisters — their father passed on all of the archival material that he had collected over the years. And that included the high-resolution photos and charts. A lot of this material had not been published previously. In my conversations with Roslyn, she had invited me to her home to have a look to see is this significant scientifically? You know, I said like a kid at Christmas. I was just so excited you know with the high quality of all this material. And instantly, as soon as I saw these photographs, it was perfectly clear that the mystery was solved. These were not made by a four-legged, quadrupedal, meat-eating dinosaur. Clearly, the footprints — no handprints — made by two different sized bipedal dinosaurs.

CO: [chuckling] Of course, you didn't just find out this one thing, this is a treasure trove, isn't it, of this Ross staines material — including dinosaur footprint plaster casts that were stored in a cupboard [chuckling]. So what else have you discovered with this?

AR: Yeah, yeah. So with Roslyn, she had archival photographs. And her sister — who was living in Sydney — she had a cast of the footprint. And it wasn't until late last year that I visited her in Sydney, and had the opportunity of looking at this footprint, making a 3D model of it and really getting to examine to find out, okay, what type of dinosaur made this footprint? And that was really the exciting part. To have something that they had stored in what they call the Harry Potter cupboard under the stairs, and then bringing it out and showing this plaster cast that was nearly 70 years old, but in pristine condition, because they loved their treasure from the father.

CO: And as you say, this is a palaeontologist’s version of Christmas. So what other gifts do you think you might discover that might shed more light on these caves?

AR: Well, I've had a lot of interest with the publicity. People have approached me, saying, hey, I’d love to do some volunteer work. I'm a geologist. I can help with this and that. And even people saying, hey, I've lived in this Mount Morgan area. When I was a kid, I used to go to the caves, come talk to me, there might be some more historical information that we can provide to glean a clearer picture of what the environment was, what these animals were like?

CO: Well, I hope at some point you get to have access to these caves, and get answers to more of your mysteries. But great story, Anthony. And I appreciate you telling it to us. Thank you.

AR: Thanks. Thanks so much, Carol.

CO: Bye.

AR: Bye-bye.

CH: Anthony Romilio is a Research Associate with the Dinosaur Lab at the University of Queensland. We reached him in Brisbane. And to see photos of the dinosaur prints in question, make tracks for our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: polka?]

Tower update

CH: It was the pride of Dallas for a while there. But you know what pride cometh before. Earlier this month, we told you about a building that was being called the Leaning Tower of Dallas. Even after attempts to destroy it with explosives — and a wrecking ball — part of it remained defiantly tilted, refusing to go down. Well, on Monday, one final swing brought that eleven storey structure crashing to the ground. Engineer Thomas Taylor said, “Nobody got hurt. And that's extremely important.” Which is true, except we're all a little hurt that the building buckled under pressure. But its memory will never topple. It's been immortalized online, and by the Legoland in Dallas Fort Worth — which put its own miniature slant on that slanted tower. You can see photos of it as it once leaned on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: polka again?]

Trebek cancer update

CH: It's been a year since "Jeopardy!" host Alex Trebek revealed that he had been diagnosed with Stage four pancreatic cancer. It wasn't the first time the 79-year-old was transparent with his fans about his health. In 2018, he posted a video explaining he'd had surgery to remove blood clots from his brain, after hitting his head in a bad fall. And while he had to take a brief leave of absence at that point, Mr. Trebek's cancer diagnosis didn't pull him away from his hosting duties — a gig that he's had since the quiz show's debut in 1984. His odds of survival aren't great. But Mr. Trebek has found some hope. Today, in another video posted to "Jeopardy!"'s social media accounts, he gave this candid update.

SOUNDCLIP

ALEX TREBEK: The one-year survival rate for stage four pancreatic cancer patients is 18 per cent. I'm very happy to report I have just reached that marker. Now, I'd be lying if I said the journey had been an easy one. There were some good days, but a lot of not so good days. I joked with friends that the cancer won't kill me. The chemo treatments will. There were moments of great pain, days when certain bodily functions no longer functioned and sudden massive attacks of great depression that made me wonder if it really was worth fighting on? But I brushed that aside quickly because that would have been a massive betrayal, a betrayal of my wife and soul mate, Jean, who has given her all to help me survive. It would have been a betrayal of other cancer patients, who have looked to me as an inspiration and a cheerleader of sorts of the value of living and hope. And it would certainly have been a betrayal of my faith in God, and the millions of prayers that had been said on my behalf. You know my oncologist tried to cheer me up the other day, he said, Alex, even though the two-year survival rate is only seven per cent, he was certain that one year from now, the two of us would be sitting in his office, celebrating my second anniversary of survival. And you know something? If I… No, if we — because so many of us are involved in this same situation — if we take it just one day at a time, with a positive attitude, anything is possible.

CH: That is "Jeopardy!" host Alex Trebek speaking about hitting the one-year milestone of living — and surviving — with Stage four pancreatic cancer. Only one in five people make it past the first year of living with the disease.

[Music: Sombre]

Part three: Neptune exoplanet, Moscow perfumery

Liverpool Football Club coronavirus

CH: Liverpool Football Club's manager was game to answer questions yesterday about his team's disappointing loss against Chelsea. Jurgen Klopp was not, however, game to talk about the new coronavirus. European football clubs are taking a slew of precautions — from playing matches to empty stadiums, to advising players not to sign fan autographs. But Mr Klopp says he will leave those decisions to the experts. Here's his incredulous response to a reporter at a press conference yesterday.

SOUNDCLIP

JURGEN KLOPP: Look, what I don't like in life is that on a very serious thing, a football manager’s opinion is important. I don't understand it. I could ask you. You are exactly the same role that I am. And it's not important what famous people say. No, we have to be have to speak about the things in the right manner. Not people with no knowledge like me talking about something where people with knowledge should talk about it, and tell the people, do this, do that, do this and everything will be fine, or not. So and not football managers. I don't understand it. Politics, coronavirus, why me? I'm concerned as much as you, maybe less, I'm not sure. I don't know exactly what your amount is of feeling concerned. But my opinion is really not important. I live on this planet, and I want the planet to be safe, healthy. I wish everybody the best, absolutely. But my opinion about Corona is not important. If somebody tells me you play football, we play football, because I think smarter people said we can play football. I will not make a decision.

CH: That was Liverpool F.C.'s manager Jurgen Klopp, complaining about a question from a reporter about the new coronavirus outbreak.

[Music: World music]

Neptune exoplanet

Guest: Nikku Madhusudhan

CH: About 125 light years away from us is a planet that's bigger than Earth, but smaller than Neptune. Scientists poetically call it a "mini-Neptune". And not poetically at all, they call this particular one "K2-18b". Until now, astronomers didn't think mini-Neptunes were habitable planets. But a new study published in the Astrophysical Journal Letters refutes that theory. Nikku Madhusudhan is the lead author of the study. We reached him in Cambridge.

CO: Professor Madhusudhan, what have you discovered that suggests possibly that planet K218b might be habitable?

NIKKU MADHUSUDHAN: Yeah, so the planet that we looked at — the K 218b — is about two-point-six times the size of the Earth. And about eight-point-six times the Earth's mass. In the past, a planet of this size was generally thought to potentially host a thick layer of hydrogen — which would make the temperatures and pressures at the bottom of the atmosphere too high to be conducive for life. What we have established in this study that, in fact, the hydrogen atmosphere doesn't have to be that thick. And that the conditions on the surface of the planet could potentially be conducive to life. In other words, the temperatures and pressures could allow for liquid water to be present on the surface at similar conditions to what we see in the Earth's oceans.

CO: So when you say habitable, I mean, as in humans. We could go and live there?

NM: Not necessarily, all that habitable means is that the pressure and temperature conditions are just right to have liquid water. Now, that doesn't necessarily mean that we could live there because the atmosphere is not oxygen-rich. It's a hydrogen-rich atmosphere. And we don't know what other chemicals are present in the water and in the atmosphere. So we can't make the inference that humans can live there. All that means is that some form of life could live there because there is liquid water at just the right temperatures and pressures.

CO: And that might also suggest there is life on that planet?

NM: We can't make that claim at this point. It's too early to say that. All we can say is that any life that requires water in such an environment is possible in such conditions. Basically, we shouldn't be surprised if we detect life in this planet. It's a very good candidate for hosting life.

CO: Well, I think a lot of people would be surprised if you found life on another planet [laughing]. I get your drift.

NM: Yeah.

CO: And so now this K218b, where exactly is it?

NM: The planet is in the constellation of Leo, about 124 light years away.

CO: So it's not in our solar system, but it is part of a constellation? It has a star, has a sun of its own?

NM: Yeah, yeah, yeah, so the sun is called K218, and “b” denotes the name of the planet. One twenty four light years away, by astronomical standards, that's actually pretty close. And its star is what is known as a red dwarf. It's actually cooler — significantly cooler — than our sun, which means the planet can be closer in and still have the similar temperatures as we have on Earth.

CO: So how long would it take us to get there?

NM: Oh, I don't think we can get there anytime soon [both chuckle]. Even with the fastest probes, it's going to take centuries to get there.

CO: Okay, we have to work on that part.

NM: Yes.

CO: But now, another part to work on, can't you come up with better names than K218b? I mean, isn't there something more romantic we can call this planet?

NM: [chuckling] Yeah. But, you know, technology astronomers use very specific. So in this particular case, K2 stand for the Kepler mission — the refurbished Kepler mission. And 18 is the number 18 of the system that the planets were found.

CO: Okay, I get it that there's scientific reasons for this, but you can appreciate that [laughing] it would be nice to have more interesting names.

NM: Absolutely.

CO: All right. We'll ask our listeners for that. Now, as far as what has been the reaction in the scientific community? We know that here in Canada, the lead author of one of the studies from last year from the University of Montreal, he said that your study was exciting. So what's been the other reaction from those in your team and those outside your team?

NM: Yeah. Well, in my team, there has been a lot of excitement all around. When we were working on this, for the longest time, we tried to make me habitable solutions go away [laughing]. You know, we were worried that we are finding something very anomalous. And we did lots and lots of checks to make sure that the planet is indeed potentially habitable. And at the end, we realized that there are you know explanations which do make the planet inhabitable. And once we realized that, there was a lot of excitement. And we have heard very positive news from the community as well. And basically, the punchline of this entire result is that, suddenly, we find out those knowing that planets can be significantly larger than Earth and still be habitable. And that's a new direction for the search for life elsewhere. Because, so far, we have been focusing on literally Earth-sized planets — which are about the smallest planets — and then detecting that atmospheres are extremely hard. Now, if the planets like K218b could potentially be habitable, then we are talking about much bigger planets than Earth — which makes it is slightly easier to detect that atmospheric signatures and eventually detect life. So I can understand that there would be such an excitement in the community because of that. Now, we don't know if these things are definitely habitable. But if they are, then that makes it really conducive to detect bias signatures in the future.

CO: Does this mean that there are a number of planets like this one in other solar systems that scientists will revisit now saying, aha, it's possible this could be habitable. Do you think that there are those they'll go back to test your hypotheses with?

NM: Yeah. Actually, there are lots of planets out there that are like this in this zone between Earth-size and Neptune-size. There are a number of planets. And I'm sure future searches for life on exoplanets will consider — will definitely consider — planets like this — of which there are many out there.

CO: Well, I will join your other colleagues to say this is very exciting.

NM: Thank you. I really appreciate it.

CO: All right. Good to talk to you, Professor Madhusudhan.

NM: Thank you. Thanks for having me here.

CO: Bye.

NM: Bye.

CH: Nikku Madhusudhan is the lead author of a new study that says Planet K218b might be habitable. We reached him in Cambridge. And as Carol said, let us know if you have a more interesting name for K218b. You can't have a less interesting one. You can reach us on Twitter and Facebook, both @cbcasithappens. Our email is aih@cbc.ca. Or leave a voicemail by calling Talkback at 416-205-5687.

[Music: Ambient]

Paramedic/patient reunion

CH: Stefan Tergesen was on his way to India. Instead, he ended up in the back of an ambulance. Back in January, Mr Tergesen collapsed after running to the gate at Toronto's Pearson airport. He awoke to bad news and good news. The bad news was that his heart had stopped. The good news was that another passenger, an unidentified woman, had intervened to save his life. So Mr Tergesen — who's from Gimli, Manitoba — launched a campaign to track her down. But it was a CBC article that finally helped the two connect. Stefan Tergesen told Information Radio host Marcy Markusa, why he was so interested in finding her.

SOUNDCLIP

STEFAN TERGESEN: I was curious right away. I mean, because of the way the event happened for me, it was I just went blank and found myself in an ambulance. So there was just this big blank spot. And, of course, the curiosity is what happened in that time-space when I wasn't around? [chuckling] So, you know, by the time I did find her, I had already sort of resigned myself to the fact that we probably never would. You know, because it was an international airport, international flights. We don't even know if she was Canadian, she could've been coming from anywhere and going anywhere.

MARCY MARKUSA: Yeah. So how did you two finally connect, and what did you say to her?

ST: She came across the story after she'd come home. She went to Africa. When she came home, she reached out to me on a messenger. So I was just absolutely thrilled.

MM: What did you say to her, and why was she able to save your life? Tell us a little about her?

ST: Yeah. Well, that was the first thing. Is that, first of all, I was you know thank you. I’d love to hear some of the details of what took place. So turns out she's actually a paramedic. She works internationally as a paramedic. And she was on a flight to London, and then on to Africa from there. So she heard an Air Canada employee calling for a doctor and medic, screaming. So she went over to see what's going on. Apparently, three other women had already jumped in, and were doing what they could. They had gotten an AED machine, and had started putting the pads on me. But as soon as she got through the crowd, she with her expertise, decided to take over the scene. She got them all step back because the machine won't analyze you properly if you're still being touched by people and stuff. So it called for a shock. So she asked one of the women there to push the button and to give me a shot. At which point, she immediately began CPR. And she successfully revived me. Once she had told the whole story, we talked about it. So then we all had a good cry [laughing].

MM: And when are you an Ingrid Cook going to meet up?

ST: As soon as I can, I'm going to fly out there, and we're going to treat her to a fancy dinner or something. [both chuckle]

CH: Stefan Tergesen suffered cardiac arrest at Toronto's Pearson Airport in January. He's just connected with the woman who saved his life.

[Music: Glassy guitar]

Princess Anne saved

CH: It was a bizarre story at the time — and an even weirder story to hear today — about the attempted kidnapping of a royal. Ronnie Russell is a former heavyweight boxer, but he didn't win his most treasured prize in a ring. Mr Russell was awarded the George Medal by the Queen for intervening in the armed hostage-taking of Princess Anne and her husband Captain Mark Phillips in London in 1974. Here he is speaking recently with the Royal Family Channel about what he saw unfolding in front of him that evening — and how he stepped in to help the Princess Royal.

SOUNDCLIP

RONNIE RUSSELL: There’s a gun on the floor. He's got another gun in his hand. He's got Princess Anne by the arm, pointing the gun at her head. And he's saying come on in, you got to come, you know you got to come. And the calmest person you've ever seen in your life was Princess Anne. She just went, go away, you silly man. I leant into the car, I said, come this way, Anne. You'll be safe.” I got her by the forearms, out of the car, in front of me. I said, now, we're going to walk away, and he's going to have to go through me to get you. At that point, he has run around behind me. Mark Phillips has seen that, dragged her back into the car. So when I’ve turned around, he’s there now. He’s like as far away from me as you are. And he’s standing with a gun pointed at me. And I thought, well, it’s your turn or my turn. And then I hit him.

CH: Mr. Russell is talking about hitting Ian Ball, who he punched twice in the head. Those blows flattened Mr. Ball, who was later arrested and charged by police. Now, 46 years later, Mr. Russell's health is suffering. And he decided to put his bravery medal up for auction so his family will be able to pay for his funeral. Today, that medal sold for 50,000 pounds — roughly 86,000 Canadian dollars — to a private collector in the U.K. In March 1974 — shortly after the attempt on the lives of Princess Anne and Captain Mark Phillips — former As It Happens host Barbara Frum spoke to Brian Vine from the London Daily Express, who was leading a contingent of reporters covering the thwarted royal hostage-taking. From our archives, here is part of that conversation. And our apologies: the telephone connection to London wasn't very good.

SOUNDCLIP

BARBRA FRUM: Mr Vine, how much have you been able to piece together?

BRIAN VINE: Well, quite a lot up until now, but it's been coming in very short burst from the scene — which has been sealed by 100-to-200 policemen. But the story so far seems to be Princess Anne and Mark Phillips escaped a gunmen’s ambush in the mall, near Buckingham Palace, where they were retuning to tonight. It’s being understood in the House of Commons that it was a kidnap attempt. But it hasn’t been expressed by who. [Too hard for transcriber to make out]

CH: From our archives, that was London Daily Express reporter Brian Vine speaking to former As It Happens host Barbara Frum in March of 1974, after the attempted kidnapping of Princess Anne and Captain Mark Phillips.

[Music: Ambient]

Moscow perfumery

Guest: Nikita Petrosev

CH: It's the smell of terror. A Moscow ad agency has formulated a putrid new scent, in protest against a perfumery that's set to be housed in a local building with a horrific history. The building is a former military courthouse where Stalin ordered the killing of thousands of military officials and civilians during the Great Purge in the 1930s. Nikita Petrosev is with the Action Marketing agency. We reached him in Moscow.

CO: Nikita, first of all, can you describe for us what “Terror” smells like? is the scent of “Terror” you’ve tried to create?

NIKITA PETROSEV: So the composition N23 opens with top notes of ink and stale paper, following by hints of damp basement, finishing with the main theme: gunpowder and ash — with a distinctly bitter aftertaste.

CO: So those are the notes of your perfume, or the smells they can have. And they are the smells of what people would understand happened in this old military courthouse. Can you tell us about the building where this Moscow perfumery is going to start its business?

NP: I can say that this building is the bloodiest in Europe — in the whole Europe. Because inside this building, during the period of Stalin terror — of Stalin's Great Terror in the ‘30s — inside this building was the main court responsible for the terror. And inside this house, 31,456 people were shot dead inside this house. And many, many thousands were sentenced to death there. So, therefore, I can say so that this building is the most bloodiest is in the whole Europe right now.

CO: So when you say that the perfume you have created has the smell of ink and paper — which I guess there was death certificates signed by Stalin himself for these people?

NP: Yes, yeah, yeah, yeah, it symbols this.

CO: Gunpowder for the numbers of people who are shot there?

NP: Yeah, the gunpowder is the main theme of this perfume. And probably, if you look at the package, again, we tried to give this contrast. Because the package is very luxurious; it is a white, soft-touch box. Inside, there is black tissue paper. And when you open these tissue paper, you will find out instead of bed of silk, because you are supposed to have a luxury experience. But instead of this, you will find a bed of soil. And on this bed of soil, there is a shell case from a real, vintage Soviet bullet. And inside, there is a perfume with the smell of gunpowder.

CO: You said it also has the smell of a dank basement — a very sour smell — because people spent time there. They were in prison there before they were shot dead.

NP: Yes, so this perfume, I describe the perfume using the perfume language. And this perfume describes the horror that took place in that building. When we are talking about damp basement, it shows the last minutes of these people. I mean, when they were taken to a basement to be killed, and then the gunpowder because they were shot dead, and ash, was a distinctly bitter aftertaste — which means, I mean, this is a final accord. I mean, it's all about the horror, and all about the madness that we are talking about.

CO: Since you've been running this campaign, have the people who own this building — and this perfumery — have they reconsidered their plans?

NP: We can see that the opening of this perfume boutique, the plan was to open it at 2019, and they didn’t succeed. So they did not open it in 2019. And now, construction of this boutique is stopped.

CO: So do you think you have been successful in stopping this, and drawing attention to this?

NP: Forty-five-thousand people signed a petition against this boutique, and for the memorial complex inside this building. So before our campaign, we have never see such a big amount of people who were saying or announced their attitude, their protest, against this boutique. And now, we have this movement — big movement.

CO: But is it not also the case that there is a growing nostalgia for Stalin? That Vladimir Putin has been trying to rehabilitate Stalin as a hero? Is that not also happening in Russia?

NP: We can't say that Putin personally tries to restore Stalin as a hero. I can say that in modern Russian, it's not forbidden to say that Stalin was hero. The government — Putin and government — they close their eyes on some events. For example, more and more monuments — Stalin monuments — are opening in Russia. Stalin's grave is under the Kremlin as well. And each year, his supporters, his fans, they came to this grave and put a lot of really thousands of roses on this grave. And it is allowed by the government, so you can find some people inside our country who will say that he was a war criminal. But also, you will find a lot of people — really a lot of people — who will consider him as a hero. And, unfortunately, this numbers grows, and the government allow this.

CO: Just finally, what do you think should happen to this old military courthouse? What do you think they should do with that building?

NP: I think it's absolutely impossible to open any commercial shop or something like that. The only thing that we can accept there is a memorial complex, memorial museum, memorial exhibition, or something like that.

CO: Where the 31,456 people were shot?

NP: Yes.

CO: Nikita, I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

NP: Thank you very much. Thank you very much. It was my pleasure.

CH: Nikita Petrosev is with the Action Marketing Agency, He was in Moscow.

[Music Horns!]

Eagles

CH: For years now, a trio of bald eagles has been co-parenting eaglets in a love nest near Fulton, Illinois. We first told you about the feathered throuple last year, and we're happy to report that the unlikely lovers are now incubating a whole new brood. Valor One, Valor Two, and Starr were photographed this month — once again sharing egg-warming duties. That's a comforting sight for bird watchers who have been keeping an eye on the triple eagles since Starr moved in. She took the place of an earlier female named Hope, who was killed in 2017 — and who appears to have been the reason this avian love triangle took flight in the first place. Here's part of Carol's conversation with Ally Hirschlag from last year. Ms Hirschlag wrote about the eagle throuple for the National Audubon Society — and told us about its origins with Hope and Valor One.

SOUNDCLIP

AH: So they both showed up I believe it was in 2013. I think they'd been seen a little bit before then, but it was very clear that they were together and at this nest in 2013. And they had babies together — eaglets. And Valor I didn't seem to quite understand his role as a parent. He just wasn't that committed to it. He would sit on the nets were maybe 10 minutes and then leave before the mom came back. And Hope seemed to be having a lot of trouble with him.

CO: She was pretty frustrated with Valor.

AH: Yeah, as one might imagine. And I don't know if they can have actual squabbles about it, but she did something rather pragmatic, and she found a new mate, who seemed to be much better at being a parent. The next year, there was the second male eagle on the nest with her.

CO: Who you call Valor II.

AH: Right, exactly. I'm not sure how that happened. The audience who was watching the webcam at that time, there was a there was a vote on what the original eagle's name should be. And they had Valor I and Hope. So I'm not sure why they just decided to go with Valor II for the second eagle, but that's how it turns out.

CO: Now, Valor II showed up, and joined in. And was he a better mate for Hope?

AH: Much better. He actually seemed to get it. He was very good at you know doing all of the gestational and once the babies were born taking care of them, feeding them, protecting them. But Valour I never left. He sort of was just around. Like he didn't do any of the parental duties, at least not at first. But he just hung around, and Valor II didn't scare him off. Like most predator birds don't have two males that can subsist in one intimate relationship like that, at least not for long. And then within a couple of years, he was seen suddenly being brought back into the fold, and taking on parental responsibility because I think he maybe just got it by watching Valor II do it.

CH: That's Carol, speaking with Ally Hirschlag — who first told us about an Illinois trio of bald eagles last year. Happily for bird lovers — and lovers of all kinds — the throuple is now preparing to co-parent a whole new brood of eaglets.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

March 04, 2020 epsode transcript

More Stories Like This