Chris Renwick, the hearing officer overseeing the disciplinary tribunal for Const. Helen Grus, said during Thursday's proceedings in Ottawa, ON, that he would not allow an email chain between the defendant and a witness for the prosecution to be entered as an evidentiary exhibit.
Grus, an officer with the Ottawa Police Service's (OPS) sexual assault and child abuse (SACA) unit, is being accused of discreditable conduct by the OPS. The charge flows from her inquiries into a possible link between infant deaths and the "vaccination status" of the descendant babies' mothers, specifically the mRNA injections marketed as "COVID-19 vaccines." The prosecution has accused Grus of conducting herself insubordinately and conducting illegitimate Records Management System (RMS) searches as part of her inquiry.
Grus's defence team said their client observed an increase in infant deaths brought to the OPS's attention and used this data point as part of the rationale for her inquiry.
"I am not going to allow the emails to be entered into the record," Renwick, the tribunal's de facto judge, said while siding with the prosecution's objection to entering an email exchange between the defendant and Staff Sergeant Shelley Rossetti, who formerly worked as the OPS's SACA unit's top officer.
The prosecution claimed "public interest privilege" should shield the emails from public disclosure in the hearing, warning that confidential police information was contained within the emails. Renwick, a retired OPS officer without professional legal accreditation, did not provide a legal basis in his siding with the prosecution's objection.
During cross-examination, Rossetti agreed that Grus's record as a SACA detective was "exceptional" and the defendant possessed "excellent investigatory abilities" while reviewing one of Grus's performance reviews.
Renwick also broadly sustained the prosecution's objection to the defence's questioning of Rossetti's notebook during cross-examination, despite Rossetti having the notebook in her possession and consulting it while testifying as a witness.
"We have a right to know what the witness is looking at," Blair Ector, one of Grus's defence lawyers, said in response to Renwick's refusal to allow his cross-examination of Rossetti on the basis of the witness's notebook. He added, "This is such an abusive process," and described Renwick's decision as "an appealable error."
On Monday, the sixth day of the tribunal, Renwick sided with the prosecution's objection to deny the defence's request for Grus's duty book – which she composed herself in her capacity as an OPC SACA detective – to be disclosed and entered as evidence into the record.
"This hearing cannot and will not be a venue for opinions or theories linking COVID vaccines to child deaths," Renwick stated on Monday. The defence intends to summon several expert witnesses – presumably subject-matter experts in the fields of medicine – to bolster its claim that Grus's inquiry into possible links between infant deaths and "COVID-19 vaccines" was substantiated and reasonable.
Renwick will decide on the admissibility of the defence's requested expert witnesses.