Lawyer breaks media silence on Ottawa Detective's probe into sudden infant death increase

Lawyer Bath-Sheba van den Berg describes sitting in a police station, surrounded by officers and the chief of police's legal team, hearing potential evidence of criminal activity—specifically, disturbing trends in infant deaths—that would typically prompt an investigation. Yet, they appear to ignore this critical evidence.

Remove Ads

An Ottawa police detective is facing trial for allegations of misconduct after investigating a series of unusual sudden infant deaths in the region, in 2021 and 2022.

Detective Helen Grus, who was working at the time for the sexual assault and child abuse unit (SACA) for the Ottawa Police Service (OPS), is accused of unauthorized access of an internal database while researching a potential link between the novel COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and an uptick in sudden infant deaths after their roll out.

During her tribunal defence hearing in May of this year, Grus presented evidence of a roughly 97% fatality rate among unborn babies in Pfizer's clinical trial data. This full disclosure could not be heard because Grus was interrupted and silenced by the hearing officer, retired superintendent Chris Renwick, who has no legal training.

The defence suspects that the police and the hearing officer are politically motivated to silence and prosecute Grus, disregarding potential criminality around this alarming trend affecting the most vulnerable population.

Grus’ lawyer, Bath-Sheba van den Berg, describes the unsettling incident as unlike anything she has witnessed in proceedings before.

“She’s sitting there in front of me, facing me,” details van den Berg, “and she's stating simply that, 31 out of 32 [babies died]. And as she was stating that, the hearing officer lurched forward and said ‘stop.’”

Van den Berg describes that Grus physically moved back and cowered at this demand. “I’ll never forget that image,” she said.

It's because of that image that has been burned into my mind that I thought it's important to talk about her case publicly and not just her case, but what she was looking into. You have to remember she had stacks of clinical information that she had passed on to her chain of command at the time of her compelled interview on May 12 that showed that there are adverse effects to these COVID-19 vaccines and showed the fatality rate of babies as a result of these COVID -19 Pfizer vaccines. She showed this to the police. She tried saying it during her own testimony, which is key to her defence.

Van den Berg explains that Grus’ misconduct charge is a strict liability, yet the prosecution repeatedly accuses her of personal beliefs in her research. She asserts that Grus acted within her duty as a police officer to preserve life and protect the public.

“Based on this clinical data, based on the data before her, which showed that there was a double to triple increase of sudden infant deaths in a nine month time period in circumstances of death, almost identical to the adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccine, she suspected potential criminality, which gives her the police discretion to look into,” explains van den Berg.

Instead of looking into this, it is alleged that coworkers began snickering about Grus’ concerns instead of taking them seriously, which persists to this day with hearing officer Chris Renwick’s reaction to the clinical trial data that Grus attempted to share during her defence.

There I am sitting in a police station with police officers, with the legal team for the chief of police, and we are hearing evidence of a potential criminal occurrence. It’s akin to learning and being put on notice, that there's a murder and you have the list of suspected accused. Well, the police have a duty, they have a statutory duty to investigate that knowledge. It's like almost filing a police report, right? An investigation has to commence. And so I kind of get the feeling that the reason why the defence has been almost barred from talking about the circumstances of death altogether, which go to [Grus’] defence… is that there may be a criminal occurrence and the police have a duty to investigate. And so long as they do not hear that evidence or can pretend that they haven't heard it, right?

The question of how this made it to the public remains. It was CBC journalist Shaamini Yogaretnam that first ran the story of Grus’ private, internal probe in March 2022, which relied on unnamed sources.

This potentially implicates OPS staff in breaching confidentiality, defaming Grus, and orchestrating politically motivated public punishment of her investigation. Additional evidence suggests the involvement of public health officials and ultimatums issued by CBC to the OPS, which have ultimately served to halt Grus’ efforts to address concerns over unusual infant deaths linked potentially to COVID-19 vaccines.

Van den Berg emphasized the importance of truth and the necessity of asking questions, especially about medical treatments like COVID-19 vaccines, which have clinical trial data to reference and inherently come with side effects. She criticized the punishment of those who ask such questions, highlighting Detective Grus’ public ordeal despite her exemplary performance and dedication as a police officer.

Grus’ proceedings will resume in January 2025. She remains under oath until that time, unable to discuss the case with anyone including her legal team.

Remove Ads
Remove Ads

Don't Get Censored

Big Tech is censoring us. Sign up so we can always stay in touch.

Remove Ads