Ottawa Police Detective Helen Grus Not Allowed Any Defense Witnesses
Dr. Eric Payne, Dr. James Thorpe, Dr. Gregory Chan, Ottawa Police S/Sgt (retired) Peter Danyluk, Lawyer Shawn Buckley – Ottawa Police Tribunal Rejects Every Defense Witness!
Hearing Officer Chris Renwick refuses to allow testimony from any of the five defense witnesses proposed by Detective Grus’s legal team.
Ottawa Police Detective Helen Grus is charged with ‘Discreditable Conduct’ under the Ontario Police Services Act for conducting “unauthorized” investigations into the sudden deaths of nine infants.
“Why even pretend to have this sham trial? The verdict’s already been decided. The fix is in.”
(Ottawa Police Staff Sergeant ‘B’ commenting to journalist Donald Best)
Detective Grus was investigating any potential connection between the vaccination status of the mothers and the sudden deaths of breastfeeding babies. Ottawa Police shut down her investigation, ordered her to stop, and charged her with an internal disciplinary charge.
In a decision dated November 26, 2023, Hearing Officer Renwick rejected all five defense expert witnesses – three medical doctors, a retired Ottawa Police Staff Sergeant, and a Regulatory lawyer.
Let me paraphrase the legalese of Renwick’s decision with the truth…
Trials Officer Supt (Retired) Chris Renwick
Renwick essentially found that he doesn’t require the testimony of the witnesses as they are biased and will present evidence in favour of Detective Grus.
Oh… he says it a little differently but the core of his decision is evident to anyone with any sense of justice.
For instance, Dr. James Thorpe had expressed an opinion that “the Ottawa Police Service should be investigated for their political prosecution of Detective Grus.”
So no testimony from Dr. James Thorpe.
“S/Sgt. Danyluk, in written response to a questionnaire, provides his respectful opinion that the disciplinary system is being used against Cst. Grus where leadership should have been applied and there was a failure in not investigating the media leak.”
So no testimony from retired Staff Sergeant Peter Danyluk – a recognized expert in police ethics.
Lawyer Shaun Buckley “was a moderator at the April 26, 2023 National Citizen’s Inquiry who put questions to a witness, former RCMP Corporal Daniel Bulford, on Cst. Grus’ actions and subsequent PSA charges – whereas Dr. Eric Payne and Dr. Gregory Chan were witnesses at the Inquiry.”
So no testimony from Shawn Buckley, Dr. Eric Payne, or Dr. Gregory Chan.
And there you have it folks…
The Ottawa Police Tribunal will not allow Detective Grus to call any defense witnesses.
Dr. Eric Payne, Paediatric Neurology – NOT ALLOWED
Dr. James Thorp, Obstetrics and Gynecology – NOT ALLOWED
Dr. Gregory Chan, Family Medicine – NOT ALLOWED
Ottawa Police Staff Sergeant (retired) Peter Danyluk – NOT ALLOWED
Lawyer Shawn Buckley. – NOT ALLOWED
A sham trial by a sham tribunal.
Ruling on Proposed Expert Witnesses for Defence
This is the November 26, 2023 ruling by Ottawa Police Hearing Officer Superintendent (retired) Chris Renwick.
Having attended every day of the Grus Hearing in August and October/November, 2023 – I can assure each of my readers that there is NO WAY that Hearing Officer Renwick wrote the attached Ruling. Not a snowball’s chance. Never happened.
Which raises the question… Do Ottawa Police Hearing Officers have independent legal counsel to assist in crafting their decisions? If not, the obvious writer of this decision is at best a lawyer employed by the Ottawa Police, and at worst the prosecutor herself.
Here is the Tribunal decision in .pdf format…
Grus Case Ruling on Proposed Expert Witnesses for Defence
Grus Expert Witness Decision scanned
The Memo Book Scandal
Hearing Officer Chris Renwick also won’t allow Detective Grus to examine her own handwritten memo book notes for the very date and event she is charged with. (I’ll be covering that part of the story in more detail later this week.)
Yet another example of “justice denied”.
Time the citizenry takes an active interest in such matters.
A modest proposal: amend all applicable legislation to require the office of Chief of Police, or, Commissioner of Police, to require an elected three party body to act as one person.
All decisions taken by the ‘Chief or Commissioner” must, by statute, be made available to the public on demand.
Remove the solicitor-client relationship from the equation altogether, permanently.
Donald am I wrong in assuming the sham hearing on finding against Det. Helen Grus will force this through to a higher court and eventually the Supreme Court of Canada?
I’m asking this because after attending several days of hearings in August and November it appeared to me that the case was a done deal before day one of hearings.
This leads me to believe it’s all intentional and possibly being used to bleed Helen dry of funds, in defending herself as her union failed to represent her or provide legal assistance.
Our legal system like our governement and “health care” are disastrously run and blatantly corrupt. It’s disgusting.
Your diligence in reporting on Helen’s case are crucial. Thank you for all your hard work and dedication.
You are so inspiring Donald Best! After all the hell you went through personally at the hands of this ‘system’, you bounce back stronger and more determined than ever, when other would simply lie down and give up.
All Tribunals are part of the UN’s Administrative Law scheme and all are shams that are intended to deprive Canadians of their day in a real court.
Pick any tribunal and you will see they are all just as unjust, biased and often corrupt and immoral and unethical.
Thanks for your kind words Grace. With so many important stories and causes right now, I’ve focused my resources on a few where I believe coverage will make a difference.
She is being made an example of for any other officers that may even think about not towing the line and following the narrative of their overlords.
I guess having an opinion on right & wrong is a “bias”. The whole “don’t wanna hear nuthin bad about the magic potion” business is just sickening.
.. I guess I won’t be testifying either 🙂
I am disgusted by this ruling disallowing the evidence of the defence’s 5 expert witnesses. The reason boils down to their alleged bias. That simply means they have a different opinion than what is presented by the prosecution. Is that not what trials are all about?
The heart of the entire matter rests on whether Detective Grus’s investigation had any reasonable foundation. To deny the presentation of evidence to that effect is a gross injustice.
I remember a time in police work when initiative like that shown by Constable Grus would have been awarded with a commendation.
This trial truly is a sham.
I noticed too that the trials officer referred to Grus as Constable Grus. It seems to me that prior to this, all the references I have seen have referred to her as Detective Grus.
Has she been demoted or is this a tactic of denigration by the trial officer.
This message submitted by a former MTP Constable.
The legal system is broken!
Thank you very much for your coverage of this “sham trial by a sham tribunal.” I wonder how people like Chris Renwick can live with themselves!