Milestone Decisions

 In Legal News

Ximena Renaerts

Together with my co-counsel Tom Berger, we achieved a record infant settlement on behalf of Ximena Renaerts, who suffered catastrophic injuries from neglect after she was born alive and after she had already survived an abortion. While there have been other survivors, including Gianna Jensen, Melissa Ohden, Claire Culwell, Josian Presley and Nik Hoot, once a child is born alive in Canada, that child then meets the definition of human being as set out in the Criminal Code, and is legally recognized as a person with constitutional rights. Every child born alive is vested with legal rights. Unfortunately, abortion survivors who are born alive after an attempt on their life are neglected by choice, and abandoned to die by medical staff. If a newborn child does survive an abortion, that child often suffers crippling or catastrophic injuries, for which hospital staff and others may be found liable in both criminal and tort law. Here is a link to a news story about Ximena, and the decision of the BC government not to prosecute those responsible for Ximena’s injuries.

See: https://www.consciencelaws.org/background/procedures/abortion002.aspx

Julie Baumer

With the able assistance of Carl Marlinga and Heather Kirkwood, and supported by a team of students from the Ave Maria School of Law, after six years in jail, an innocent Julie Baumer won her chance at a new trial after being wrongfully convicted of child abuse in a Michigan State court. Doctors failed to diagnose a stroke suffered by a child and erred by claiming that shaking baby syndrome caused the child devastating injuries. Even when confronted with new evidence from some of the world’s leading experts, the Michigan doctors stubbornly refused to change their minds. Julie Baumer was acquitted by a jury at her retrial. Heather Kirkwood continues to fight against wrongful convictions based on bad science and Carl Marlinga became a judge. All the legal expenses for this case absorbed by her defense team, a cost of over $200,000 USD. The Michigan Innocence Clinic and a faculty advisor assisted at the new trial. Students play acted, by reading in the transcripts of the medical experts I examined at the previous proceeding. The Criminal Defense Association of Michigan only honored the Innocence Clinic for the entire team’s work to free Julie Baumer.

See: https://www.macombdaily.com/new-trial-in-baby-abuse/article_b8d73c63-6ad0-5dc3-a389-6a20d3bf0995.html

William Whatcott

A class action suit of $104 million dollars was launched against William Whatcott for his participation and activities in a Toronto pride parade. A Christian activist, William Whatcott distributed leaflets warning of adverse health effects of an LGBTQ lifestyle, and called for repentance and invited a pathway to eternal salvation. He did this at a public political event that had the political support of various political parties, and in particular, the Liberal Parties of Canada and Ontario. The plaintiffs included a subclass, the 600 plus  members of the Liberal parties that marched in the Parade, including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Premier Wynne. With the skilled assistance of John Findlay, the class action was defeated before it even got to trial. Justice Perrell dismissed the claims for defamation, emotional distress and conspiracy made by the class, and invited individual claims to proceed, on the understanding that they would be joined together. He also ordered William Whatcott to disclose the identities of his fellow activists. Both sides appealed the decision on various grounds, the appeals were abandoned, and no individual plaintiffs came forward. About a month after the civil case was lost, the Liberal Attorney General of Ontario began criminal proceedings against William Whatcott on the same matter, alleging the crime of hate speech. That case is ongoing.

See: https://nationalpost.com/opinion/christie-blatchford-104m-lawsuit-against-anti-gay-activist-a-political-witch-hunt-lawyers-say

William Whatcott lost an important case before the BC Human Rights Tribunal ruled that political speech can constitute hate speech and that truth is not to defense to what the Tribunal finds as hate speech. This case is under appeal.

See: https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bchrt/doc/2019/2019bchrt58/2019bchrt58.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQANd2hhdGNvdHQgb2dlcgAAAAAB&resultIndex=1

The American press showed great interest in the case:

See: https://www.getreligion.org/getreligion/2019/3/31/no-first-amendment-in-canada-referring-to-trans-women-as-men-is-hate-speech

And see: https://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen3/18d/Whatcott-BC-Tribunal/lugosi-reply.html

Leave a Comment