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 2022

The AIH Transcript for August 3, 2022

PAUL HUNTER: Hello. I'm Paul Hunter.

TALIA SCHLANGER: Good evening. I'm Talia Schlanger. This is As It Happens.

[Theme]

Prologue

TS: Tonight:

PH: State of excitement. A pro-choice supporter in Kansas tells us there was much celebrating and some tears, too, after winning a referendum maintaining access to abortion.

TS: He called 'em like he saw 'em. A colleague and huge fan remembers legendary sports broadcaster Vin Scully, who he says did so much more than simply read the field.

PH: Blast radius. Two years after the deadly port explosion in Beirut, one father tells us he's still fighting for justice for the daughter he lost.

TS: The InfoWars war. The Alex Jones defamation trial enters its final phase, and a lawyer drops a bombshell on the embattled host.

PH: Dog days. After a massive animal-rescue operation saves several thousand beagles in Virginia, the dogs are being unleashed on communities -- who seem more than happy to welcome them.

TS: And… staring into the void. Actually, staring into many tiny little voids… all in a row at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean. And scientists say how they got there is a complete mystery.

TS: As It Happens, the Wednesday edition. Radio that always seeks the hole truth.

Part 1: Kansas Abortion, Beirut Explosion Family, Ocean Floor Holes Mystery

Kansas Abortion

Guest: Allie Utley

TS: Earlier this summer, people across the United States watched to see if the right to an abortion would survive a legal test at the Supreme Court. It did not. But now, a major political test on the issue has resulted in a different outcome in Kansas. Last night, a majority of voters rejected an amendment that would have opened the door to lawmakers putting future restrictions on abortion. Here's what it sounded like at a watch party as the results rolled in:

[sc]

[cheering, clapping and lots of screaming in joy]

[/sc]

TS: Allie Utley was in that room last night. She's also the vice president of the Kansas Young Democrats. We reached her in Prairie Village, Kansas.

PH: Allie, there's an amazing picture of you that's all over the web today. I'm sure you've seen it. You've got your hands in front of your face, and you're… you look like you're just overcome with emotion. And the person beside you is jumping. Jumping for joy, midair. What… what was that moment like?

ALLIE UTLEY: So that picture was taken probably at one of the greatest moments of my life. That is when it was officially announced that we had defeated the constitutional amendment. We were victors for the day. And I think I was just overcome with emotion that my state stood up very boldly to protect me and women and anybody that can get pregnant in the state of Kansas. They were protected, and we were able to become a sanctuary state for people seeking abortion access throughout the Midwest. So, we're very proud here in Kansas and…, and we're having a good day.

PH: Were you as surprised as many people might have been by the outcome?

AU: Absolutely not. People have gotten to work organizing around the state. You don't know how many rural counties I was seeing actually showing up and doing vote-no demonstrations. Towns as little as Humboldt in Kansas, all the way to, you know, Johnson County and Kansas City. So, I'm not surprised by this at all. The work was put in, and we are victors today because of it.

PH: Was it a celebration afterward last night?

AU: It was a celebration. It was a tear fest. It was… it was a lot of things last night. But, you know, last night we celebrated, and today we're getting to work.

PH: So in Kansas, currently, abortion is legal up to what? Twenty-two weeks, I think, right? So what was… let's unpack the referendum a little bit. What were people voting on yesterday?

AU: People were voting on striking down and an amendment that would allow the states constitution's verbiage to change to be… not have abortion access as part of our constitutional rights. So, we were voting that down and making sure that the constitution was saying the same and abortion access would still be legal in our state.

PH: Millions of dollars were spent by both sides in the run-up to the referendum, Allie. I mean, did you witness nastiness? What… what… what was the tone in the run-up to the… to the vote?

AU: Absolutely, I was seeing nastiness. I was helping out doing some canvassing, knocking doors and delivering yard signs to lots of different parts of Kansas, especially in some rural areas. You know, as I was doing this, you know, I was often called a baby killer. Terrible names like that. And then, as well, just getting the middle finger from some people and just not nice comments, just not productive things. So, it is nice to see that all that pain and suffering that our side had to go through at least paid off in the end.

PH: I understand there was a… what you might call a tricky robocall that was sent out. What do you know about that?

AU: Yes. So there was a robocall that was sent by a variety of 888 numbers, basically saying to protect women's choice, they actually use the word choice. Yeah, it's a little disappointing to see something so disgustingly untrue come moments before voters were set to cast their ballots.

PH: And what was your message to voters as you were sort of going door to door to convince people to make sure they get out and vote and that they reject the amendment?

AU: Yeah, well, I think the main thing was about this amendment that it wasn't just striking down abortion access. It was striking down abortion access even in the cases of rape, incest and life of the mother. And I think that's just unacceptable. Like, it's not even… they weren't allowing me to protect my own self and my own life if something were to go wrong during my pregnancy. So I just think that's crazy. And Kansans all over the state realize that as well.

PH: Including Republican Kansans?

AU: Absolutely. I mean, we had… I can't… I don't know what the final total is. And I think there's still some advance ballots coming in. But, yes, I think Republicans realize that as well. And all of us collectively struck down radicalization in our state last night.

PH: I ask that because, of course, you know, Kansas is a conservative state. It is, right? It voted big time for… for Donald Trump, I think, 15 point margin in 2020, right?

AU: Sure.

PH: And yet, you know… and yet, last night, what does that say to you that quite clearly conservatives -- Republicans -- were coming down on your side here?

AU: Well, actually, I'm going to have to argue on that one a little bit. I don't consider us a boldly red conservative state. You know, the women's voting rights activism began in Kansas. We're the John Brown state. We're bleeding Kansas. We joined the union, baby. I don't think we're as conservative as people think. And we've won three out of the last five governor's races held in the nonpresidential cycle. So, I don't think we're nearly as conservative as people give us credit for. And I think last night shows that as well.

PH: Interesting. Indeed it does. And the turnout was also really high.

AU: Spectacular.

PH: Wasn't it? Spectacular, yeah. What do you… what do you read into that?

AU: You know, I think that just shows that people really recognized how important this vote was. I think people really understood what was at stake. And I think that's just in large part due to the fantastic organizing we had this cycle.

PH: I'm going to draw politics into it again for just a moment. You know, because the midterms are coming up. And I think people when the Supreme Court decision came down a little while ago, everybody, you know, wondered what impact that would have on voter turnout, on how people would vote come November, the degree to which it would be an issue given the economy and inflation and other factors. What do you think about all of that?

AU: I think that this is a strong voting issue for Kansas. I mean, I think this gets people out to the polls. And so, I think there are going to be a lot of politicians across Kansas going forward making this a part of their platform for once.

PH: I stood in front of the Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C., the day Roe v Wade was overturned. There was a massive crowd in front, angry with a message to the Supreme Court. What message do you hope last night's vote in Kansas sends to the Supreme Court?

AU: I think last night's main takeaway is that Kansas is not something to be messed with. And I think women across the United States are not something to be messed with. And take our freedom, you know, we're going to take our anger to the… to the polls. So, they should be scared. I think people running on a pro-life platforms should be really afraid right now.

PH: Allie, thank you so much for your time today.

AU: All right. Thank you so much.

PH: Bye-bye.

AU: Bye-bye.

STS: That was Allie Utley, vice president of the Kansas Young Democrats, in Prairie Village, Kansas.

[ambient]

Beirut Explosion Family

Guest: Paul Naggaer

TS: People in Beirut were out on the streets today. They were mourning the more than 200 people killed by the explosion in the city's port two years ago this week. But also venting their anger at Lebanon's government and what many people see as a response to the devastating event. On August 4th, 2020, a ship in the city's port filled with a load of ammonium nitrate blew up... creating one of the biggest non-nuclear explosions ever recorded. The ammonium nitrate had been in the port since 2013, was stored improperly, and it later emerged that officials had been aware of the problem for years. Many in the streets today held up photographs. One of them was of Alexandra Naggear. At three years old, she was the youngest person to die that day. Paul Naggear is Alexandra's father. We reached him in Beirut.

PH: Paul, first of all, I know it's been two years, but I want to say I'm sorry for the loss of your daughter. I wonder, what are you remembering about her today?

PAUL NAGGEAR: It's as… what we remember every day. She's a fantastic child. That was… you know, filled our life with joy, playfulness, love. We miss her everyday. And there is no day that is any different than the other. And actually, it doesn't really get better.

PH: What is your most vivid memory of that terrible day two years ago?

PN: Probably the moment we where… where Tracy and I had to separate. We were on the street where we lived, which is like less than a kilometre from the… from the epicentre of the blasts. It was complete chaos, as you can imagine, a sci-fi movie, total destruction. At some point, because Tracy had three broken ribs and three broken vertebrae. She had a very big hit on the… on the face. One of her lungs was… was detached as well. So she was in a very, very bad shape. But still, she managed to walk, but she reached a point where she couldn't advance anymore. And this point where we had to separate when I saw her. And Alexandra was in my arms; she wasn't doing well at all. Her state started worsening. And the most vivid image is we were in… so we had to go to the hospital on a scooter because there was no one to help. But when we were in the ambulance going to the final hospital where we landed, she was in a really, really bad shape. She was vomiting blood. This is something that no one wants to see his child go through.

PH: You and Tracy have been fighting for justice. What progress have you made?

PN: Look, so since the very beginning, Tracy and I were convinced that there was going to be no justice whatsoever in Lebanon. Because Lebanon is a role model in impunity and injustice, and I've seen it for the past decades, from political assassinations in total impunity to today, people living in extremely miserable conditions and no one to be accounted… accountable for it. So we had no hope in Lebanon. And we… from the very beginning, we started working on the international front. And things I'd say are progressive… are progressing averagely. The areas where we have most of the hope are the lawsuits that were filed against specific companies, targeting specific companies that took part in the… in the ammonium nitrate transaction. The ammonium nitrate is a chemical that… that exploded on this day. So, for instance, Tracy and I are participating in the lawsuit that engaged also three or four other parties against Savaro. This is in the United Kingdom. And Savaro was a company that owned the ammonium nitrate at the time of the blast. Things that are progressive… progressing, I'd say not so bad there. The U.K. court forced the company to disclose their ultimate beneficiary owner, and they have a deadline, I think, in September to do so. This is progressing okay, I'd say. And there's a second lawsuit in this… in the same… same strategy, I would say, in the U.S. that is taking place now in Texas. It was just filed a couple weeks back against also one of the companies. We put a lot of effort also on the… to obtain a fact-finding mission from the United Nations Human Rights Council. This needs to be adopted through a resolution from this council, and we've been pushing that for the past four or five sessions. Unfortunately, what's… the state that we've reached is that at the latest convention, most of the states were going for it, but France did not give the green light. And France is seen as a bit of the chaperon to Lebanon. And this was… this was put forth by Human Rights Watch, which is an international human rights association with a lot of notoriety. It was taken also by different media worldwide, such as Le Monde. And unfortunately, this is the case. So France is not helping. And this is where we are now.

PH: You sound frustrated and angry.

PN: [scoff] Well, it's August 3rd. My daughter passed on the 7th. Tomorrow is the remembrance of the worst day in our life. After two years, we still have nothing. Paul, we have to continue our lives. But frankly speaking, it's… it's extremely hard. It's… I'm not going to say that… you feel like you're… you're dying every day because you're not progressing, and you… and there's no… no accountability. Can you imagine? Two years later, after what we lost, we lost our daughter, we lost our lives, we lost… our home was completely destroyed. From one second to another, your life changed completely. So, it's, yeah, a lot of anger. This is what injustice brings?

PH: What would justice in Lebanon look like for you and Tracy?

PN: Well, as it would be in Canada or any normal country, right? You find the truth. People who are responsible are held accountable. As in any country. You know, this… this question that you ask me, you wouldn't ask it to any other country in the world, probably. Maybe with a few exceptions. You wouldn't ask it to anyone in Canada because justice is a basic human right. And Lebanon is not a state where law is present. And justice is not a given.

PH: Do you hold any hope that the Lebanese government is even capable of delivering justice or accountability?

PN: It's not a question of the executive power today that is in there. These are pure puppets. From 2013 and 2020, they were all somewhat, you know, responsible or had positions of responsibilities in the… whether the Executive, or the Port Authority, or the Customs. You know, all of the stakeholders in this affair. And they didn't do nothing. They didn't do anything about it. So they are all, you know, responsible for what happened. And given that we don't have even a independent judiciary, there is no lawful independence of the judiciary in Lebanon. So a criminal will not incriminate himself. So we have no hope whatsoever.

PH: Paul, thank you. And good luck in seeking justice. And if… if it's possible, finding closure. I appreciate your time today.

PN: Thanks, Paul, for allowing us to. And keeping our, you know, our cause alive and spreading the message.

TS: Paul Naggear is the father of Alexandra Neggear. She was the youngest victim of the Beirut explosion. We reached him in Beirut. And you can find that story on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[chillhop]

Alex Jones’ Phone

TS: Lawyers gave their closing arguments today in the Alex Jones defamation case, where a jury will decide the appropriate penalty for years of his broadcasts of misinformation about the Sandy Hook school shooting. At issue throughout the trial were communications Mr. Jones might have had with his team about Sandy Hook -- and whether he was holding back any texts or emails that should have been entered into evidence. He said he was not. A lawyer for the parents of a child murdered at Sandy Hook challenged that claim with some surprising new information during his cross-examination of Mr. Jones.

[sc]

MARK BRANKSTON: Mr. Jones, did you know that 12 days ago, 12 days ago, your attorneys messed up and sent me an entire digital copy of your entire cell phone, with every text message you've sent for the past two years? And when informed, did not take any steps to identify it as privileged or protected in any way. And as of two days ago, it fell free and clear into my possession. And that is how I know you lied to me when you said you didn't have text messages about Sandy Hook. Did you know that?

ALEX JONES: I… see, I told you the truth. This is your Perry Mason moment. I gave them my phone. And then…

JUDGE MAYA GUERRA GAMBLE: Mr. Jones, you need to answer the question.

AJ: No, I --

MB: Did you know this happened?

AJ: No, I don't know this happened. But, I mean, I told you I gave my phone over.

JMGG: Just answer the question.

MB: You said… you said in your deposition you searched your phone. You said you pulled down the text, did the search function for Sandy Hook. That's what you said, Mr. Jones, correct?

AJ: And I had several… several different phones with this number, but I did… yeah, of course. I mean, that's why you got it.

MB: No, Mr. Jones, that's not why I got it.

AJ: My lawyers sent it to you, but I'm hiding it? Okay!

JMGG: Mr. Jones, please, just answer questions. There’s no question… Mr. Bankston, also only ask questions.

MB: Sure. Mr. Jones, in discovery, you were asked, do you have Sandy Hook text messages on your phone? And you said no, correct? You said that under oath, Mr, Jones, didn’t you?

AJ: I was mistaken. I was mistaken. But you got the messages right there.

MB: You know what perjury is, right? I just want to make sure you know before we go any further. You know what it is?

AJ: Yes, I do. I mean, I'm not a tech guy. I told you, I gave in my testimony the phone to the lawyers before or whatever. And so, you've got my phone. But we didn't give it to you.

MB: No, Mr. Jones, one more time. And please remember, if you need to assert the Fifth Amendment, you can. I need you to know that you can do that. But you testified under oath previously that you personally searched your phone for the phrase Sandy Hook and there were no messages. You said that under oath.

AJ: Yes.

MB: And you lied when you said it.

AJ: No, I did not lie.

[/sc]

TS: That was Alex Jones under questioning from lawyer Mark Brankston, who represents Neil Heslin and Scarlett Lewis, the parents of Jesse Lewis.

[ambient]

Ocean Floor Holes Mystery

Guest: Michael Veccione

TS: Scientists spend a lot of time clarifying things they kind of already know. Confirming or rejecting long-running hypotheses. That kind of thing. But every so often, they stumble into something that makes even the experts go... huh? That was more or less how Michael Veccione reacted when he got a look at several rows of holes on the floor of the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Portugal. They're around five to seven feet long. And to some eyes, they're straight enough to suggest something intelligent might have put them there. Mr. Veccione is a deep-sea biologist with the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. He was part of the expedition that first saw the mysterious holes. We reached him in Solomons, Maryland.

PH: Mike, given what you do for a living, I'm guessing you must have seen a lot of strange stuff at the bottom of the ocean. Where does this rank for you?

MICHAEL VECCIONE: Well, it ranks right up there as a mystery. So I work on deep-sea cephalopods mostly. But when we were exploring the mid-ocean ridge, we came across these holes in the bottom and I had no idea what they were. [chuckle] And I've seen a lot of stuff down there. And nobody I talked to knew what they were. So the mystery has just increased over the years since we first saw them.

PH: What went through your mind when you saw them for the first time?

MV: Well, I'm not sure I could say that on your radio. [PH chuckles] Basically, what the hell is that?!

PH: Can you describe what it looks like? What… what… what do you see when you're looking at it?

MV: You know, what you see is a very long line of holes that are either poked into the bottom or pushed up from underneath. They're… the freshest looking ones or elongated. So there is a long dimension, and they're not as wide as they are long. But they're… they're all lined up so that their long dimension is parallel to the… the long row of the holes. And the space between each hole is just about equal to the length of each hole. So, it looks a little bit like a sewing machine has punched its way through the bottom.

PH: And how deep underwater are we talking?

MV: The ones we've seen have been from 2,000 to 2,500 metres. But similar things have been reported at 1,500 metres. So basically, we're talking about a mile to a mile and a half or a little bit more than that deep in the… in the water.

PH: That's very deep, correct? Like, that's… that's way down there, right?

MV: It is. Yeah, the people that work on the deep sea tend to define it as deeper than 200 metres or, you know, 660 feet or so. So this is much deeper than that. This is actually deeper than sunlight penetrates into the water. So this is in the area where there's no penetration of sunlight at all, the really deep sea.

PH: What does it tell you that they're in a row? And that the holes seem to be spaced out kind of evenly? What kind of clue is that?

MV: Oh, [chuckling] what a good question. I don't know what that tells us, to be honest. It's being interpreted by different people in many different ways. To me… well, I'll go ahead and tell you what I think is happening, even though I don't have any actual proof of it. I think what's happening is that there's an animal burrowing in the sediment under the surface of the sediment and periodically punching chimneys up to where the water is, maybe to get clean water circulating through its burrow, and it does it on... on a regular basis. But other people have interpreted it differently. One person suggests that some type of organism may have laid eggs in the bottom periodically. And what we're seeing is holes from when the eggs hatched out. It's… other people have suggested that maybe it was caused by a manmade object, sort of pogo sticking along the bottom. So there's a lot of different interpretations, and we don't have any evidence really to support one over the other.

PH: If it's an animal, is it safe to say that it would be some kind of creature that no human has ever seen before? This is something as yet unknown and undiscovered?

MV: Again, because it's a mystery, we can't even see that very well. There's been a lot of sampling of deep-sea animals, and it's possible that this is something that has been caught in one of the… the dredge type of samplers, or there are things that they send down to the bottom that punch a hole in the bottom and bring sediment back up. It's possible that that animal has been collected before. But again, we don't know. [chuckling] We don't… we don't know what's making it. So I can't really answer that.

PH: You sound genuinely baffled.

MV: At this point, I am. You know, one thing I was hoping when we… when we found them in the most recent expedition and then it became… you know, it really blew up on public media, basically, was that I would get some feedback from somebody who had investigated this, and I just didn't know about it. But, you know, it's been weeks now, and all I'm getting is guesses from people and nothing solid. So, I'm thinking that this truly is something that nobody knows the answer to.

PH: What's the craziest, most far-out theory that you've heard about what it might be?

MV: Oh, some of them are pretty far-out. I've heard that maybe it's creatures that live at the centre of the earth, and they… they're drilling upward. I've heard that it's secret operations by the Russians that have done it. And, of course, there's… there's all kinds of alien explanations for it. I mentioned the… the fact that some of my colleagues suggested that it was a piece of human-made gear that was pogo sticking along the bottom, which I think I can argue pretty strongly against. But there's also a lot of really good ideas, and it's a question of finding some kind of evidence that indicates support for one over any of the others. [chuckle] And right now, we don't have that support.

PH: [chuckle] I got to say, I love the mystery of it. And I love that you're fascinated by it and that we don't have answers. I guess we'll find out one day. But who knows when?

MV: I don't know when.

PH: [chuckle] Well… well, keep… I was gonna say keep looking, but keep diving. Pleasure talking with you, Mike. I appreciate your time.

MV: And I appreciate your interest.

PH: Bye-bye.

MV: All right. Bye.

TS: Michael Veccione is a deep-sea biologist with the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. We reached him in Solomons, Maryland. You can find more about this on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[chillhop]

Part 2: Vin Scully Obit, Beagle Rescue

Vin Scully Obit

Guest: Jon Weisman

TS: Vin Scully was not just a successful announcer. He was sometimes called the Babe Ruth of sports broadcasting. He called decades worth of baseball games and was such a legend in the business that to many fans, his voice just SOUNDED like baseball. Vin Scully died last night at the age of 94. It's more or less impossible to pick just one major baseball moment that he helped deliver to audiences, but many fans were sharing this one today. From the 1988 World Series, when the injured star Kirk Gibson came to the plate with a chance to win it for the LA Dodgers.

[sc]

[baseball pump-up music]

VIN SCULLY: All year long, they looked to him to light the fire. And all year long, he answered the demands until he was physically unable to start tonight. With two bad legs, the bad left hamstring and the swollen right knee. And with two out, you talk about a roll of the dice. This is it. If he hits the ball on the ground, I would imagine he would be running 50 per cent to first base. So the Dodgers are trying to catch lightning right now. Sax waiting on deck. But the game right now is at the plate.

[the crack of a ball meeting a bat and fans cheering]

VS: High flyball into right field. She is… GONE!!!!

[cheering and clapping]

VS: In a year that has been so improbable, the impossible has happened.

[/sc]

TS: That was Vin Scully's call of Kirk Gibson's home run in the 1988 World Series. Jon Weisman is a writer, and he briefly worked for Mr. Scully's home team, the Dodgers. We reached him in Los Angeles.

PH: Jon, you've worked for the Dodgers. You've written about the Dodgers for a lot of your life. What made Vin Scully so special for you personally?

JON WEISMAN: Well, I mean, it dates back almost 50 years. It was sort of an organic growth of him being the hometown broadcaster of the team I grew up watching. But very quickly, it turned into a recognition that he was at the pinnacle of his profession, and just his overall personality and demeanour and artfulness and skill was just you couldn't help but be enraptured by it.

PH: What was it like trying to write an obit for him? How do you sum up the life of Vin Scully?

JW: I didn't try. [laughing] I… I had written so much about him. I literally had written… you know, you prepare obituaries in the business, in journalism, often years ahead of time. And so, I had written an obituary for him years ago. I had written about… chapters about him in various publications, in one of my books. And I wrote last night, when I got the news of his passing, I just wrote about my feelings mostly. And I… you know, I could cite chapter and verse about his life of 94 years, honestly. I could… from his toddler years to last week, basically. And it… I didn't think, honestly, it was the place for me to do a play-by-play of his life. I just… you know, Vin ultimately left me with certain feelings throughout his life and throughout my life. And I just wanted to kind of articulate what my feelings were at the end.

PH: What made him such a powerful influence on your life?

JW: Something came through with his demeanour. There's kind of a kindness to him on the air. And he wasn't hyper-focused on baseball. He was employed as a baseball announcer. And he did… he announced… he covered the games. I mean, you… he left no detail unspoken, but he also weaved in so many other things. And it coincided with me sort of having a literary bent as I was growing up. And everything he was was something I wanted to be. I knew I couldn't be everything he was [chuckle], obviously, but he was definitely a role model for me on multiple levels.

PH: You know, every time I heard him do play-by-play, I always felt he was… you know, you know that he's talking to millions of people, but it always felt as if he was just talking to you, the individual, you know? It was… he had a… he had a real way of connecting with people, you know? And you talk about play-by-play, I must have watched the Kirk Gibson [chuckle], you know, call, I don't know, 11,000 times. What are your favourite moments out of Vin Scully commentary?

JW: Well, obviously, that's… I think that has to be at the top. But there are other ones. He… there was a game in 1983… [chuckle] I mean, I know this is almost 40 years ago, where the Dodgers had been trailing in the pennant race, and they had a big game against Atlanta, and they scored four runs in the bottom of the ninth to win the game. And the winning run was brought in by a rookie, R.J. Reynolds, who… it was something like his 10th Major League game, laid down a squeeze bunt to get the run in -- a perfect bunt. And Vinny goes, the squeeze! And here comes the run. And he does it with such… [PH chuckles] I don't even know how to describe it. Joy and surprise and passion for just what was happening. He wasn't a home… homer announcer. He was famously praiseworthy of other teams and willing to criticize the Dodgers when they warranted it. But he loved baseball, and he was… whether it was the Dodgers or whether it was, you know, the 1986 World Series between…. with the Bill Buckner play, the excitement of the game captured him. And he was a true baseball fan. I don't want to misspeak on the fact that even though he weaved in this other stuff, he wasn't a baseball fan. He truly was.

PH: You know, I just watched the Buckner clip. I think he called a dribbler from Mookie Wilson through Bill Buckner's legs. And like with the Kirk Gibson, and like with the Hank Aaron call, you know, with Buckner, I timed it. It was nearly after the hit -- or the error -- there was nearly two minutes where he wasn't talking at all and just let the pictures play and let the sound go. And I thought that was genius, you know? Like, he's known for play-by-play, but it's those breaks where he isn't talking that is part of what made him so great, you know?

JW: He wouldn't call it genius, though. I mean, I totally agree with you. But he would call it just that's what the moment called for. I don't think he would have said… I mean, he certainly wouldn't have said there was any thought to it, I don't think. Other than the fact, like, it’s sort of an awareness that he didn't… not only he didn't need to speak, but he probably shouldn't speak. I think the thing is, most every other broadcaster would just feel the need to speak. It would be an insecurity about the dead air, and maybe some ego, maybe not. Vin was egoless. And so, he had no… there was no internal issue for him to… to be silent at all.

PH: You ever cross paths with him?

JW: Yeah. I mean, I… I had interviewed him before I started working for the Dodgers. And then once I was in the Dodgers, I wasn't in his inner circle or anything, of course. But, you know, I ran editorial for the Dodgers, so I was near the press box where I worked. And so, yeah, we would cross paths and occasionally chat. [chuckling] I still have a notepad piece of paper that someone put on my desk that says Vin called for you. You know, it was a phone message, and I kept it forever. I have kept it forever. Just that, you know? And he mentioned my name on the air once. It was probably the pinnacle of my career. [both laugh]

PH: What is… what… what did you learn from him? What did we all learn from him?

JW: You can be kind in this world. You can be both kind and successful. They're not contradictory. In fact, you should be kind because they're not contradictory. I mean, I could go on forever about the lessons that we can learn from him, but I think that stands out is that he was… he understood life more than he would admit to, I think. He just had an innate sense of it.

PH: What a lesson, what a legacy. Thank you, Jon.

JW: Oh, thank you for the opportunity to talk about him.

PH: Bye-bye.

JW: Bye.

TS: Jon Weisman is a writer and editor who formerly worked for the LA Dodgers. We reached him in Los Angeles.

[Spanish guitar]

Beagle Rescue

Guest: Rachel Hahn

TS: No one wants to see a dog mistreated. One is bad enough. So just try to wrap your head around this: 4,000 hungry, sick and abused beagles in Virginia have been rescued. U.S. authorities investigating the Envigo breeding and research facility found multiple violations. Now, the mistreated dogs are being released to shelters and rescue centres throughout the United States, where they will hopefully find new homes. Rachel Hahn works with the Wisconsin Humane Society, which received some of the first beagles. We reached her in Milwaukee.

PH: Ms. Hahn, when you first got to meet one of these rescued beagles, what were they like?

RACHEL HAHN: Yes. So, the moms -- the Beagle moms -- were definitely a little bit more quiet, a little bit more reserved than the puppies. The moms had clearly been in the facility a little bit longer than their puppies. But honestly, the whole group, considering what they've been through, both moms and puppies, were just very excited to see me. Wagging tail, just excited to see all of us. And you could tell that there was just this feeling like they knew that they were safe.

PH: I can kind of picture that. [both chuckle] What condition were they in?

RH: So, some of them definitely had some medical attention that was needed, from some dental attention to some fur or skin and coat attention that was needed. I would say that more than anything, some of their behaviour with just being a little bit more shut down or a little bit more fearful was more evident than anything. But they have needed some medical attention.

PH: Well, what were they going through? How were they being treated before they were rescued?

RH: So, the Humane Society of the United States is who we've been working with, and we're so happy to help them with this effort. They're coordinating the removal of approximately 4,000 beagles that were housed at an Envigo RMS LLC facility in Cumberland, Virginia. And that facility bred dogs to be sold for laboratories for animal experimentation. So that transfer is going to continue to take place over stages over the next few weeks. And the transfer has come as a result of a lawsuit that was filed against Envigo by the Department of Justice in May that alleged Animal Welfare Act violations at the facility. So, part of that was repeated federal inspections that resulted in dozens of violations, including findings that some dogs had been euthanized without first receiving anesthesia, that dogs had received inadequate veterinary care, insufficient food, and that they were living in unsanitary conditions.

PH: Four thousand of them.

RH: Four thousand.

PH: How… how does… how did that happen? Was nobody overseeing what was going on?

PH: You know, that's a great question. You know, there are many federal regulations on this. And I think that there was an ongoing investigation certainly happening there. But, you know, this is how… how it happened. Unfortunately, it does seem like things got out of hand. And we're just so grateful that we can be a small part in stepping into support.

PH: I got to say that I didn't even know that dogs were still being used for medical research. I mean, obviously, that's still a thing. This was authorized by the federal government in the U.S. You know, it's a necessary, valuable thing, I guess, is the argument. The issue here is treatment. Is that right?

RH: That's correct. So, it is treatment. And, you know, and our position statement on it really is that we realize that it can be important to improving human and animal health, meaning medical testing can be. But we believe all alternatives to animal testing should be explored and used wherever possible. And no matter how you feel about testing on animals, if you agree or don't, we do believe any animal testing must prioritize humane treatment and respect for animals. And really, that's what… what came to be in this case is a recognition that they were not prioritizing or following humane treatment and respect for those animals.

PH: And so now we have these 4,000 beagles making headlines all over the place. How has the community responded?

RH: You know, first, the whole journey of how we got here, we sent two of our transport volunteers. So we had these wonderful volunteers step up in our community who made a 26-hour round trip drive out to Virginia to pick up and transport nine adult beagle mothers and 53 puppies back to us here in Wisconsin. And when they arrived back, it was in the middle of a thunderstorm. And they were greeted by a variety of animal care staff who were here to support volunteer drivers with unloading that transport van. Every crate that came to us, you could finally see that they… they really felt safe. And as staff perform those health checks, you know, our excited foster parents eagerly awaited to pick up their new foster companions. And our callout to our foster parents in the days ahead of our transfer actually generated interest from over 100 foster parents in our network, which is just huge. And the night the beagles arrived, in less than two hours, all 62 beagles we received were placed within loving foster families. So, we could not be more grateful for the support from our incredible foster network. That's really what has guided us through that and been able to support with this transfer.

PH: Sixty-two is a big number, but so is 4,000. Who's taking care of the rest of them? How is that working?

RH: So many other shelters across the United States did receive some of the beagle puppies and their moms or other beagles at the facility. So there was an outpouring of support for the… for HSUS. So, that's been wonderful to see just the number of shelters stepping up to support. So, at this time, that's kind of where we've left it is that there may be some more who need some support. And… and really, that support for HSUS, they've been reaching out looking for that additional support as needed for any that are remaining in care.

PH: I'm still picturing these beagles with their little tails wagging [chuckling] as they arrive at your place. There are the physical issues for them, but I imagine also psychological issues. What… what are your concerns for the health of these dogs long term?

RH: So long term, you know, what's really incredible has just been to see how they've really started to enjoy becoming a companion animal. We've started to see that in their foster homes. There's so many firsts that they get to experience, from walking in the grass, to playing with toys, to sleeping in comfy fleece beds. These are things they never had before, and it's just been a joy to watch those transformations happen, especially for the adult mothers who lived in cages their entire lives. And they are coming out of their shell slowly, they're showing their personalities and their being their best beagle selves, which is just truly a pleasure to see. It’s been wonderful getting to see them just become more comfortable.

PH: I can hear the love in your voice. How did you feel when you see those tails wag, and you get a sense that they feel they're in a better place?

RH: There's no feeling better. You know, it's just been such a pleasure to be a small part of the journey for them and an even greater privilege to be a part of the full team that really made that happen. So just a lot of joy, a lot of pride for those that I work with on this effort.

PH: Well, thank you for your good work, Rachel. It’s been a pleasure speaking with you.

RH: Thank you so much for having me.

PH: Bye-bye.

TS: That was Rachel Hahn of the Wisconsin Humane Society. She was in Milwaukee.

[chilhop]

FOA: Clayton Ruby Obit

TS: "A dedicated advocate for human rights, a champion of the underdog, and a loving friend." That's just one of the many tributes being shared online for Clayton Ruby today. The Canadian civil rights lawyer died yesterday. He was 80. Throughout his long career, Mr. Ruby sought to bend and shape the law to better serve the underserved. Whether fighting for women's access to abortion, advocating for the rights of prisoners, or calling out racial profiling and police brutality -- Mr. Ruby's moral compass often led him to take on precedent-setting cases. It also made him a regular on As It Happens.

[sc]

CLAYTON RUBY: There's two aspects that troubled me. First of all, until about a year and a half ago, the Toronto Force had a sterling reputation for this kind of domestic dispute and drunken brawl situation that arises so often in these deaths. And that was at tremendous risk to themselves. The police officers would not fire their guns. They would instead subdue the person involved and talk it out quietly. Often taking time. This requires great patience, but they do it. And about a year and a half ago, that all changed. In a couple of situations, officers shot the person involved, and the police force backed them up; the chief backed them up. And that backup operation has gone on so thoroughly that it has obviously filtered down to the men of the force that there's no point in risking your life, which is a pain to do after all, in order to subdue these people. It's much more convenient to shoot them and get backed up later on by the commission by the chief. The public doesn't seem to have any outcry, and there's no difficulty. I think there's a problem that's got to be solved by a new direction being set by the chief of police. The tolerance for police shootings has got to stop. It's just not healthy for the citizenry of our city. The second aspect that bothers me is this. Overwhelmingly, the people involved as victims in these shootings tend to be young and tend to be Black, minority groups. And that, I think, is because to an overwhelmingly white police force, white older police force, you've got a certain amount of threat perceived from the young and from the Black and from the disadvantaged. And so, they're more frightened, and they're more likely to shoot those kind of persons. And that's a long-term problem that can only be solved by having more people from minorities on the force. Of course, the commission and the chief don't want that because, in order to do that, they have to relax the height and weight requirements. They're unwilling to do that. The simple fact is that man at any height, and we can use a gun. And on the statistics, a man of any height and weight can wisely refrain from using it.

MICHAEL ENRIGHT: What do you think caused this change in psychology? Because we always thought that the gun was the last resort used by the police.

CR: That still remains the theory. But you've got to remember, there's always two messages coming from the police department. One is what's written in the regulations, and that's that the gun is of last resort. And another unwritten rule it's developing is, well, if you go ahead and use it in the situation where sober judgement would indicate more risk to the officer and less killing, then we're going to back you up, and you won't be in trouble. I think there's got to be more restraint. More caution instilled in the force in situations where guns are involved. What is coming across here is a message: shoot first and worry about it later. Don't risk yourself. Whereas our force has always before had a tremendous respect from the community for putting themselves at risk rather than risking the community itself. And the principal lesson that psychology has given us is that time is the factor that works best. It may take hours. It may take days. But rather than kill a man and run the risk of further life lost to everyone, you simply wait these guys out. Put them in a situation where they have a chance to think. To consider their family and their other circumstances, and that works. That's a pattern that's been successful whenever they've had these problems. The pattern that I don't like is the pattern of a quick shot.

ME: There will be an inquest, Mr. Ruby. Do you think anything will come of it?

CR: Inquests are totally inappropriate form. They're not fair. They're not presided over by a legally-trained officer. They're presided over by a lay coroner, usually.

ME: What would you suggest in his place?

CR: What is needed is a system of complaints made against the police.

ME: You mean a citizen review board?

CR: Yeah. That involves the people where there is impartiality seen. We don't have that in Ontario. What we've got is a rigged shop where the police investigate their own and make their own judgments. But if we had a real impartial tribunal, that would be a suitable place to have these matters aired and disposed of. And the public could be confident that a real judgment was being made, impartial and independent of the police.

[/sc]

TS: From 1979, former host Michael Enright speaking with Clayton Ruby. The Canadian civil rights lawyer died yesterday. He was 80.

[sombre instrumental]

Canadian Death Race Winner

TS: Lindsey Klassen can add another piece of hardware to her long list of accomplishments. Last year, the ultra-runner almost died after sustaining a massive chest injury during a bike crash. Six months later, she ran the Boston Marathon. And this past weekend, she won the aptly-named Canadian Death Race. The death race winds its way through Alberta's Rocky Mountains. There are three mountain summits, one river crossing and a whole lot of elevation change over 125 kilometres. Ms. Klassen won the women's solo race in sixteen and a half hours. She told CBC Manitoba, her home province, what it was like to cross the finish line.

[sc]

LINDSEY KLASSEN: It's just been an incredible experience. And I've had such a great build-up to this race following my accident, and I just couldn't be more happy and just glad to be where I'm at these days.

MARCY MARKUSA:” What was the competition like? What was the toughest part? I mentioned a whole bunch of things that to me [LK chuckles] all sounded tough. So for you, what was the toughest part?

LK: The fourth leg, which is what they call “Mount Camel Assault”, was definitely pretty brutal. It was a massive vertical climb and then a massive vertical descent. So, that was… that was challenging. It was over about 18 or 19 miles, with over, I think 5,000 feet of elevation during… during that segment. Legs are a little bit sore, going to lose a few toenails, but overall, body is feeling pretty recovered, only being two or three days out now. I think I was racing in second for most of the race. And then, it wasn't until the last six miles that I passed the girl who was running in first for the entire time. So, I ran a scared race the last six miles to the finish [chuckle] because I didn't know if she was going to catch up to me or not.

[/sc]

TS: That was Lindsey Klassen speaking with Marcy Markusa host of Winnipeg's Information Radio.

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

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

August 3, 2022 Episode Transcript

More Stories Like This