CBC tries to shut down lawsuit by detective who probed infant vaccine deaths

Helen Grus’ lawsuit alleges CBC and others waged an “adverse campaign of publishing harmful, malicious, and harassing newspaper articles containing false statements."

By: Jason Unrau

The case of the Ottawa detective found guilty of discreditable conduct for probing a link between COVID vaccines and infant deaths resumes this week for the penalty phase of proceedings, which have spanned three years; more than five altogether since Helen Grus was suspended, investigated, then charged under the Police Services Act in July 2021. At the same time, Grus is carrying on her fight to hold the CBC and others accountable for what she calls “malicious and harassing” coverage.

The tremendous amount of time and resources Ottawa Police Services (OPS) expended in its prosecution of the 23-year police veteran with an otherwise impeccable record seems at odds with a more sensible approach of allowing Grus to complete her probe, or as referred to during her protracted disciplinary tribunal, “the unsanctioned special project”, and let chips fall where they may.

After all, Grus was and remains a top investigator with OPS. During her years with the force’s sex assault and child abuse (SACA) unit, her detective work sent a child rapist to prison, superiors asked her to audit hundreds of unsolved cases and urged her to take the sergeant’s examination. After being charged, Grus was seconded to the robbery unit, where her investigation record is also stellar as was heard during the tribunal.

And the longer her case has dragged out, more information about the harms these COVID drugs caused has emerged, adding weight to Grus’ suspicions; however, disciplinary tribunal officer Chris Renwick, retired OPS superintendent, was never interested. Renwick denied Grus’ defence team expert medical testimony and excluded evidence, most recently documents that Canadian public health officials were aware of circumstantial but related COVID vaccine harm, even as mandates were being implemented and carried out across the country.

Take the shot or lose your job. Take the shot or you cannot visit grandma in the hospital. Take the shot, or you cannot play hockey and so on.

But the elephant in the room remained as her tribunal grinded along and remains to this day. In his March 2025 decision, Renwick writes that “political and societal ramifications” of Grus’ inquiries, including COVID vaccine status of mothers, as she did directly in one instance and internally with fellow SACA investigators, were the real issue.

“It is fair to conclude that a dispassionate, reasonable person would have concerns to learn that a SACA detective discreetly, without authorization, undertook investigative inquiries of criminal negligence into the actions of public health officials, clouded by her personal belief of a potential linkage between infant deaths and COVID-19 vaccinations,” writes Renwick, although investigating child deaths under five was part of SACA unit’s mandate.

“If in fact ultimately deemed warranted, investigative inquiries of such magnitude, even preliminary, would have to be carefully considered by the (OPS), in consultation with legal, medical, and prosecution experts, due to the political and societal ramifications entailed.”

A politically convenient decision if there ever was one, for a prosecution that Grus’ lawyer Bath-Shéba van den Berg has described as a cover-up.

Grus committed no real crime. She was not running a tow-truck kickback scam or caught drunk driving, yet her union would not assist with legal defense costs as it had other OPS members before similar tribunals for allegations of criminal code offences. So, on top of the professional damage this case has caused Grus, the financial toll on her has been tremendous as well, while John and Jane Q Taxpayer pick up the tab for OPS’ visceral run through the quasi-judicial wilderness.

To wit, Renwick ignored potential witness tampering by then-professional standards unit (PSU) inspector Hugh O’Toole (OPS’ internal affairs boss during the investigation of Grus), denied Grus and her legal counsel expert witnesses and access to her own duty book (police notebook), before OPS replaced in-house lawyer Vanessa Stewart.

In addition to serial interruption of defence counsel and once drawing comparisons between Grus and a notorious murderer, Stewart was in conflict of interest the entire time, given her sister-in-law was a police witness for the OPS prosecution. To say that this process bore little resemblance to a real court would be an understatement.

Though Grus’ first gambit in a real court failed – in December 2023 Ontario superior court Justice Marc Labrosse dismissed her application for judicial review of Renwick’s duty book decision – an $875,000 lawsuit against the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, its reporter Shaamini Yogaretnam and unnamed members of OPS remains very much alive.

Grus’ lawsuit alleges CBC, Yogaretnam and OPS members waged an “adverse campaign of publishing harmful, malicious, and harassing newspaper articles containing false statements,” precipitating the discreditable conduct charge. In February, lawyers for CBC began arguments in the Ontario superior court to have the lawsuit tossed for violating anti-SLAPP (strategic litigation against public participation) legislation.

“This is about an individual’s exercise of her power as a police officer. To pursue on her own initiative, an investigation into whether a parental decision on COVID-19 vaccines led to the death of their infant children,” said counsel for CBC David Taylor, arguing the public interest outweighed any harms that befell Grus in the aftermath of Yogaretnam’s reporting.

During PSU investigating officer Jason Arbuthnot’s disciplinary tribunal testimony, he also described Grus’ vaccine inquiries as laying blame on parents who followed public health advice, but Superior Court of Ontario justice Sylvia Corthorn questioned this characterization of Grus’ actions and motivation.

“What if you had said to me that on her own initiative, the detective investigated the potential correlation between a pregnant woman receiving the COVID-19 injection and the death of infants? That could be seen, from some perspectives, as a valuable public initiative for the well-being of the public generally. This is what I see. Is anybody paying attention to this, whether the person is in favor of or against the vaccine as a whole?” said Corthorn.

“That may well be a valid question to ask. And my point is, it can’t be irrelevant just because of the way you phrase it.”

Arguments in CBC’s anti-SLAPP motion continue in the Ontario superior court in June and the penalty phase for her discreditable conduct runs from May 19 to 21 at OPS Huntmar Road station in Stittsville, Ontario. OPS is asking the tribunal to punish Grus with a two-year rank demotion and commensurate pay cut.