Canadian True Crime - Major Case Updates and Feedback 2022—Part 2

Episode Date: October 2, 2022

[Part 2 of 2] Cases that have had notable or major updates.Approximate timestamps:1:00 The Johnson Bentley Family Murders5:30 The Abbotsford Killer9:00 The Murder of Jagtar Gill15:00 Lush & Whiteway Families20:00 The Renfrew County Murders - 2022 Inquiry28:00 The Brentwood Five36:00 The Death of Ezekiel StephanAD-FREE episodes are available via our Premium FeedsSign up via Apple Podcasts, Patreon or SupercastCredits:Research: Enya BestNarration, writing: Kristi LeeAudio editing and production: We Talk of DreamsTheme song and stingers: We Talk of DreamsDisclaimer voiced by the host of True  Information sources:https://docs.google.com/document/d/12CN8SlHyYfrwMZQskoh9PYyyuCTG1t-E90ZnP498h1o/edit?usp=sharing Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

You can get anything you need with Uber Eats. Well, almost, almost anything. So no, you can't get an ice rink on Uber Eats. But iced tea and ice cream? Yes, we can deliver that. Uber Eats. Get almost, almost anything. Order now. Product availability may vary by region. See app for details. Canadian True Crime is a completely independent production, funded mainly through advertising. The podcast often has coarse language and disturbing content, and it's not for everyone. This is part two of our major case updates episode. In this episode, you'll hear updates on the Johnson-Bentley family murders, Miranda Shelley Peters, the Lush and Whiteway families, the Renfrew County murders, the Brentwood Five, and the death of Ezekiel Stephan. Please see the show notes for approximate timestamps, give or take. The Johnson-Bentley Family Murders

This was the 1982 case of the family who went camping in British Columbia. Girls Janet and Karen Johnson, just 13 and 11 years old. Their parents Bob and Jackie Johnson, and Jackie's parents George and Edith Bentley. As the family enjoyed wilderness camping, they were stalked by David Shearing, a local troublemaker with malicious intentions, who murdered all four adults and both children. After a massive manhunt and wild goose chase across Canada, he was finally found locally, pleaded guilty to six counts of second-degree murder and has been in prison ever since. Last year, David Shearing, now known as David Ennis, signalled his intent to apply for parole for the first time in quite a few years,

which prompted the relatives of the Johnson and Bentley families to organise a petition on behalf of the local community, stating safety concerns if he were to be released. After our episode on the case aired, the signatures on the petition surged, so thank you to everybody who went and signed that petition. The parole hearing ended up being pushed back two months, which meant it was after last year's case updates episode. By the time it was held in September of last year, the petition had gathered more than 100,000 signatures. CBC News reported that the then 62-year-old David Ennis told the parole panel that he had sexual fantasies from his mid-teens, including rape and murder. Of the Johnson and Bentley families, he said that he was only interested in one of them, 13-year-old Janet Johnson, and he killed the four adults,

her parents and grandparents, because they were in the way. He said, quote, I saw them as a means to an end, basically as being in the way of what I wanted at the time. He added that 11-year-old Karen Johnson just happened to be there. He first murdered the four adults and then kept Janet and Karen captive for an additional week, subjecting them to repeated sexual assaults and torture, before murdering them as well. He then put their bodies in the car with the bodies of their parents and grandparents, and set it on fire on a remote logging road, destroying all the evidence. David Ennis was asked what he did to the girls that week he held them captive. He wouldn't answer directly, only to say, quote,

When I saw the effects of that violence in real life, Janet was crying, as was Karen. Those things stopped me from escalating to more violence. It did stop me from using the violence for sexual Now, we mentioned that back in the early 80s, just as the police started to focus on David Shearing, they'd heard whispers that he was responsible for the hit-and-run murder of a teenager. It turned out to be true, and he referenced this in last year's parole hearing. turned out to be true and he referenced this in last year's parole hearing. David Ennis said that getting away with that crime made it easier for him to escalate his violent behaviour. He also apologised to the remaining members of the Johnson and Bentley families, saying he better understands their pain and has powerful feelings of shame and regret. their pain and has powerful feelings of shame and regret.

CBC News reported that he had been attending sex offender programs, he works in the prison chapel and is taking a Bible course. Nine emotional victim statements were presented, pleading with the board to reject his application. Family spokesperson Tammy Arishinkoff, also Janet Johnson's childhood friend, said, quote, six people died because he wanted them dead. He is still the same sick, brutal, callous, remorseless monster that he was in 1982. He showed no mercy for my friend. The parole board rejected his application, saying he still has deviant sexual fantasies and there are overwhelming negative aspects in this case. Quote, the gravity and severity of your offending, it's of the utmost level. It was very violent and it devastated so

many people. When we look at your assessed risks, together with your diagnosis of sexual sadism which largely remains unchanged, the most appropriate place for you to make gains is in the safety and security of the institution. The Abbotsford Killer Terry Driver was the man who, in 1995, murdered and sexually assaulted 16-year-old Tanya Smith and attempted to murder her 15-year-old friend, Misty Cockrell, who was lucky to have escaped. Terry Driver then went on to taunt the police with phone calls and desecrated Tanya Smith's headstone. But the Abbotsford killer came undone in a similar way to American serial killer Dennis Rader, also known as BTK. He tried to taunt the

police again with an anonymous written confession, but it backfired when they found his fingerprint on it. Terry Driver was sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years, and after he was convicted for two other sexual assaults that happened in the years before the assault on Tanya Smith and Misty Cockrell, Driver was designated a dangerous offender, same as Paul Bernardo. The Abbotsford News reported that he applied for parole in 2021, and the parole board documents revealed that while in prison, Terry Driver was involved in a violent incident in 2007 and then assaulted someone in 2019. In advance of his 2021 hearing, a psychological assessment was conducted and it was determined that Terry Driver was still a very high risk for violent and sexual recidivism. His parole application was denied, with the board stating that Driver has shown little remorse or victim empathy, is quote, not considered to be engaged in his correctional plan, and presents an undue risk to society.

August of 2021, it was announced that Terry Driver had died in prison, age 56. All Correctional Service Canada would say was that he died of apparent natural causes. City News reported that survivor Misty Cockrell described it as a shock, and she was trying to process her feelings. She said she was told that Driver died from cancer, but she had no idea he was ill. She did say that his death brought about a newfound chapter of freedom. Quote, I don't have to worry about upcoming parole hearings. I don't have to worry about whether he'll ever be released or not, and whether my family's safe. Now I know that they are, and it's a relief. Misty also spoke about her work as a victim advocate, which she said brought her some personal healing. She said that it was difficult to be a survivor because back in the 90s and 2000s,

members of the general public blamed the teenagers for the attack. Quote, Everything was our fault. We were walking at night. We were wearing the wrong clothes, whatever the case may be. She said that these days attitudes have changed and quote, You hear a lot more people supporting victims of violence. Our view as a society towards victims is growing more compassionate. It really makes me happy that I got to be a small part of that.

Misty said she was thinking about everyone affected by the Abbotsford killer and she hopes that everyone can have a little bit of peace in the news that he had passed away. The murder of Jagtar Gill Jagtar Gill was the mother of three who was recovering at home in a suburb of Ottawa from a hernia operation. It was also her wedding anniversary and her husband and teenage daughter left her at home to go out and buy some flowers. When they arrived back, they discovered she had been bludgeoned and stabbed to death. As it turned out, her husband, bus driver Bhupinderpal Gill, had been having an affair with his co-worker Gurpreet Ronald, who was also married with children and lived in the same area. The two of them were found guilty at trial of first-degree murder. The last update was that their guilty convictions were overturned on appeal. The ruling found that the trial judge made

a legal error in not telling the jury they could consider a conviction of second-degree murder, which would mean that the crime did not have the planning and deliberation that first-degree murder charges require. So a new trial was ordered and the update is that the trial took place last year. Judge only, no jury. The Crown's case was that Bupinderpal Gill was having an affair with his co-worker Gurpreet Ronald and they planned the murder so they could be together. Both took the stand in their own defence, denying their roles in Jagtar's murder as described by the Crown. Gurpreet denied that she was the one responsible for murdering Jagtar and continued to maintain that she stumbled across Jagtar's body and the crime scene by chance when she let herself into the home to pick up some

tools. So if that were the case, why didn't she call 911? The court heard that she didn't for purely selfish reasons because she knew she would be a suspect in the crime. The Crown suggested that what actually happened was that Gurpreet was in a rage and she assaulted Jagtar Gill numerous times with a weightlifting bar with the intent to kill. But when she became aware that Jagtar was still alive, she grabbed a knife and stabbed her repeatedly with it to finish the job. Gurpreet denied this suggestion. As for Bipindipal, he denied the Crown's suggestion that his assigned role was to make sure that his wife, who was weakened as she was recovering from major surgery, would be home alone. And then Gurpreet, the woman he'd been having the affair

with, could enter the house. He denied the plan was for him to arrive home with his 15-year-old daughter, feign surprise and then clean up and destroy any evidence left by Gerpreet, which included knives and a weightlifting bar. His legal team argued that he had no motive to kill his wife because the affair was over and suggested that Gurpreet acted alone in a rage. As for why Bhupinderpal disposed of and hid the murder weapons if he wasn't responsible, he testified that he had a brain freeze and wanted to get them out of harm's way. Superior Court Justice Anne London Weinstein found both of them guilty of first-degree murder, the same verdict as their last trial. The justice was satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that

Gurpreet Ronald killed Jagtar Gill, but Bhupinderpal Gill was actively involved in the planning. The judge said that the evidence strongly suggested that the two began plotting shortly after Jagtar's surgery date. The crime was committed when Jagtar was alone, recovering from surgery at her weakest. And Bhupinderal did his part by leaving his wife home alone with the door unlocked to make sure Gurpreet could get in. One of the most shocking things about this case was the fact that when Bhupendapal Gill arrived home with his 15-year-old daughter, he stood back and allowed her to enter the house first to discover her mother's battered body. The Crown suggested that he was so committed to his plan

that he was willing to sacrifice his own daughter's mental health to protect himself. He denied this too. A victim impact statement from Jagtar Gill's parents was read in court, describing the loss of a loving daughter who was herself greatly loved. Quote, Bhupindipal Gill and Gurpreet Ronald were sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years. Their lawyers said separately that they were disappointed and considering appeal, but that was last year and nothing more has been announced.

Lush and Whiteway families. This was the horrific car crash in Newfoundland where John and Sandra Lush were driving their daughter Suzanne, her boyfriend Josh Whiteway, and their newly adopted cat to the airport after a trip back home to visit family. Their car was hit by another car, and John and Sandra Lush were killed on impact, as was the cat. Suzanne Lush and Josh Whiteway were left with serious injuries and Josh in a wheelchair for life. The driver of the car was Nicholas Villeneuve, an intoxicated 22-year-old man driving home from a nightclub. Unfortunately, in the chaos of the crash, the RCMP did not properly inform him of his charter right to speak with a lawyer, so the judge ruled that some of the evidence could not be used by the Crown in making its case at trial. This included his consent to take the blood samples that proved he was over the limit to drive, and also his admission that he had been drinking.

With that main evidence excluded, the Crown decided there wasn't enough evidence left to convict and withdrew all eight charges. After that, survivor Josh Whiteway was active on social media, trying to raise awareness of the case and persuade the Crown to file an appeal. There were many protests and demonstrations in Newfoundland. The Crown did end up filing an appeal, and it was heard in May of this year, 2022. Essentially, it was an argument about when exactly Villeneuve was officially detained by the RCMP. His lawyer had argued that he was effectively detained in the ambulance on the way to the hospital because an RCMP officer rode with him asking him questions.

Ergo, he should have been informed of his right to speak to a lawyer in the ambulance. But the Crown prosecutor argued that in the ambulance, the RCMP officer didn't have enough knowledge to establish that a crime had been committed and weren't actually questioning him. They were just conducting a general investigative inquiry to find out what happened. Ergo, Villeneuve wasn't actually detained until he arrived at the hospital, which is when the RCMP requested a sample of his blood. To this, his defence lawyer countered that the RCMP officer was not in the ambulance by chance. He knew who the driver of the other car was and a reasonable person would have assumed that when he exited the ambulance

accompanied by the police that he had been detained. That was May of 2022 and the media reported that the Court of Appeal had reserved their decision, meaning it would be coming at a later date. At the time of recording, it's mid-September and there's been no announcement. Regardless of legal semantics, the fact remains that none of this would have happened if Nicholas Villeneuve had not been on the road that night, and he never showed any remorse, nerve had not been on the road that night, and he never showed any remorse, nor did he offer any kind of apology to the Lush and Whiteway families for the devastation his actions caused. Obviously, his lawyer would have advised him to keep his mouth shut. But as Josh Whiteway put it,

the criminal justice system focuses on whether the criminal's rights were violated, but what about their right to not be killed and maimed? Their right to exist on the road without someone running into them and leaving them near dead on the side of the road. Quote, who is protecting the public here? What message does this send to the people of our province? message does this send to the people of our province? Not only did Suzanne Lush lose both her parents, and not only did she and Josh Whiteway have to deal with months of rehabilitation, physical therapy, and ongoing health issues, but when the case is thrown out on a technicality, and the offender can't even give them the dignity of acknowledging their loss and ongoing pain, of course the families are going to fight even harder for justice.

It's a sad situation, the state of our criminal justice system, and unfortunately it happens all too frequently, both during the trial process and right up to parole hearings. Families just want to feel heard, and most of the time they leave feeling bitterly disappointed. Hopefully soon, there'll be a decision that I can tell you about. We'll see you next time. Moose? No. But moose head? Yes. Because that's alcohol, and we deliver that too. Along with your favorite restaurant food, groceries, and other everyday essentials.

Order Uber Eats now. For alcohol, you must be legal drinking age. Please enjoy responsibly. Product availability varies by region. See app for details. Hi everyone. Today we're talking passion projects that turn into careers. A topic that obviously resonates quite a bit with me. In collaboration with the Ontario Cannabis Store and ACAST Creative, I want to introduce you to someone who took his passion for cannabis, turned it into a career, and is now an industry trailblazer. This is Nico Soziak. He's the Chief Financial Officer of Canara Biotech, a prominent producer based in Montreal. Nico, I know that you've had a passion for cannabis for quite a few years, but you seem a lot younger than what I was expecting.

I have to know how and when you got into the cannabis business. Yeah, absolutely. I look younger, but I'm aging by the day. But no, I'm 35 years old. I got into cannabis about five years ago. I started younger, but I'm aging by the day. But no, I'm 35 years old. I got into cannabis about five years ago. I started with Canara. But you were a consumer before that. Yeah, I've been a consumer. I had friends in the legacy side of the business and watched what they did.

I tried the different strains and genetics, watched how they grew. Really found a passion for cannabis and the products. But my professional career is an accountant. So while I had a passion for cannabis, I was also a straight A student. Wow. And then Canada decided to legalize cannabis. And that was when I was like, okay, this is kind of my calling. I have to try to figure out how do I can get into the industry. And Canara had just became a public company.

I joined them in April 2019 and built the finance department here at Canara and worked with the founder and at one point I was given the keys to that and now I'm here today. Wow that's that's such a cool story. So how do you feel about being called a trailblazer in the legal market now? It's an honor. I've looked up to many trailblazers in this industry today that come from the legacy side that went to legal. You know, I'm happy to be part of that. So actually, I wanted to ask you about the legacy market.

How did you incorporate it into operations on the legal side? I don't pretend that the cannabis market just got created in 2017, right? For me, legacy means that everyone that's been working, all the businesses that have been in the industry pre-legalization. I'm not going to reinvent the wheel in terms of thinking I know what consumers want. There's been an industry that's been built

for many, many, many years. So it's all the ideas and creations that were pre-legalization, figuring out how do we evolve that into the legal side with all the regulatory frameworks. What would you say is the best part of working in the legal market? Knowing that your product is clean, knowing what you're consuming, we're ensuring quality, we're ensuring the price. I think we're ahead of other industries. Okay, so final question. What gets you excited to go to work every day?

This is my dream. This is my passion. I get excited. Work doesn't feel like work for me. When you're creating things that you dream about, I give the idea to the team. The team is able to execute different innovations. That's what really gets me excited.

Thanks for listening to this Trailblazers story brought to you by the Ontario Cannabis Store and ACAST Creative. If you like the trail Nico Soziak is blazing, you will love what's happening in legal cannabis. Visit ocs.ca slash trailblazers to learn more. The Renfrew County Murders This was the horrific case of intimate partner violence. The case of the man who went on a spree to get revenge on three women who did nothing wrong other than being his ex-partner or his unrequited love interest. Anastasia Kuzik, Natalie Wormadam and Carol Collettan lost their lives that day in

2015. Basil Borutsky was convicted at trial and sentenced to life with no parole for 70 years. and sentenced to life with no parole for 70 years. In June of this year, a long-awaited inquiry was held into the Renfrew County murders, where a jury looked at the circumstances and offered recommendations for system changes to reduce the chances of it happening again. The inquest heard about many systemic failures that led up to Basil Borutsky's murder spree on September 22, 2015. He was not well supervised by probation officers, and he also was not held accountable when he failed to comply with probation conditions. conditions. For example, he ignored several court orders to attend partner assault response programs, but there were no consequences or charges for breaching a court order. An expert witness testified that in situations like these, where a known abuser is not held accountable,

it can embolden them to escalate their behavior. And it did. The jury heard that Basil Borutsky threatened the women who pressed intimate partner violence charges against him until they dropped those charges out of fear. And because he was highly manipulative, he would reassure new partners who'd heard about the incidents, telling them the charges had been dropped and he'd been unfairly targeted. He even told Natalie Warmadam as a threat that if his ex-wife pressed charges and he ended up in jail, he'd find a way to kill her and he didn't care about the consequences. A year before the Renfrew County murders, he was released from his latest stint in custody, and a rehabilitation officer emailed the probation service with concerns that his release put the women he'd been harassing at risk.

Nothing was done. Despite repeated reports from women that he'd become violent when drunk, not once was he ever referred to treatment for substance use. His parole officer also dropped the ball in several different ways, including allowing him to drop contact in the months before the murders, again with no consequence. The inquest heard that there are specific challenges faced by intimate partner violence survivors in rural areas, like Renfrew County. As well as a lack of privacy, there's limited transport options, limited services available to help them, and also a higher prevalence of guns. prevalence of guns. Domestic homicides involving a firearm are twice as common in rural communities, and there is still a gap in tracking guns and ensuring people with a history of intimate partner violence do not have access to them. At the time of the murders, Basil Borutsky had

technically been banned for life from owning weapons of any kind, but he still had his firearms possession and acquisition license card. The inquest jury recommended that the Ontario government needs to formally declare intimate partner violence as an epidemic, a recommendation described by many as groundbreaking. One of those was lawyer and women's advocate Pamela Cross, who attended the inquiry and spoke with CanadianWomen.org, saying the term epidemic has enormous symbolic value because it validates the experiences of anyone who has had to deal with intimate partner violence, especially those who were manipulated into thinking that what they experienced was their own fault. The inquiry heard that since the Renfrew County murders,

111 more people in Ontario have been murdered by their current or former partner, and according to Statistics Canada, a woman is killed by her intimate partner every six days in Canada. As well as declaring intimate partner violence an epidemic, the jury also recommended an independent commission be established to eradicate it. Other recommendations included a 24-7 hotline for men, an emergency fund to help women seek safety and include a role of advocate for survivors regarding their experience in the justice system. The jury recommended adding coercive control and femicide to the Criminal Code of Canada, allowing victims of abuse to testify in court via video, and establishing a royal commission to review and recommend changes

to the criminal justice system to make it more victim-centric and more responsible to root causes of crime. One of the people who testified was Valerie Wormadam, the daughter of Natalie Wormadam, who brought an empathetic perspective to the table. She said that the recommendations were a good start if they're actioned, but she wasn't holding her breath because inquests often don't bring about any action. Valerie Wormadam also said that the threat of prison time is only a band-aid solution to protect victims. And it often doesn't work because perpetrators either don't care or aren't in a place where they are capable of considering and accepting the consequences of their actions. Same thing when it comes to restraining orders and strict bail

conditions. Valerie said they aim to protect survivors but do nothing to stop the offender from finding new victims. And that's exactly what he did. Valerie told the inquest some details about the two years Basil Borutsky lived in her home with her mother Natalie. She said he wasn't all bad. He had good aspects to his character as well and focusing only on the bad after the fact, isn't going to stop real everyday people who are perpetrating these harms as they escalate their behavior. She said, quote, you have to build a system that isn't just for catching monsters, because really most folks won't see them as monsters until after these types of events have occurred, and that doesn't do anybody any good. In response to talk that Basil Borutski may have suffered

abuse in his childhood, Valerie told the jury that she would be interested to hear about any recommendations for early intervention. We know that not all children who have suffered abuse go on to become killers, but Valerie's point was that if he did suffer abuse in his childhood, perhaps proper education and care earlier in his life may have made a difference to his outcomes later. She added, I want to be very clear. What we want out of this is recommendations that make people the safest, everybody the safest. Even if that might mean less harm coming to perpetrators, the best option is the one where most people are the safest. She said that when perpetrators like Basil Borutsky feel isolated in society, it can be a destabilising factor, and building circles of

accountability and support around them is very important. We hope that this inquiry will be different to so many others, and hopefully next year I can report back on progress when it comes to the 86 recommendations. The Brentwood Five This was the tragic case of a college house party in Calgary, a night where five young people lost their lives. Zachariah Rathwell, Jordan Segura, Joshua Hunter, Katie Parris and Lawrence Hong. They were attacked and stabbed at the end of the party by Matthew DeGroote, who at the time was having an episode where he believed he was the son of God

and that he was being hunted by monsters. son of God and that he was being hunted by monsters. He was given the label of not criminally responsible due to mental illness or NCR, a defence that hinges on the offender being in a state where they weren't able to understand that their actions were wrong. Since that time, Matthew DeGroote has been in a facility and has been applying for all privileges and freedoms as soon as he's eligible. In September of 2020, he applied for more freedoms which included being released into a group home in the next year. This request was not supported by the psychologist treating him and it came out that he'd changed medications and experienced a deterioration in his mental condition which he was unaware of and which went undetected by medical professionals. The psychologist said that even

if he continues to take his medication as prescribed, the potential is there for him to relapse and develop psychosis undetected, so he needed closer monitoring. The board agreed and denied the request, stating that Matthew DeGroote was still a significant threat to the safety of the public, but the board also rescinded some of the freedoms that they gave him at a previous hearing. Matthew's legal team appealed, and the freedoms were restored in April of 2021, and the freedoms were restored in April of 2021, giving him the ability to make supervised and unsupervised outings, and paving the way for him to eventually transition to a group home. His next hearing was scheduled for five months after that, in September of 2021. The month before that was the grand opening of the Quintera Legacy Garden, a memorial to Zachariah Rathwell, Jordan Segura, Josh Hunter, Katie Parris and Lawrence Hong.

Their families had come together to create a musical garden space at a park that features instruments, a stage for events, five flowering trees and five permanent memorial chairs with unique plaques for each of the five. The families have described the garden as a beacon of hope, life after loss. The piece was short-lived because they needed to prepare their victim impact statements for the review board hearing the next month. their victim impact statements for the review board hearing the next month. According to the Globe and Mail, the board heard that Matthew DeGroote's psychosis was in full remission and there had been no problems with him taking his medications. But a psychologist treating him said that there were some significant uncertainties and recommended he remain under a full mental health warrant instead of receiving a conditional discharge. Dr Santok Ray said the treatment team felt the mental health warrant

was a necessary consideration to the safety of the public because it allows Matthew to be returned to the hospital immediately if his mental health deteriorates and or he stops taking his medications. Quote, He can appear very well to the point where he can actually function in an employment setting in the morning and then in the evening do something very serious. The psychologist added that when Matthew is in active psychosis, he has the ability to inflict very serious harm on multiple people

very quickly. Matthew DeGroote addressed the review board directly, saying that he is not asking for sympathy. Quote, I accept what I have done and I'm truly sorry. I just hope one day I will be seen as a person who is able to earn his way back into society. The weight of this tragedy bears heavily on my shoulders and is not lightened over time. I carry the shame and guilt with me 24-7 and will forever. I want to make amends in any way I can. I'm committed to managing my illness. It should be noted that Matthew DeGroote's father is apparently a high-ranking police officer in Calgary, and his parents filed a statement with the board saying their son is

human and not a monster. They wrote, nothing prepared us for the increasing crusade of seeking a lifetime punishment for Matthew. We feel the need to remind those who seem to have forgotten that Matthew has already been through the trial and found to be not criminally responsible, yet some people feel the review board hearings every year should be treated like a quest for justice. End quote. While I sympathize with them and with Matthew, because no one asked to have a mental illness, my personal opinion is that this statement is in very poor taste, and it appears to be directed towards the parents of the five young people who lost their lives that night. And absolutely, Matthew DeGroote's parents should advocate for their son, but they have to understand that the

parents on the victim's side want to advocate for theirs as well. they have to understand that the parents on the victim's side want to advocate for theirs as well. And at the end of the day, Matthew is alive, but there are five families who will never see their loved one again. His parents' statement demonstrated a complete lack of empathy. Joshua Hunter's mum, Kelly Hunter, told the board that this was the sixth victim impact statement she had submitted since her son's life was taken. She said, I struggle every year with writing to honour Josh. I get so sad at times. I just can't seem to think of Josh without feeling sad about him not being here anymore. I miss him terribly. feeling sad about him not being here anymore. I miss him terribly. Katie Perris's mother, Shannon Miller, said that nothing is going to take away the pain of losing her daughter.

Quote, the truth is Katie didn't die. She was murdered and there's a huge difference between the two. How do you articulate having Katie ripped from my life? She was my baby girl. She was part of who I am. And now that is gone forever. It shatters me. In October of 2021, the media reported that the Alberta Review Board had decided to allow Matthew more freedoms, including escorted and unescorted absences, supervised camping trips, passes to transition to a group home and approval for his eventual move to one. Whenever I mention this case I receive feedback from both sides, from those who think he should be released immediately to those who

believe he should be locked up for life. There hasn't been any reporting of reactions from the families of the victims, but I'm sure that they continue to feel frustrated and unheard. Perhaps that's the ultimate injustice when it comes to our justice system. The death of Ezekiel Stephan This is the Alberta case of Ezekiel, a toddler who was sick for two weeks. His parents, David and Colette Stephan, are proponents of pseudoscientific and alternative medicines and prefer to treat him at home with natural therapies like garlic and olive leaf extract, as well as herbal supplements. David Steffen was the marketing director at The Family Business, a nutritional supplements

company started by his father. He appeared at various health and wellness expos to push back against the medical establishment and promote his father's company's nutritional supplements as a better option, often encouraging people to withdraw from their prescribed medications and switch to supplements instead. When it came to his own child getting sick, he was of course against treating him with modern medicine. child getting sick, he was of course against treating him with modern medicine. And this stance continued, even as little Ezekiel went stiff, lethargic and started to show odd neurological symptoms. A family friend who was a nurse told them she thought Ezekiel had meningitis and should get checked by a doctor. But it appears that for David Stephan, deciding whether to get his son

seen by a medical doctor was not just a parental decision, it was also a business decision. They resolved to keep treating him with supplements and natural remedies. Ultimately, the decision was taken out of their hands when Ezekiel got so sick that he stopped breathing and they had to call 911. The family lived in a rural area and the local ambulance sent to them was not stocked with the proper equipment to help him breathe again. Tragically, Ezekiel went without oxygen for more than eight minutes. After a few days, he was declared brain dead and his life support turned off. David and Colette Stephan went to trial for failing to provide the necessaries of life. The prosecution argued that the ambulance situation was tragically unfortunate,

but if they had have gotten Ezekiel medical attention sooner instead of waiting until he'd actually stopped breathing to call an ambulance, he would probably be alive today. The Steffens argued that they did their due diligence when making the decision not to have Ezekiel seen by a medical doctor using the information they had at the time, which included consulting with that nurse who helped them with their home births and googling the types of meningitis. Colette decided that Ezekiel had the less serious viral meningitis instead of the bacterial meningitis that it appeared he might have actually had. It was a long three-part series. After being found guilty of failing to provide the necessaries of life to Ezekiel, his parents appealed and went to a new trial where they were acquitted. But then,

the Crown announced it would appeal the acquittal, saying the judge's comments about the accent of one of the expert witnesses, Nigerian-born Dr Bamidali Adeokbo, resulted in bias against his valid testimony. In March of 2021, the Alberta Court of Appeals ruled in the Crown's favour against the Stephan family, finding that the judge's comments about Dr Adeokbo were inappropriate. David and Colette Steffen were not happy when the Court of Appeals ordered them to go to trial a third time for failing to provide the necessaries of life. The Steffens announced that they were going to take it up with the Supreme Court of Canada, hoping that Canada's top court would see their perspective and override the decision to order a third trial. But after they'd lodged their application, the Crown unexpectedly announced that it had decided to

drop the charges, giving the reason that it had been more than nine years since Ezekiel passed away and the available evidence had deteriorated to a point where it was no longer sufficient for prosecution. Basically, the Crown no longer had a reasonable likelihood of conviction. But while the Steffens were now off the hook, they were still pressing forward with the Supreme Court of Canada application, which they said they hoped would result in a clarification of the law so that other parents don't face the same situation. David Steffen also announced that he planned to request that he be repaid the money he spent on court costs over the years. In August of 2022, CTV News reported the Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear the Steffens' appeal,

giving no reason for its decision, which is customary. So that means no repayment on court costs, no clarification of the law, and the end of the line for them when it comes to court proceedings. That same day, David posted to his Facebook account promising to do a live stream to cover what the decision means quote in relation to the erosion of medical and parental rights for all Canadians. I can't find any evidence that the live stream ever took place but what he has said previously is that he wants parental rights protected so that parents won't be held criminally liable if they choose alternative treatments for their sick children. But in no way was he or his wife held criminally liable for choosing alternative treatments. Many of us choose alternative treatments when our

children are sick, like Vicks Vaporub or Honey for Coughs. I myself am also quite partial to burning essential oils. But when it comes down to it, as parents, the onus is on us to use our judgment and critical thinking skills to interpret all the health information available to us to determine what situations are okay for natural remedies, and what situations demand attention from a medical doctor. If their nurse friend hadn't mentioned meningitis specifically, then perhaps they could have argued that they just didn't realize. But instead of taking Ezekiel to be seen by a qualified doctor, they googled. And instead of recognizing that Ezekiel was displaying an escalating number of red flags for the life-threatening bacterial meningitis, they simply decided he didn't have it.

The Steffens weren't held criminally liable for treating Ezekiel with natural remedies or alternative treatments. The decisions they made amounted to depriving him of the life-saving medical treatment he desperately needed. They may have been free to make those decisions, but they shouldn't expect to be free of consequences when their all-or-nothing decisions cause irreparable harm. It's interesting to note that two posts before David Steffen posted about the end of the line with Canadian courts, he also posted in support of the practice of forcing people to give birth against their will, more specifically, the US Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. He wrote that the only reason the US is the country that it is, is because it was founded on the principles contained in the Bible, and the further people drift from those principles, the less peace and freedom they will enjoy. He added that it's only because of the virtue of previous generations that US citizens have

the freedom and prosperity we have today. Now, I'm obviously no constitutional scholar, but luckily for me, the ACLU website explains the concept of religious freedoms clearly. It states that the founding fathers of the US were from different religious backgrounds themselves, and the First Amendment was created to differentiate church from state. It states very clearly that everyone in the United States has the right to practice his or her own religion or no religion at all. And about the whole virtue of previous generations claim in David's Facebook post, one of his commenters replied that they weren't going to be taking lessons in virtue from people

who owned slaves. He replied, quote, I'm sure they would hold the same sentiment towards us regarding the barbaric practice of murdering innocent babies and selling their body parts for extreme profits. It's always striking to me how people like David Stephan can get away with making outrageous, incorrect statements, and people believe them to be fact simply because they are delivered by a person who is charismatic and speaks confidently and boldly. It's also striking how these kinds of people cry out about having their own freedoms violated, kinds of people cry out about having their own freedoms violated, but then think it's perfectly okay to turn around and use their own personal religious beliefs to remove the freedoms of others. David Stephan wanted the freedom to parent his child however he wanted without consequence,

even if that consequence was his son's death. But if a person gets pregnant and doesn't want to be, he supports forcing them to give birth against their will anyway. And what about little Ezekiel's freedom to be allowed to receive the scientifically-based treatment that likely would have saved his life? It appears that David Stephan doesn't care about freedom at all. He only cares about his freedom. It appears that David Stephan doesn't care about freedom at all. He only cares about his freedom. As I said last year, for the sake of those children,

I hope that this will be the last we hear about the Stephan family. Rest in peace, Ezekiel. Thanks for listening and special thanks to Inya Best for researching these case updates. Please see the show notes for the full list of resources and links for further information on any of these cases. If you want to know more about the podcast, including how to access ad-free episodes on our premium feeds, visit canadiantruecrime.ca. As always, thank you so much for your kind ratings, reviews, messages, and support. Thanks also to the host of True for voicing the disclaimer, and We Talk of Dreams, who composed the theme song. I'll see you in 24 hours for part two. We'll see you next time. So, no, you can't get an ice rink on Uber Eats. But iced tea, ice cream, or just plain old ice? Yes, we deliver those.

Goaltenders, no. But chicken tenders, yes. Because those are groceries, and we deliver those, too. Along with your favorite restaurant food, alcohol, and other everyday essentials. Order Uber Eats now. For alcohol, you must be legal drinking age. Please enjoy responsibly. Product availability varies by region.

See app for details.