Michael Schmidt's Ontario Farm Hit By Raid in Connection with Scrapie Sheep Case
A raiding party of twenty agents from three different agencies descended on Michael Schmidt's Ontario Farm at 7 this morning with a simple message: he could be looking at 14 years in jail in connection with conspiracy charges associated with the scrapie sheep case from last April.
The agents didn't actually have any kind of indictment or charges, just a search warrant that gave them authority to confiscate the four computers at his Glencolton Farm, and to copy all the information from all iPhones they could find. But the warrant indicated that the search was in connection with potential conspiracy charges for Schmidt's suspected involvement in the sheep case. The agents were from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), as well as provincial and local police, and they made sure to relay to Schmidt the penalty if he's found guilty of such conspiracy.
The agents also had authority to confiscate all electronic equipment, including the videos or other equipment of anyone who wanted to record the events. When Schmidt's wife, Alyssa, began to take photos, they confiscated her camera. A guest from Germany staying at Schmidt's farm had his iPhone confiscated when he began recording the search.
"This was something new," Schmidt told me, about the confiscation of electronic equipment. He should know--he's probably had half a dozen or more raids at his farm since the first one in 1993, mostly in connection with raw milk sales. He has recorded videos of the searches in the past. "They are getting careful--too many pictures are getting out" of raids and enforcement actions. As a result, there are only a few still photos of what occurred during the seven hours the agents were at his farm.
The agents raided the farm of Montana Jones as well, and were still there by late Thursday evening. She runs the Ontario farm whose sheep were targeted for destruction in April in connection with an investigation into scrapie among the sheep. She questioned the accuracy and authenticity of testing that showed one of her sheep had scrapie. Before the sheep could be confiscated, they mysteriously disappeared one night, and an organization, "Farmers Peace Corp.", took credit for their disappearance.
Raiders also appeared at the Ontario farm where the sheep were finally found in late June.
According to Schmidt, "They are looking at me as the leader of the Farmers Peace Corps."
The 31 sheep were thought to possibly harbor scrapie, a fatal degenerative disease that can spread among sheep and goats. When 28 sheep were found by Canadian authorities in late June and slaughtered and tested, they were negative for scrapie.
In a June video statement in which he compared the targeting and slaughter of the rare sheep to Nazi Germany's genetic engineering, Schmidt gently challenged Canadian authorities over their handling of the case. While denying direct involvement in the affair, he said, “I am aware that I as a consequence to my public statement might be subject to an investigation and possible charges related to the sad sheep saga. I am determined to support the brave work of those who have risked their personal safety and security to try to protect those sheep with the hope that ‘conclusive evidence’ would have been provided by the CFIA (Canadian Food Inspection Agency) in order to return the sheep for orderly slaughter if found infected or for further testing…Whatever will evolve I am honored to be a part of this brave action, as I have taken on the role as liaison for the Farmers Peace Corp.”
By 3 p.m., the agents had departed. "We are back to milking the cows," said Schmidt.
Schmidt's two sons, 3 and 5, probably enjoyed the events more than anyone. "They were all excited when they saw all the police."
Schmidt was calm. "I had proposed a dialog to find an alternative to killing off the rare sheep breeds," he said. "This is their response."
Until Thursday, Schmidt had been totally preoccupied with the devastating drought ravaging mid-North America. His farm's pastures have been dried out, and hay is very difficult to obtain because it is in such high demand.
This site's mission is to provide news and analysis about food rights and raw milk. Increasingly, our access to privately available food is under attack by government and industry forces that seek to impose their choices on us. The Complete Patient seeks to provide up-to-date information and encourage the development of community to maintain traditional food acquisition options.
the word 'war' has been used by those in the thick of this Campaign for REAL MILK, so , "in war, sometimes the best recognizance you can get, is getting shot at".
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency is made up of the same kind of soft bureaucratic apparatchiks who dumped our milk, here in BC, back in 2009 = like Health Inspector Rod Asplin, with a "little man" complex, who have the smirk playing on their face, when they're accompanied by an RCMP officer, with a loaded sidearm on their hip ... But wait til you get those chumps under cross-examination ... they go to pieces in a real court of law
My old man used to say "if you don't have a lawsuit on the go at all times, you're not trying hard enough"
I guess we all need to install cameras that direct feed onto the internet instead of relying on hand held devices. I hope the pics/video come back and can get posted. Even while this didn't seem to be overly aggressive (material things were taken, no animals, no arrests) it is still scary to think of it happening anywhere.
Tracy
There is something wrong with the brain of any judge that would sign a warrant authorizing the seizure of private cell phones. That seizure is the seizure of truth!
Next step should be a hearing demanding the return of private cell phones and damages
No, I think the judge (and the agents who made the request) was thinking very clearly. This is obviously a new tactic to reduce media exposure of their enforcement actions. We should expect to see it in the U.S. as well, since the American and Canadian ag agents work hand in hand. It should definitely be challenged in court--would make an important case. In the meantime, Americans should plan for similar tactic. If a friend arrives while a raid is going on with his/her own camera, can the authorities seize that as well, even though it's not a part of the premises being searched? Raises all kinds of intriguing Qs.
I'm so sorry that Michael Schmidt was raided again. This is very scary. I certainly hope that the breadth of a search warrant that allows the seizure of electronic equipment not related to the investigation at hand (not to mention the personal property of people not being investigated) is challenged. What a gross violation of civil rights.
Shana,
I agree with you 100%. When the video taping of police activities is against the law...there is something innately wrong. We should all be able to see the police activities and that transparency should vindicate their activities. If there is no clear appreciation for what they are doing....
Why is it that police do not want pictures taken of what they are doing. It is because what they are doing is not popular and what they are doing is criminal....criminal with an official badge and a gun.
I love dash cams in patrol cars. Everything should be able to be viewed by all. They work for us.
Secrecy and confiscation of private cameras should be a crminal activity...
That is fascist and Nazi. Simple as that.
the fact that they seized cameras of the search unfolding, is extremely insulting to sensibilities of British Justice. An Accused is entitled to start preparing his defence, the minute he becomes aware he's in jeopardy of being charged : especially, gathering evidence. For the purpose of exercising one's right to make full answer in defence, those images / the recordings of every kind about what went on in the moment are not much different than the notes a peace officer might take at the scene of an investigation ... available to Accused and perhaps crucial to exercising his right to defend himself. Seizure of those note-taking devices was obstruction of Justice. ... whoever authorized that aspect, screwed-up bigtime
Members of the Cult of the Black Robe just love stuff like this = they'll talk about it for years. "Your case cries out for Justice, sonny. How much Justice can you afford?"
Maybe things are different in Canada, but in America things wind their way through the court system at an agonizingly slow pace. You may go into the "system" as a young person, but by the time things get in front of a judge you'll get the best lawyer social security can buy.
The war is getting ugly. http://informant.kalwnews.org/2011/09/u-s-district-court-videotaping-pol...
@phadams The article you posted makes me wonder about court settings as well. If events like preliminary hearings are open to the public, then are we not legally within our rights to video/audio record every moment of activity there as well? I ask because when I attended the prelim hearing for Sharon Palmer and James Stewart in Ventura County, CA, a friend of mine was escorted out of the courtroom and not allowed to re-enter, all on suspicion that she was using a recording device... It seemed odd and unjust to me. Clearly, I need to educate myself better on my own rights, if I'm to have any chance at protecting them.
My sense is there is a difference, legally, between filming police and filming/recording court hearings. On the latter, the public is definitely entitled to court records, and to official transcripts of court proceedings. But I believe states vary in what is allowed, and in some places, judges may have final say over whether actual court proceedings can be recorded. You'll notice in some highly publicized trials, there are artists who produce drawings of key people, because no filming is allowed. Yet in some places, there are videos of the proceedings instantly available. As you suggest, probably worthwhile to research in advance what is allowed, and who has the final decision, about recording in a courtroom.
We are routinely photographed and video-taped by government agencies on roads, in buildings, and virtually anywhere from aircraft, with the intent of using recorded events for police action should somebody be caught breaking a law or regulation. Supporters of the practice say that if we have nothing to hide we should not object to being filmed. What does it mean then, if "they" can film "us" but not the other way around?
On cameras in court: Presumable the restriction is to protect justice by preventing the proceedings from reacting to the cameras. There is ample reason to be suspicious of that idea, as some carefully worded comments from Supreme Court justices indicate:
http://www.c-span.org/The-Courts/Cameras-in-The-Court/
As usual, control is the issue.
Yesterday I exchanged emails with a CA conventional dairyman that has been a bogger and activist for fair dairy milk prices ( he is a rare one in deed ).
He said the following: Whisky is for drinking and milk is for fighting!...
He also said that there is a schizophrenia in the American Dairy Industry saying: Dairymen want the government out of their back pockets....but their damn well better be a subsidy check in their front pocket by Friday.
FoodNet stats show little improvement in foodborne illnesses
http://www.thepacker.com/fruit-vegetable-enewsletter/packer-daily/FoodNe...
Fund’s goal allows direct purchases from farms
http://www.americanfarm.com/publications/the-new-jersey-farmer/
@ user2389: I thought the gubment had a big idea about creating "food safety" by irradiating everything to death. I tried to find some information to post here about just that subject, but all the sites are either .gov or from wiki - two of the MOST unreliable sources for truthful information I can think of. I did find a good Canadian based web site concerning nuclear stuff where they talk about radiation and irradiation, but it was pretty involved and didn't have anything to do with food. So, even though American food is being irradiated, people are still getting sick. Hmph. The gubment called irradiation "pasteurization without the heat". Wow, that's scientific. They also fail to mention the dangers involved.
And it's another example of where the gubment doesn't have to label foods unless they choose to do so. Restaurants don't have to tell you if certain foods are irradiated either, but some do just because they know that people want to know.
Never expect a straight answer from the gubment about anything. I would venture to say that food borne illness numbers are probably a lot different than what is quoted in that article, but the CDC and other agencies just pick numbers out of a hat. No basis in fact because those numbers change every second, even though they're "protecting our foods and our bodies". Uh-hunh.
For those of you that have an iPad, there is a nifty App (for Free) available to download called "Know Your Rights". It is a quick way to know exactly what to do when confronted by "authorities". Very useful and....did I mention...it is Free!!
The actions of the police in Canada with regard to phones and videotaping in the raid on Glencoulton Farm reveal the sinister aspects of the recently passed "Federal Crime Bill."
The police no longer need to go before a judge to get a warrant to access/or seize phone, internet or email traffic, information or phone call and use data. The smoke screen around this intrusive legislation is exemplified by the conservative party's rhetoric or should we call it propaganda. "This legislation will enable the law enforcement community to catch pedophiles, so anyone against this legislation supports pedophiles." In Canada we no longer have any court protected expectation of privacy in the use of our phones or computers or cameras.