Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2019

The AIH Transcript for December 6, 2019

Hosts: Carol Off and Karen Gordon

Prologue

CAROL OFF: Hello. I'm Carol Off.

KAREN GORDON: Good evening. I'm Karen Gordon. And this is As It Happens.

[Music: Theme]

KG: Tonight...

CO: The long harm of the law. Police in India are being celebrated for killing four men accused in a high profile rape case -- but a woman's rights activist says this outcome is more than just unjust.

KG: Arms length. It's been 30 years since Heidi Rathjen the massacre at Montreal's Ecole Polytechnique, and she's still fighting for better gun control in Canada.

CO: Mesmerizing to the occasion. The Montreal Children's Hospital finds that hypnotizing some of its young patients before certain procedures reduces stress, pain, and tantrums.

KG: Unsafe passage. Uber reveals that there were more than 3000 sexual assaults in the US in its vehicles during 2018 -- our guest says that's an important admission, but what the company does about it is more important.

CO: Ahead by more than a century. In the northern community of Tuktoyaktuk, the late Persis Gruben was an elder in every sense of the word -- and was wise beyond her years, even at 101.

KG: And axing for trouble. Norway scoured its forests for the best Christmas tree to chop down and send to London to stand in Trafalgar Square, where it's being insulted for looking mangy and anemic. As It Happens. The Friday Edition. Radio that supposes they're pining for a different spruce.

[Music: Theme]

Part 1: After Indian police kill rape suspects, lawyer calls public celebrations 'abhorrent'

India rape case

Guest: Prabhsahay Kaur

SOUNDCLIP

[People cheering]

KG: The sounds of celebration in the Indian city of Hyderabad today. Residents were toasting their local police officers, hoisting them on their shoulders and showering them with flower petals. Hours earlier, those police officers had shot and killed four suspects accused of raping and killing a young female veterinarian. The vet's remains were found last week, and the case sparked massive protests. And in the early hours of Friday morning, police ordered the detained suspects to take them back to the scene of her rape and murder. Police say they shot and killed the suspects when they tried to escape. While Hyderabad is celebrating those deaths -- our guest is not. Prabhsahay Kaur is a women's rights activist and a lawyer in New Delhi. And that's where we reached her.

CO: Ms. Kaur what do you say to people in Hyderabad who are celebrating the killing of these four men?

PRABHSAHAY KAUR: To be honest, I think it's absolutely abhorrent. This is an insult to the democracy. It's an insult to our constitution. It's an insult to the rule of law. And I don't think they are any better than any other criminals who take law into their own hands.

CO: Even the parents of the rape victim, though, are calling these deaths, justice. They say that their daughter has received justice by virtue of these police killing the men.

PK: The Indian law doesn't allow me to take the rape victim's name. And she's been named Disha. Personally, I'm completely against that law. But because it's the law, I won't use her name. The parents of the Disha are at a very different mindset right now. And I won't justify that they are saying this, but one can understand their rage. But one cannot understand the rage of people who are absolutely taking law into their own hands and that also people who are supposed to be the protectors of law.

CO: Can you give us a few details of how this came to be? This happened at 3:00 am. These four men had been taken to the scene of the crime of what happened to this young woman. What happened from then?

PK: So it's routine to take the accused back to the scene of the crime. They were not armed. So there is absolutely no question of them having arms to fire at the police. In fact, in one statement, the police have said that they were attacked with stones and sticks, which definitely should not call for such an un-proportionate reaction as to them shooting all four of them.

CO: And there are so many questions, aren't there? I mean first of all, how could all four of them be shot dead? Why were they not just wounded? Why couldn't they have overwhelmed them and apprehended them, again, given that the police were armed? Why 3 am? I mean you must have a lot of questions of your own.

PK: Absolutely. And not only the act in itself, but the acts and the reaction after it. For instance, they left the bodies there for a long time for the public to collect it. And this entire celebration and all of this happened much after -- many hours -- after the incident. But there is one heartening development that has happened today. The High Court of Telangana has taken suo motu cognizance of this incident. They have directed for the bodies of all the four accused to be sent for post-mortem. And they have directed for the bodies to be preserved. So I'm very glad to know that this kind of kangaroo justice hasn't affected our higher courts. And who are still viewing it in the right perspective and they are asking the questions that need to be asked.

CO: How is the police department itself responding to what its officers did?

PK: They are calling themselves heroes. I believe this is a moment of glory for them. So it's very unfortunate because it's not for the police to take a decision. It's for the courts to decide whether they were actually the accused or not after a trial. And if the police is going to indulge in acts like this, it is going to put more question on whether they caught the right accused. Why were they in such a hurry to remove these people if they actually felt that their investigation would have ultimately led to conviction for them? So it puts a lot of questions on the arrest of these four if you ask me.

CO: The details of this are extremely difficult to take. So we'll warn our listeners that this is coming. But can you tell us how this woman was killed?

PK: This woman was a veterinarian. She was working in a government hospital. She parked her vehicle and she went to work. It seems that some of the accused saw her in the morning when she parked her vehicle there, and they knew she was going to come back in the evening. So they planned it in such a manner that they punctured the tire of her vehicle. So when she came back in the evening around 6:00 to collect her vehicle they apprehended her and they also to help her. The plan was that they will ambush her, which is exactly what they did. She was taken into the bushes. She was raped. She was then strangulated. And to remove all evidence, they burnt her body.

CO: It's so disturbing. And I recall from a few days ago, the public reaction -- there were many who thought, 'well, what was she doing out late? Why didn't she call police?' There were a lot of suggestions that she may have brought this on herself.

PK: That's extremely disturbing. And I think it's doing a huge disservice to the woman who has lost her life because she was earning an honest living. She was an independent, confident young lady who was going out to work. And raising questions like this is as bad as the incident in itself. But to be honest with you, when Nirbhaya's case happened in 2012, we had heard a lot of these voices. It seems that we have also accepted and moved on as a society that women have a right to earn their livelihood. They have a right to be out in the open. They have a right to be out on the road in the same way as men do. So this time around, that voice has been in the minority rather than the majority.

CO: When you mention 2012, this was the brutal attack on a woman in a minibus and a gang rape in that situation and she died as well.

PK: Yes. That led to a national uproar. It led to a lot of changes in the law. Fast track courts have been set up for rapes. So the law was taking its course.

CO: People who are celebrating, who see this as justice -- is it not an issue that there are so many cases that don't end with a successful conviction, that there's so much impunity for rape and for attacks on women that people perhaps feel this is the only way they would have had any satisfaction? Is that possible?

PK: That's true. That's absolutely what their justification is. This reaction is testament of the absolute failure of our criminal justice system to bring justice for rape victims.

CO: What's the biggest thing that's been lost in this killing of these four men today?

PK: To be honest for you, we haven't considered this and seen this beyond the point of view of punishment. Increasing punishment is a deterrent. But what we're not accepting and understanding is that it's not the severity of punishment, but the certainty of punishment, which is important. The other aspect that I think is entirely lost in this entire conversation is the need for education. We don't realize and understand that somewhere these men are growing up with a feeling that women are not their equals. They feel that whenever they want to take out their frustration, they can make any woman their prey. This education of respect for women, respect for their dignity has to start at the school level. And there is absolutely no effort at all to inculcate that sense in boys as they're growing up. I feel this is really lacking and this will go a long way in the long run, preventing molestation and rape from happening.

CO: Ms. Kaur I know it's very late and I appreciate that you would speak with us. Thank you so much.

PK: Thank you so much. Thank you.

KG: Prabhsahay Kaur is a women's rights activist and lawyer in New Delhi. We reached her there. For more on this story, go to cbc.ca/aih.

[Music]

Medical hypnosis

Guest: Johanne L’Ecuyer

KG: Convincing children to calm down and prepare for a medical procedure often leaves everyone in tears. But now some staff at Montreal Children's Hospital have a new tool at their disposal: hypnosis. They've just completed a pilot program to see how well hypnosis works on young patients to reduce the pain and anxiety involved in getting a catheter inserted or even having a biopsy. Johanne L'Ecuyer is the Chief Medical Imaging Technologist at the Montreal Children's Hospital, and she started the pilot project. We reached her in Montreal.

CO: Johanne, what made you decide to try hypnosis for your young patients at the hospital?

JOHANNE L'ECUYER: Well, it started a few years ago when the director of our professional order went to France and attended a conference on some procedures done under hypnosis for pediatric patients in medical imaging. So when he got back to Montreal, he proposed to me to go and visit France to find out if we could import this technique to Montreal.

CO: When you went over and saw this technique being done, what was your reaction? What did you think of that?

JOHANNE L'ECUYER: I was floored. It was amazing because procedures that we saw there were done here but under general anesthesia. And over there, it's simply under hypnosis. So it's quite amazing.

CO: And when you watch it, how did the children respond?

JOHANNE L'ECUYER: Very very well. But there's a certain age, right, because if you go younger than 6 years old, it usually doesn't work. They need to be able to concentrate and to collaborate with you because we go into their imaginary.

CO: Most people's experience with hypnosis is from old movies where there's a watch going back and forth and saying "you're getting very sleepy now." So I presume that that's not how it works. What do you actually do?

JOHANNE L'ECUYER: Well, it's not the watch. We don't do that. And they're not sleeping. You have to understand that they're conscious of what's going on. So the way we do it is -- it starts in the waiting area. We go and we meet with the patient. And at that point, we ask them what is comforting for them? What do they like in life? Is it sport? Is it a day at the beach? Whatever they would like us to talk to them about. And from the story that we're telling them, we have to be very careful of the procedures. So that the patient is not surprised. Let's say there's a needle involved. And if the subject is a day at the beach, the technologists would say, you are at the beach, you're lying under the sun, you're warm. It's a nice day. And there's a mosquito around you and the mosquito is going on your arm. And very soon the mosquito will leave. So they will put that into their imaginary.

CO: Wow. That's quite an extraordinary thing to do to a mind. And so what kinds of procedures are we talking about that they are having under hypnosis?

JOHANNE L'ECUYER: So the project started with voiding cystourethrogram procedure where we have to put a small catheter into the bladder. So it's quite uncomfortable. But this procedure is never done under any kind of sedation or any anesthesia because we need the collaboration of the patient for that test. But now, instead of not being comfortable, they are comfortable in their imaginary. The other thing is a picc line insertion. A picc line insertion is a catheter that we put in a vein of the arm and it goes through the heart and it's in place for weeks for chemotherapy and for [inaudible]. So this is also not comfortable and it's this kind of procedure if there's six and more (years old) also we don't do sedation. But now with hypnosis, it's much more easier. So once we saw that it was working well with procedure without sedation, we pushed a little bit further and we started to do biopsies that are usually done with sedation and also sometimes under general anesthesia.

CO: Oh, my gosh. In this pilot project, are you able to compare the children who have these procedures under anesthetic with those who are being hypnotized? How do you compare the experiences for the children?

JOHANNE L'ECUYER: So what we did is once we had the permission, I should say, to start this project, we started our control group. So a group of patients that were going through these procedures without any sedation. So we start rating. We start collecting data. So the way we collect the data is at the end of the procedure, we show pain scale to the patient and we ask them to rate their experience. So that's how we are able to compare without hypnosis and with hypnosis.

CO: At the end of this pilot project, you were able to compare how the children reacted to these procedures under anesthetic and how they reacted under hypnosis. Was there a big difference?

JOHANNE L'ECUYER: There's a huge difference. So the pain scale goes from 0 -- where there is no pain -- to 10 which is the maximum. So for the procedures that we've done without hypnosis, the average was at 5.4. And with the hypnosis the average is at 1.4 -- which is quite amazing.

CO: How far do you think this could go? What you saw in France, did you see this go into, for instance could it go to surgeries?

JOHANNE L'ECUYER: Well, I didn't see any surgeries in France. There's some countries where there are some surgery being done under hypnosis. And not very long ago, there was a surgery booked for one of our teenager patient who has muscular dystrophy. And this patient was supposed to have a gastrostomy. A gastrostomy is you have to open the skin at the stomach level and put a tube inside so that the patient will be fed by that tube. And the anesthetists refuse to do anesthesia on that patient because it was risky. So he consulted with our radiologists. We said, well, why don't we do it under hypnosis? And the technologists said, why not? How long is it going to take? It was supposed to take 30 minutes. So she said yes. So the anesthetist was present all time of the procedure. And instead of lasting 30 minutes, this procedure lasted two hours. So the technologist kept the patient under hypnosis for two hours. It was quite amazing. And he was fine. At the end, we ask him to rate on the the scale and he rated his pain at 4.

CO: Just extraordinary stuff. And...wow. I think lot of people will be interested in this. Johanne, I appreciate speaking with you. Thanks.

JOHANNE L'ECUYER: You're welcome.

KG: Johanne L'Ecuyer is the Chief Medical Imaging Technologist at the Montreal Children's Hospital. We reached her in Montreal.

[Music]

Tuktoyaktuk elder obit

Guest: Chuck Gruben

SOUNDCLIP

[Woman speaking in Inuit language]

KG: That's the voice of Persis Gruben, an elder from Tuktoyakutuk, Northwest Territories. She was telling some of her life story as part of an oral history project recorded in November 1976. At the time, she was 58 -- and she already had plenty of stories to tell as the mother of 11 children who'd seen her community experience its share of change and upheaval that turned out to be only part of her story. She would go on to live another four decades as a respected and much loved elder in Tuktoyaktuk. Persis Gruben died on Sunday at the age of 101. Chuck Gruben is the youngest of her children. We reached him in Tuktoyaktuk.

CO: Chuck, first of all, I'm sorry for the loss of your mother.

CHUCK GRUBEN: Yes, she had a long-good life.

CO: 101 years old.

CG: 101.

CO: What's it like for you to hear her voice from 1976?

CG: Well, I do have some recordings from 1976. That was the year that we moved back to our bush camp, which is about 65-70 miles east of Tuktoyaktuk. And that's where she spent probably most of her life.

CO: And was that a happy place for her?

CG: Yes. Even after my dad passed on in 1993, mom was still going up with this -- like you said -- it was her happy place.

CO: Even though she was in the bush camp and she had all the children -- you were the youngest of 11 -- she was very involved in her community. And can you describe the impact that your mother, that Persis Gruben, had on the community of Tuktoyaktuk?

CG: Well, first and foremost, she had a real soft-spot any kids. It didn't matter whose kids they were. There was always a place in her heart and her home when these kids would come in or wherever she'd meet them.

CO: And it's recorded that she was the last known survivor of this Shingle Point Residential School. What did she tell you about her experiences there?

CG: You'll hear a lot about residential school survivors on radio, TV -- a lot of the negative things. But she went to school at Shingle Point and she completed 2 years. And she said this was a happy place for her too. She never found nothing negative about staying there except missing her parents. That was about the only negative thing I heard her say about school was: it was lonely at times.

CO: And what about as a child in her own family, her mother and her stepfather, when she was young, they spoke different languages. Is that right?

CG: Yes. They spoke both different languages so there was a communication gap. So this is where my mom came in. And one, she got the hang of the two languages -- she translated between her mom and dad.

CO: She was interpreting language between her parents. That's how they communicated.

CG: Yes. Yes. She was an awesome lady -- an awesome mom. And even before she met my dad, they married in 1937. She was telling a story in 1928 and 1929 --when the men used to go out hunting, she'd be left alone with her siblings -- with her little sister. And she said many times, a polar bear came up -- they were living in a snow house. She said that they had a polar bear stomping on. But she never got scared. She'd go out and scare the bear away. But that was nothing new for her.

CO: She was a storyteller, wasn't she? We just played some of her storytelling from 1978, the beginning. And so what was important to her about passing those stories on -- having an oral tradition where those stories would go to you and to others?

CG: All the stories to me, anyway, were spoken in our Inuvialuktun language. And she spoke so clearly. Like if right now someone else speaks the language to me there are mixed up words now. I have a hard time. But when my mom spoke, I could understand every word. You know, she told me that stories are important. They're going to be important in the future because our young kids are not going to know how hard it was. So she said stories are good -- and kindness is even better.

CO: When your mom turned 100 last year, I understand there was a big birthday celebration. There were more than 100 people who came from across the Northwest Territories, from the Yukon, Alberta, British Columbia, and even some from the United States. Is that right?

CG: Yes. Yes, they were. Everybody tried to make her 100th birthday. She didn't like to be fussed about her. When you fussed about her, she would always turn down and say "I'm okay." It's very close to my life. Some kind of a bond. My wife was fussing about her again and she turned around and told my wife, "I'm not sick. I just old." She made us kind of giggle.

CO: Your mother had a big impact on a lot of people in her own way. What's the thing that you will remember most about her?

CG: Well, for myself personally, I'm going to miss walking into her house where she would laying there or sitting there. She would start singing a little song to me. And I never did get that song on record. So I think that's something I'm going to miss. She always told me that, whatever you do, do it well and don't be scared to do it. Those are the words and actions I've tried to live by. Everything I do, I do it to the best of my ability and I think of my mom when I do this stuff.

CO: Chuck, your mother sounds like just an absolutely remarkable woman who had a good life. And I'm glad you would tell us about her today. Thank you.

CG: You're welcome.

KG: Chuck Gruben is the youngest of Persis Gruben's 11 children. She died on Sunday at the age of 101. We reached Chuck Gruben in Tuktoyaktuk, Northwest Territories. And thanks to the Inuvialuit Cultural Resource Centre Digital North Library for the recording of Persis Gruben that we heard in our introduction.

[Music]

Kerry McKee

KG: If you were five years old, there's nothing better than being with your friends and family. Except maybe being with your friends as you and your parents officially become a family. That was the case for Michael Clark. The five year old invited his kindergarten classmates along, when his foster parents officially adopted him in a Michigan courtroom yesterday. And his classmates didn't just sit there and watch -- they actually participated in the ceremony. Kerry McKee is Michael's teacher. She told the BBC's Julian Marshall all about it.

SOUNDCLIP

KERRY MCKEE: Andrea, his mom-to-be mentioned that there may be a December 5th court date for official adoption. I saw her just beam at the possibility of being a brand new mom. And I thought, how can we support Michael with that same feeling? That feeling of being included and supported and loved. And so I just kind of thought about what would be the chances for us to have the opportunity to go to this special event. And so I said it makes sense to me with my heart. But I said, I want Michael's opinion and approval. And he, according to his parents, had an overwhelmingly excited response of: yes.

JULIAN MARSHALL: And his classmates had a chance to speak at the adoption hearing.

KERRY MCKEE: That was just so heartfelt. And this was very unexpected. The judge asked each individual in the courtroom -- adults and children -- to stand, state their name, and also state why they were there. The line came around to me and I burst into tears. I couldn't even finish a sentence. And yet one of my students right next to me -- five years of age -- stood up proudly and said, "He's my best friend." And then the next child stood up and said, "I love him." And then the next one was, you know, "I'm so happy he has a family who will love him forever." And so 21 little voices stood up. And I was so proud of them that they could stand up with no rehearsal, no inkling that this was even going to occur and be able to represent what was in their hearts at that time for that child and that new family.

KG: Oh, that's so sweet. That's Kerry McKee speaking with the BBC's Julian Marshall. Yesterday, the kindergarten teacher and her students joined their five year old classmate, Michael Clarke, in court as he was officially adopted.

[Music]

Part 2: École Polytechnique anniversary

École Polytechnique anniversary

Guest: Heidi Rathjen

KG: It's been 30 years since a misogynist gunman at Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal killed 14 young women. For those who survived and those who lost loved ones, the grief that immediately followed the Montreal Massacre has not gone away. For some, neither has the determination to try and prevent similar tragedies. It's been with them since the beginning. Suzanne Laplante-Edward is the mother of Anne-Marie Edward. Anne-Marie was a 21-year-old engineering student -- one of the 14 women killed on December 6th, 1989. A few years later, Ms. Laplante-Edward sat down in the CBC Montreal studio to reflect on that night.

SOUNDCLIP

SUZANNE LAPLANTE-EDWARD: There was a makeshift morgue that they had made up there right on the premises. And we went to identify her. And we were one of the lucky ones where Anne-Marie had not been shot in her face. So that was a little bit of a blessing in the grief. And I remember when I did identify her, I went around the table -- and my husband and my son were on this side -- and I just looked at the skin and I kissed her on the forehead. And it was like there was an incredible and unexplainable transfer of energy. And I swear to you, it was physical. And it was like my daughter saying to me, "do something and do it fast." It was like her screaming to me, "do something like now!" I didn't know what to do. But I just knew I would be doing something on a grand scale and like something I would devote the rest of my energy to doing something to make this wrong, good. To make a little part of this big big wrong, good.

KG: From our archives, that was Suzanne Laplante-Edward, the mother of Anne-Marie Edward, speaking in 1995, six years after the Montreal Massacre. Ms. Laplante-Edward is one of several relatives and survivors who are still doing something. They've written to the federal minister of public safety urging him to take immediate action to curb guns. Heidi Rathjen is a survivor of the Polytechnique shooting, and another one of the signatories. We reached her on the road between Quebec City and Montreal.

CO: Heidi, I know you were in the studio with Suzanne Laplante-Edward when she talked about kissing her daughter Anne-Marie and feeling this powerful urge that she had to do something. What's it like for you to hear that now, so many years later?

HEIDI RATHJEN: Well, I know Suzanne really well by now. And I've actually been working with her for 30 years now. Way back then we worked to pass comprehensive, reasonable gun control. Which passed in December of 1995. And yet she continues to support gun control and work with other advocates like myself. It's heartwarming. But at the same time, it's really tragic that these families continue to fight to protect public safety.

CO: I think that Suzanne is with you in the car right now as you return. Is that right?

HR: Yes.

CO: And how important is it that you have these allies -- when you hear Suzanne talk about the six years after the massacre, her feeling that she that her daughter was saying, you have to do something -- do you still feel that? Do you still feel those women telling you, "you must do this?"

HR: Well the reason that I'm involved is I made a commitment to my friends and schoolmates after that day that we would at least try to make a difference. Make sure something good came out of this tragedy. And gun control is one way that is concrete that saves lives. And that's why as long as we have a voice and we can make a difference, we are working together with other survivors and families of victims of other mass shootings because they didn't stop. And that's why we continue to work on this cause.

CO: And what do you think in the 30 years that you and others have been working on this to do something about -- to get better gun control -- what do you regard as the greatest accomplishment at this point?

HR: Well, we did achieve comprehensive gun control -- many measures. We've lost a lot of them. But there are still some pillars that are left, like the licensing of all gun owners. We lost the long-gun registry. But one of our biggest fights is to get a registry in Quebec. We were able to safeguard the data, the federal data, for Quebec and now the province is in the midst of implementing its registry. We haven't achieved it yet, but we may be on the eve of it because the Liberals did promise to ban assault weapons. And the promise is very solid. And we're not talking about the kind of ban that we saw in the past which was accompanied by grandfather clauses, meaning that the weapons that were banned would take generations before they would be eliminated from circulation. The Liberals promised to ban assault weapons like New Zealand and institute a buyback program, which would mean that these weapons will no longer be in circulation in two years. And it hasn't happened yet. But we just heard the throne speech and that promise was reiterated. So we're incredibly optimistic that finally, after 30 years, we will finally achieve the goal of the student's petition that was launched in the aftermath of the shooting, which called for a ban on assault weapons. 30 years later, we might actually get it. And that I think will be a very significant achievement.

CO: Because it's quite striking that the semiautomatic rifle that the Polytechnique shooter used, the Ruger Mini-14, it still has -- after 30 years -- has not been banned. So will that happen now if the Liberals are true to their promise?

HR: Well, we hope so. And we're optimistic because during the election campaign, Justin Trudeau did refer to the Polytechnique tragedy as being committed with an assault weapon. And so if the prime minister and the government is consistent with that comment, then the Ruger Mini-14 should be included in their definition of assault weapon.

CO: You were at the Polytechnique that night -- hiding -- while the shooter was killing those women and injuring another 14. It happened in about 20 minutes. So you understand the power of these weapons that could kill and injure so many people so quickly. Do you think that if you don't have that experience, if you don't know what that's like, you don't appreciate how important it is to stop these weapons?

HR: That's totally true. You know, most Canadians support gun control, but they don't really do anything about it because they're not affected by it. And so, like the father of one of the victims of the Danforth shooting said he supported gun control but never thought to get involved until it affected his family. And that's why I think the families of the victims have such a strong voice because they know what can happen when guns fall into the wrong hands. And Nathalie Provost, who is my friend and co-spokesperson for PolySeSouvient -- she faced the killer and she knows what a powerful semi-automatic with 30 bullet ammunition clips can do. She saw her friend fall down dead around her in a matter of seconds. And I mean, 30 years later, that's why we still feel it's important to fight to get these out of the hands of private citizens. These are weapons that are designed to kill people and nobody should have them other than the police and the military.

CO: I'm sure you've heard the argument, you've heard it countless times, that it's not legal guns that are the problem -- it is illegal guns. No matter what bans there are on weapons, weapons legally obtained will be stolen and sold or come up through the United States. What do you say to the argument that when you put restrictions on firearms that it just limits the rights of people who would never do anything like this?

HR: If you look at mass shootings, virtually all of the mass shootings other than the Danforth shooting in Toronto were committed with legal guns by legal gun owners up until they pulled the triggers. And most domestic violence and most suicides are committed with legal guns. That's not to minimize the phenomenon of illegal guns and gangs. That's also a problem. But, you know, one shouldn't be done at the expense of the other. And there is no right to own guns in Canada. Public safety should come first.

CO: At Quebec's National Assembly this week, the 14 women who were killed were given posthumous medals. And I know you were there. What did it mean for you to see them honored like that?

HR: Well, I was especially happy to see all the families. There were 11 families that were present and they each got a medal. And I have to say that somehow this year, the 30th anniversary, is really special. The people are saying that something happened since -- even since the 25th -- including the ability to call it what it is, femicide and murder of women because they were women, an act of hatred against feminists. It was a delicate issue at the beginning. And I think over the years, society has evolved. That's kind of what we talked about with the families that somehow this is a very special anniversary. And something happening in a positive way, not just to commemorate the 14 sisters and daughters that they lost, but to move forward this better understanding of what happened and what we need to do to move forward and prevent violence against women and hatred of women.

CO: Heidi, it's good to hear your voice again and to speak with you. And thank you once again for talking to us.

HR: Thank you for having me.

CO: And give our best to Suzanne.

HR: I will.

KG: Heidi Rathjen is a survivor of the shooting at Ecole Polytechnique, and a longtime gun control advocate. She was on the road on her way to Montreal. Nathalie Provost also signed that letter to the minister of public safety. She was wounded in the shooting, but survived. Five days after the 1989 massacre on a day when some of the victims were being buried -- then-As-It-Happens host Michael Enright reached Ms. Provost in the hospital. Here's part of their conversation.

SOUNDCLIP

MICHAEL ENRIGHT: Was it a help to you in your grief -- was it a help to watch the funeral on television?

NATHALIE PROVOST: Yes, because now it's a reality. You know, it was a bad dream for me. Now it's a reality. It was a way for me to say goodbye to all of my friends.

MICHAEL ENRIGHT: As you watched the funeral and you saw all those people there -- obviously, you must have thought about your friends. Did you think of them in happy times? What kind of images did you have of your friends?

NATHALIE PROVOST: I had some marvelous images of them. They were beautiful girls. They were intelligent girls. They were girls with a high potential. And it's in that way that I will remember them.

MICHAEL ENRIGHT: Have you had a chance to think about yourself, about your own future?

NATHALIE PROVOST: Yes. I will try to make my future as normal as possible. I will try to complete my dream and to make my dream true. But I would like to try to be better to create best world. I dream of a world where respect of the humanity, of life, is a big thing.

MICHAEL ENRIGHT: The question I have, though, is that after you've gone through the nightmare and you saw your friends today being buried at mass, you still believe in the world.

NATHALIE PROVOST: You know, inside each people there is good. After the shot of faith that I had, I had the shot of love, you know, I still live. And I hope that all of my friends that have been hurt see that shot of love.

KG: From our archives from December 1989, that was Polytechnique shooting survivor Nathalie Provost speaking with then host Michael Enright.

[Music]

Christopher Mitchelmore

KG: Last night at Newfoundland and Labrador's House of Assembly members met to decide the fate of Christopher Mitchelmore. He's a cabinet minister who's being held responsible for the controversial hiring of a former Liberal staffer at The Rooms -- a museum, art gallery, and archive in St. John's. That staffer, Carla Foote, got the job at The Rooms without competition and was given a boosted salary. Last night, Minister Mitchelmore's colleagues voted to punish him. It includes a suspension of two weeks without pay. Minister Mitchelmore has said that he unequivocally apologizes to his colleagues and the people of his province. But some members of the opposition aren't satisfied. This morning, PC leader Ches Crosbie spoke with the CBC's Jamie Fitzpatrick. Here's part of that conversation.

SOUNDCLIP

CHES CROSBIE: Look, I've spent less time actually legislating than I have spent time dealing with ethics violations. Now, some of your listeners may say to themselves, you're wasting an awful lot of time on this stuff. But if you have ethics violations, you either live by a code of conduct and a code of ethics or you don't. You can't just let that stuff not be followed up on and not enforced. Particularly in light of the fact that Mr. Ball, the premier, and the minister himself, Mr. Mitchelmore, have dug in and stubbornly refused to vow to parliamentary tradition whereby a minister who is caught in gross misconduct of the kind he was caught in must resign from cabinet. And in the face of that refusal to resign from cabinet, we thought it appropriate to opt for the sanction that he should surrender his minister's salary, not the base pay, but the minister's salary for one year. Now, if he had stepped down from cabinet, we wouldn't be looking for that kind of sanction. But he didn't step down from cabinet. He did not do the honorable thing. He did not take personal responsibility. Dwight Ball did not take responsibility and show Mr. Mitchelmore the door from cabinet. The taxpayers' money here has been squandered. That's the meaning of gross mismanagement. It's gross mismanagement of public funds that would have been appropriate punishment where he's refusing adamantly to step out of the cabinet. And then we had the spectacle of Mr. Mitchelmore refusing to accept even the punishment that his own colleagues saw was just, and voting against it.

JAMIE FITZPATRICK: I want to make reference to one other point you made outside the House of Assembly last night -- and forgive me and correct me, I'm paraphrasing here. So if it's inaccurate, please correct me. But you very much suggest that Dwight Ball still has a lot to answer for in this incident and you're not satisfied to see last night being into it.

CHES CROSBIE: The guy in charge of the team is responsible for everything that goes wrong, whether he was the person who dropped the wrench down the bore hole or not. And I see leadership that way. At the very top you have to have somebody who's responsible. The hallmark of the Liberals under Dwight Ball is they never take responsibility for anything. I think that is not leadership.

KG: That was Newfoundland and Labrador PC leader Ches Crosbie speaking with the CBC's Jamie Fitzpatrick on the St. John's Morning Show. Premier Dwight Ball has denied any involvement in the hiring of Carla Foote.

[Music]

Christmas Tree

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: Boy, are you stupid Charlie Brown. What kind of a tree is that?

VOICE 2: You were supposed to get a good tree. Can't you even tell a good tree from a poor tree?

VOICE 1: I told you, he'd goof it up. He's not the kind you can depend on to do anything right.

VOICE 2: You're a hopeless Charlie Brown. Completely hopeless.

VOICE 1: Rats.

KG: Aww that's so mean. Yes. Charlie Brown's tree is not majestic. It's homely, and sparse, and it sheds needles. But as we all learn from a Charlie Brown Christmas, doesn't anything become majestic when it's imbued with true holiday spirit? No, it doesn't. Not in London, England, where cranky visitors to Trafalgar Square are doing a real hatchet job on the tree provided by Oslo, Norway, this year. It's a little brown in the colour sense and extremely brown in the Charlie sense. You can't fault it for its height. It's a towering thing -- 24 meters tall (that's 79 feet). But it's not the sprucest spruce you ever saw. Its branches are sort of droopy and far enough from one another you could see daylight between them. It's not lush with needles. It looks thirsty. And some underwhelmed people are all "Bah, humbug" about it. A New York Times article quotes passersby saying "it looks like a Christmas tree losing hair," and "It's dead. It's a present from Norway and it's dead." And on social media, people have called it "anemic" and "pathetic." Yikes. Well, for one thing, it's a real spruce tree from an actual Norwegian forest. That's what they look like. And for another thing, Oslo sends a tree to London every year as a sign of gratitude for Britain's support of Norway during the Second World War. As the British ambassador to Norway says, quote, "It is important to consider the symbolism of the tree rather than simply how many branches it has." Exactly. Because really, as Linus says in "A Charlie Brown Christmas."

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: I never thought it was such a bad little tree. It's not bad at al, really. Maybe it just needs a little love.

[Music]

Part 3: 3,000 sexual assaults reported in Uber rides last year the 'tip of the iceberg,' says lawyer

Uber attacks report

Guest: Mike Bomberger

KG: Of course, Uber mostly wants people to talk about the good things about its ride hailing service, its contribution to the sharing economy. But yesterday the company took the unusual step of highlighting the worst things to happen in an Uber in the US over the past year. It reports that more than 3000 sexual assaults were reported in Ubers -- with victims being both drivers and passengers. The assaults ranged from unwanted touching to rape. In addition, nine people were murdered, and 58 killed in crashes involving Ubers. The company pointed out that sexual assaults or murders occurred in only 0.0002 percent of Uber rides. Mike Bomberger is a lawyer representing more than 100 people who say they were sexually assaulted in an Uber or Lyft. We reached him in San Diego. And a warning: this interview contains some descriptions of sexual assault.

CO: Mr. Bomberger, why do you think Uber decided to make these numbers public?

MIKE BOMBERGER: Uber decided to make these numbers public because enough people had come forward about their assaults and enough people were asking for how many assaults happened, that they felt that at some point they can't continue to hide this information.

CO: Victims like the ones you represent. You have 100 people who say they were sexually assaulted in an Uber or Lyft that you're representing. What are some of the stories about Uber, some of the cases, you're dealing with with sexual assault in an Uber?

MB: They're all over the place. People are fondled. People are raped. There's attempted rapes. Some of our clients were successful in fighting off their attacker. Some of our clients were not. Some of our clients were drugged by the drivers. Many of our clients, I would say at least 70 percent were trying to take a Lyft or Uber home late at evening because they were out with friends and were drinking and they were trying to get home safely -- and they were assaulted when they were in the back seat. And some of them started to fall asleep or doze off and they woke up and the drivers were on top of them. And in many cases, their clothes were off.

CO: What do you make of the numbers here, of them reporting that there are more than 3000 cases? What do you make of those numbers?

MB: Well, those numbers represent a fraction of how many assaults actually occur. We've been practicing and specializing in sexual assault for the past 20 years. And all of the studies and data are pretty consistent that at most 1 in 3 women that are sexually assaulted report that assault. So these numbers represent the floor, the tip of the iceberg. And many more women were assaulted that have not reported those assaults. And I'll say one more thing, and that is that the vast majority of these women were drinking prior to the assault. And we know from our own experience that when a woman has been drinking and they are assaulted, the likelihood of them reporting the assault is even less than 1 in 3.

CO: I can probably guess why women who've been drinking don't report them. But what is the reasons for it as far as you know?

MB: Women feel -- and it's not their fault, it's society's fault -- women feel that if they've been drinking and they're assaulted, that people are going to blame them for the assault. And the shame should not fall on the women. It's on these predators that prey on vulnerable women that are trying to make the right decision to get home.

CO: The Uber company points out that the sexual assaults represent only 0.0002 percent of all their Uber rides -- even though their own chief legal officer, Tony West, said that he found those numbers jarring and hard to digest. How do these numbers compare to those in the general population? How do they compare to anything as far as you know?

MB: Well, these numbers are astronomically high. One of the reasons is because most of these happen when you have two strangers together. And the more likely than not, it's the woman who's vulnerable and is assaulted. Women do not often put themselves in a situation where they are alone with a perfect stranger when they're intoxicated or inebriated. So they're putting their trust in the company or in the driver to get them home safely. And unfortunately, these things have occurred to them. Now, one of the things that I really am annoyed by what Mr. West said was that this is a reflection of our society. It's in no way a reflection of our society. Far more women that are in these vehicles -- if you look at all the women that travel in vehicles, in public transportation, in taxis in any situation -- the number of women that are assaulted in ride-share vehicles is far more.

CO: How do these numbers compare to what happens to people in taxicabs where there's this screening background checks, there are a number of things in place, there are licenses for people driving taxis -- how does it compare, do you know?

MB: This is what I can tell you -- and all I have is the data that's available to me. Our office specialized in sexual assault cases for the past 23 years. We have not had one taxicab case where a taxicab driver has assaulted a woman. We have gotten hundreds of cases from ride-share victims just within the past three years. And I mean, if you extrapolate that over 20 years, you know, that would amount to several thousand. So from where we sit, the numbers of assaults that occur in ride-share, you can't even compare it to taxicab because it's just not even a fair comparison.

CO: But now that they have released the numbers, now that they're being transparent, at least about the cases. Do you think that it shows that there's a sign, there's a change coming, or that they're taking this more seriously?

MB: Yes. I think that this report is a watershed moment for ride-share because up to this point I don't believe that either one of these companies truly acknowledged the problem and the amount of women whose lives have been harmed by sexual assaults. And in order to really address the problem, you have to first acknowledge it. And I think, you know, that a lot of the things that Uber did in this report and committed to doing, they didn't have to do, but they did do it. And I know a lot of our clients and victims that we represent feel very good about some of the changes that Uber has committed to being made. And it shows that they're listening somewhat to the victims, how they treat the victims after these events occur. And I think it will change. And I think that Lyft who has been tone deaf up to this point, it's going to have to start listening or they shouldn't be in business because if one ride-share company is safer than the other, I can't see many women deciding to take a Lyft when they could take an Uber -- if one is going to be safer than the other.

CO: Mr. Bomberger we'll leave it there. I appreciate speaking with you. Thank you.

MB: Thank you.

KG: Mike Bomberger is a lawyer representing more than 100 people who say they were sexually assaulted in an Uber or Lyft. We reached him in San Diego.

[Music]

Typhoid vaccine

Guest: Katherine Theiss-Nyland

KG: Typhoid is a disease of poverty. It kills hundreds of thousands of people every year, including children. Now, a new vaccine trial led by researchers at the University of Oxford is showing promising results. The new vaccine does something existing ones don't. Doctors gave the new vaccine to 20,000 children in Nepal and other South Asian and African countries. And the results published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine show typhoid cases fell by 80 percent. Katherine Theiss-Nyland is one of the study's authors. She's a project manager of the study and a senior epidemiologist in the Department of Pediatrics at the University of Oxford. We reached her in London.

CO: Ms. Theiss-Nyland as you know there have been vaccinations for typhoid fever before, what's different about this one?

KATHERINE THEISS-NYLAND: The main differences between this vaccine and previous vaccines relate to the age range. So the vaccine and the potential longevity of protection. So previous vaccinations that have been available for typhoid have not been available for children under the age of 2. And that means that those vaccines are not available for use in infant routine immunization schedules. This new vaccine is licensed for use in children as young as six months of age. And so it can be used in routine vaccine schedules and places where typhoid is endemic.

CO: So how important is it that children that young can get this vaccine?

KATHERINE THEISS-NYLAND: So typhoid burden is predominantly felt in the youngest populations. And so children are the most vulnerable to severe disease for typhoid. And so in a place where typhoid is endemic, being able to introduce the vaccine to very young children allows us to protect them when they're at their most vulnerable and might have the most severe disease experience from typhoid.

CO: This vaccine -- you did a test with people in Bangladesh and Nepal principally. How difficult was it to get 20,000 kids inoculated in this trial? Was there any resistance to that?

KATHERINE THEISS-NYLAND: There wasn't very much resistance in these populations that we were working with. Typhoid is a very well-known disease and people are very eager to have any new way of preventing that for their children. The vaccine was previously tested for safety and immune response in healthy volunteers in Oxford. So before going to Nepal and Bangladesh, we knew the vaccine was safe and we knew the vaccine should be effective. But these results are the first ones to show that in a real world field setting, in an endemic country, we are seeing amazingly strong results at protecting children against typhoid.

CO: What are you up against with typhoid fever, given how many strains of the disease are resistant to antibiotics?

KATHERINE THEISS-NYLAND: So that's a really good point you make. With newly resistant typhoid fever that's resistant against many different drugs, the ability to treat the disease and the cost associated with treatment disease becomes harder and harder. And so a vaccine that can provide long term protection against the vaccine is a real game changer for typhoid prevention.

CO: And people who live in poverty and in poor parts of the world -- they are most vulnerable to typhoid. Is that right?

KATHERINE THEISS-NYLAND: That's definitely correct.

CO: When you call it a game changer, this is a major change, what you mean by that?

KATHERINE THEISS-NYLAND: So if this vaccine continues to be as effective as we are seeing it is proving to be in the study -- it could reduce the incidence of typhoid dramatically across the world and prevent so much mortality in children. And in vulnerable populations, this also affects their quality of life and well-being for families -- having to take care of those who are sick. In places like Nepal we've also seen that the cost of treatment for typhoid can be quite traumatic for families, putting those who are already in poverty situations into more severe and extreme poverty because of the cost of treatment. So a vaccine could prevent a lot of those experiences.

CO: Because families actually can go into debt trying to get medical treatment for their children who get typhoid. Is that right?

KATHERINE THEISS-NYLAND: That's exactly right.

CO: Now who will pay for the immunization of all these children?

KATHERINE THEISS-NYLAND: So one of the wonderful things about the experience with the typhoid vaccine now is that it was WHO pre-qualified, which allows the vaccine to be purchased by the United Nations agencies. And it was also recently listed as a Gavi vaccine. So Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, helps to finance vaccine access in low income countries. And Gavi has opened a 85 million dollar funding stream for eligible countries to introduce the typhoid conjugate vaccine in 2019 and 2020.

CO: And just how serious has it been? Because of the fact that it's so resistant or it's not affected that much by these antibiotics.

KATHERINE THEISS-NYLAND: Well, for example, in Pakistan right now, there's an ongoing outbreak of typhoid that's been going since 2016 and it's causing major concerns in the country, so much so that they've started the first introduction of the vaccine to try to combat this outbreak. That introduction will continue through 2020 and 2021. And so far, over 10 million doses of the vaccine have been supplied to Pakistan to address this. And over 5 million children have been vaccinated. So across the world now, there's a large effort to address these concerns that are spreading through, especially South Asia, quite rapidly.

CO: And because you've moved ahead in Pakistan so quickly, how bad is typhoid fever outbreaks in Pakistan?

KATHERINE THEISS-NYLAND: The outbreak in Pakistan has been extremely bad. I don't have the specific numbers in terms of how highly endemic it is, but it has been one of the worst outbreaks in history.

CO: The timing is perfect, isn't it, because you're dealing with all these resistant strains, the antibiotics aren't working anymore. So it couldn't come at a better time.

KATHERINE THEISS-NYLAND: It's true. And being able to provide early results from Nepal has, I think, helped Pakistan in their introduction and potentially many other countries. And so in all of these countries where we're doing this study is Nepal, Bangladesh, Malawi, we will continue to monitor the populations for longer term efficacy and to understand how the protection against typhoid continues as children grow older. But these early results are very exciting for us.

CO: Thank you for telling us about this.

KATHERINE THEISS-NYLAND: Thank you so much.

KG: Katherine Theiss-Nyland worked on a study about a new typhoid vaccine. She's with the Department of Pediatrics at the University of Oxford. We reached her in London.

[Music]

Alexandra Hall Hall

KG: Now, Quote/Unquote.

[Music]

KG: Directness seems to be one of her main attributes. In fact, you could say it's one of her Hall Hall-marks. I'm talking about the British diplomat who served as a Brexit envoy in Washington with the extremely British name of Alexandra Hall Hall. Her job is to explain the whole hopeless, complex process of the UK leaving the EU in the United States. But if you're hoping she'll explain it to you, you're too late. She just quit that job a week before the election in her home country. It's not that she became fed up with saying the same thing over and over. For one thing, Brexit plans are always changing. And for another, someone whose name is Alexandra Hall Hall is obviously used to repeating herself. The problem was that she got sick and tired of her government believing that honesty is not the best policy. In a resignation letter obtained by CNN, Alexandra Hall Hall writes that she's been deeply troubled by the way British leaders have refused to be direct about the challenges and trade-offs that Brexit will require. She adds that those same leaders routinely use misleading or disingenuous arguments when discussing what any given Brexit option would mean for citizens of the UK. And even if she's already known for withering put downs, this sentence should be added to the Hall Hall Hall-of-Fame. Quote, "I'm also at a stage in life where I would prefer to do something more rewarding with my time than pedal half-truths on behalf of a government I do not trust."

[Music]

Altamont 50th anniversary

Guest: Ethan Russell

KG: It was billed as the "West Coast Woodstock" -- a free concert in Northern California featuring bands like Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young; Jefferson Airplane; and The Grateful Dead -- and headlined by The Rolling Stones. Hundreds of thousands from across the country descended on the Altamont Speedway on December 6th, 1969, to attend the festival. But while Woodstock may have been powered by peace and love, Altamont was a different beast entirely -- lunging at lawlessness and policed by an army of Hells Angels. It would not end well.

SOUNDCLIP

STEFAN PONEK: This is Stefan Ponek, KSAN Radio San Francisco. While The Rolling Stones tour of the United States is over. They rounded up with a free concert at the Altamont Speedway for more than 300,000 people. There were four births, four deaths, and an awful lot of scuffles reported. We received word that someone was stabbed to death in front of the stage by a member of the Hells Angels. Nothing is confirmed on that. We were there. We didn't see it, but we did see a lot. We want to know now what you saw. Our phones are open. We'd like to hear from you. What was the Altamont free concert like?

KG: Ethan Russell was there 50 years ago tonight, watching and capturing the disaster unfolding in real time. Altamont was the last stop on The Stones' American tour. And Mr. Russell was the band's photographer. We reached Ethan Russell in San Anselmo, California.

CO: Ethan it has been 50 years. Is it still as unforgettable as it was that day?

ETHAN RUSSELL: It was traumatic. And trauma tends to be unforgettable. I was on the whole tour with The Rolling Stones. So my experience was their experience, if you will. For us, it was the last show. It was a well-intentioned show. Nobody saw it coming. It was the expectation that this was going to be sort of Woodstock only sort of better. The answer -- really -- the expectation was that it would be a huge hit. But if you're American, then you absolutely identify it as the end of the 60s. All Americans, myself included, felt that it was over.

CO: The Rolling Stones came in by helicopter. How did you get there?

ER: Helicopter. I was with them. Keith was there. Mick Taylor went in on the first helicopter. And I went in on the second helicopter with Charlie and Bill Wyman.

CO: And so how did it look when you arrived? What was the level of security or how organized did it appear to be when you arrived?

ER: Chaotic. But there wasn't a feeling that it was dangerous yet, for me. Right? So in one of my photographs, you can see where we're landing. So it's speed-way -- it's like where motorcar races would take place. And the helicopters were landing in the middle of it. But literally, there's a guy walking across that same area, where the helicopter is landing, with a dog that's not on a leash. In that sense, it was completely chaotic. It was free. Everybody has to remember: it was free. The Rolling Stones had just played 19 shows and they were all orderly and they were all inside coliseums and they were all excited. But this was very chaotic. You know, they had to put that whole thing together in two days because they lost the venue where it had been announced.

CO: Now, you say that they're sort of getting a sense of what it was like on the ground. I understand Mick Jagger took a punch to the face almost as soon as he got out of the helicopter.

ER: That's correct. I was not there for that because I was on the second helicopter. But, you know, a kid said, "I hate you. I hate you." God knows what that's coming from. Again, I didn't see it because I came in with them later. But you did hear that Marty Ballen, I believe, is who it was at the Jefferson Airplane so he's a home-grown because they were local to San Francisco. And he called out a Hells Angel and the Hells Angel knocked him out.

CO: Over the years, people have not wanted to talk about this concert because it was just so hellish and ugly. And those who have said in retrospect that they see the Hells Angels as being a complete mistake as far as those to hire for security. But when you heard the Hells Angels from all over California were in charge of security. What was your first reaction?

ER: I didn't hear that. I found out by going there. You know, The Rolling Stones --there's so much, there's a lot of naivete about what really happened needless to say. And it's important that the model for the concert was based upon the concerts in the park in San Francisco. And the model for that was really The Grateful Dead. The idea of the Hells Angels came really from The Grateful Dead. The Stones have taken the heat for that forever -- it is just not true. So when The Stones arrived in America to do that tour, they were immediately ask if they were going to do a free concert, because that was really the sort of template at the time. And they never said yes to it until really the end of the tour -- on the 26.

CO: What did you see as far as how the Hells Angels were handling, if we can say that, security?

ER: They weren't security. I mean, boy. I mean, they took the heat and it's impossible for them not to have taken the heat given some of the behavior. But it wasn't a black and white situation at all. And among other things, the Hells Angels vehemently denied they were security in any sort of normal sense of that were, right. They were there sort of to stand between the crowd and the stage. But the Hells Angels that were there weren't one thing anymore than any group is one thing. They were a lot of different things, some of whom were cooler than others, because they knew what they were doing.

CO: Where were you when The Rolling Stones took the stage?

ER: I was with them. I was in the tent right behind the stage when they got the call to go on stage. And I have a picture. There was no backstage -- just wall to wall people. They were on top of trucks. They're crushed in and there's no pathway to the stage. And that's behind the stage. And I'm right behind them. And when you walk up to the stage, then you know there's 350,000 other people on the other side of the quote "stage." There was just no boundaries for anybody. The stage itself was actually sagging because there were so many people on it. In that sense, it was completely out of control.

CO: Were you yourself, at any point, concerned for your own safety?

ER: Yes. Nobody that was there, I don't think was not concerned for their own safety. It felt like being in a really really bad dream. I got off the stage because I wanted to get off the stage. And there was one helicopter to get us out. It was the only way in and it was the only way out. They took two helicopters to get us and there was only one helicopter to get us out. There were 16 people on that helicopter. All of The Rolling Stones and me and assorted others. Gram Parsons. And it was so overloaded it couldn't take off like a helicopter -- it couldn't take off vertically. It started to take off and then it bounced back down. That alone could have been the death of everybody that was on the helicopter.

CO: There were four deaths in the course of that concert. One of them was during The Rolling Stones' performance. Meredith Hunter was stabbed to death. How did you learned about that death?

ER: The film. I saw it in the film. I did not know about it. That's how I heard about it and was, you know, shocking to me like it was to everybody. But there was no lights out there. It was chaotic. And one of the things that was argued at the trial was, you know, Meredith Hunter had a gun. Right. Meredith Hunter was arguably pointing a gun at the stage. And if the entire afternoon had not been as horrible as it was, that Hells Angels might have been applauded for saving someone's life. And while I'm not suggesting that that's true, because I don't know for sure -- the thing is that it's not as black and white as people see it.

CO: In the end, 50 years later, as you look back and you say that this is how the 60s was ending. What does it say about that time, about the end of the 60s, of this Altamont concert?

ER: Well, the shortest answer is, is that the sort of visual excesses of that era were intolerable to America. And this is a political statement. But I believe it. And were used by among others, Richard Nixon and Reagan as what we don't want America to be like. And it really started this kind of idea of cultural politics that are used to discredit people with different beliefs. So I think that was really what went down with music because there was a lot of promise in it. And so there's certainly a lot of sadness that it ended. I mean, I really think it's only rock and roll, but I like it as a kind of a really a disclaimer from the kind of allegiance that Americans in particular were requesting that you pay if you were involved with music.

CO: Ethan thank you so much for your perspective on this.

ER: Thank you. Nice to talk to you.

KG: That was Ethan Russell in San Anselmo, California. Mr. Russell was the official tour photographer for The Rolling Stones during their American tour of 1969. It ended with the infamous free concert at the Altamont Speedway 50 years ago today. A documentary of the tour called "Gimme Shelter" was released the following year.

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

December 6, 2019 Episode Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode