A few months ago, some readers of this web site might remember that we posted a live broadcast of a lawyer representing three doctors against the now fully captured, “College of Surgeons and Physicians of Ontario”.
The college made a link to the Zoom available but got so overwhelmed with requests for it that they put it on YouTube with strict instructions that no one should record or republish it yada yada wuzza wuzza.
Hopefully someone outside Ontario has it and will post it for the world to see how the three doctors had a slam-dunk case against the college, yet now today, this judgement came in from them.
In part:
THE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE PHYSICIANS
[7] Broadly speaking, the three physicians take issue with some of the public health measures relating to COVID-19 such as vaccination and treatment.
[9] The College alleges that Dr. Trozzi committed professional misconduct by making misleading, incorrect or inflammatory statements about vaccinations, treatments and public health measures concerning COVID-19 through his email and online communications about the pandemic.
[10] In Dr. Phillips’ case, the allegations of professional misconduct include making misleading, incorrect or inflammatory statements about vaccinations, treatments and public health measures for COVID-19; disclosing information from a College investigation, including posting such information online and failing to remove it when requested; and failing to cooperate with College investigations. The College alleges that he failed to maintain the standard of practice of the profession and engaged in disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional conduct in different aspects of his treatment of patients and public health reporting, that he engaged in unprofessional conduct and communications at his hospital workplace and also breached terms, conditions and limitations on his certificate of registration.
[11] The College alleges that Dr. Luchkiw committed professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with College investigations relating to her infection control practices, communications about COVID-19 and issuance of vaccine exemptions.
Then skipping forward a lot:
[36] Justice Morgan stated:
[1] The three Respondents in this set of Applications are physicians who believe that vaccinations are a misguided and ineffective way to address the ongoing health issues caused by COVID-19. Although the specifics of each of their cases differ somewhat, they are each under investigation by the Applicant for their conduct and practices in acting on this belief.
[2] None of the Respondents [is] prepared to cooperate in the usual way with the Applicant’s investigation. They are each of the view that the investigation and the disclosure and production requirements that accompany an investigation amount to an abuse of the regulator’s power….
[5] In the words of the formal Appointment of Investigator documentation, the inquiries were to examine each of the Respondents’ practices “including in relation to COVID-19 and [his or her] completion of medical exemptions for COVID-19 vaccinations and diagnostic testing”. For the Respondent, Patrick Brian Phillips, the Applicant had an additional concern regarding his use of online websites and social media to disseminate what the Applicant characterized as misleading health information about COVID-19, as well as his posting on social media, copies of what were supposed to be confidential communications from the Applicant. The Appointment of Investigator in respect of Dr. Phillips mandated the investigator to investigate his medical practice “including in relation to communications and conduct relating to the COVID-19 pandemic”.
…
[23] The record demonstrates through correspondence and other statements that the Respondents have no intent to provide the requested documents or to otherwise cooperate with the investigator. Their communications to the Applicant indicate that they are not prepared to respond to the matters that the investigator is investigating.
[29] The Respondents are all in continual breach of their obligations under the Code. They have put forward no reason for their refusal to comply with their obligations in this regard, except to reiterate their objection to vaccines. As indicated, what the investigator seeks is production of records; the investigation does not seek to compel vaccinations or any other specific medical treatment. Accordingly, the Respondents’ position is unresponsive to the investigator’s request and their argument about the efficacy or inefficacy of COVID vaccines is a non-sequitur.
Not being a lawyer or a doctor, or even having read this whole judgement, it sure looks on the surface that the deal is:
Doctors, who acted on their best medical judgement and attempted to dissuade people from taking an experimental and mostly untested new technology (possibly made by DoD as a military countermeasure and not actually developed by a drug company at all) are guilty of not doing what government and its agents, like the CPSO, tell them to do.
This means the official transformation of medicine from a science into a corporate practice where all practices are diktats from the top. Remember that old saying that we should all always get a second opinion? Doctors aren’t allowed to have opinions now. They have to follow instructions from government. And these doctors did not. And so they are guilty of something or other. Their patients who did not take the vaxx, are likely fine. We know now that they are less likely to catch Covid and certainly less likely to have a serious case and less likely to die of it than those who took lots of shots and certainly, infinitely less likely to suffer side effects and adverse reactions than those who took any number of shots.
So win-win for everyone who avoided the accursed Witches’ brew.
Meanwhile, back at the college:
Thank you Vlad for publishing these truths about the criminal actions of the CPSO.
The public has to be told that
their Rights are no longer protected by the College.
My usual theme music for this kind of action is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHomETco0MI
That’s right boys and girls: the Soviet anthem.
Waxing nostalgic. The days when corruption still hid in shame, under the smiling workers’ faces.
Indeed.
Actually, I’m quite convinced that back when the Soviets were around as a model of what *not* to be, the rest of us were much better off.
China could easily fill that role now, if we weren’t owned by them. We’re at war, and they’re winning. They’ve just taken Brazil.