Veteran police officer quotes the Canadian Charter of Rights opening sentence and says it is the foundational component that is our national law, “agreed upon by the entire nation of this country. And it is our primary law. It is the most important law of the land”. What follows tells how that law was ignored and abused by the police community.
Our next witness today is Vincent Gircys. And Vincent, I’d like to start by having you state your full name for the record, spelling your first and last name.
Vincent Gircys, G-I-R-C-Y-S.
And Mr. Gircys, do you promise to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth today?
Thank you. Now could you explain for the commissioners basically the experience you have as a police officer.
Certainly. I am a retired member—a former member—of the Ontario Provincial Police [OPP]. I started my career with that organization in 1982 and I served this province in policing for a total of 32 years. I have 32 years of experience in policing—and that’s different than some people, who have one year of experience repeated 32 times.
I have submitted my curriculum vitae here [Exhibit TO-26]. I believe it’s with the group, and it’s five pages long of courses that I’ve taken over the entirety of my career. I started my career in Toronto. Eventually, I became a member of the emergency response team for the OPP, one of many. And at some point, I became involved in forensic investigations and forensic reconstruction. I did that for a number of years. And throughout the course of my career, there were a number of things that I had taken on. I never turned down any opportunities for training and I received a number of commendations throughout the course of my 32-year career and retired with the Police Exemplary Service Medal for my conduct.
I just want to say that there are many men and women in law enforcement. And the men and women of law enforcement are ordinary men and ordinary women just doing extraordinary things. And I’m extremely proud and happy to know that the men and women that I worked with within the service were what I believe to be the best of the best within policing services. And I’ve met many, many wonderful police officers over the course of my career that put themselves in harm’s way and behaved very courageously.
So I’m very proud of the profession. But I see that a number of mistakes have been made over the last three years. Tremendous mistakes have been made. So I’m going to start off with a little bit more of an introduction into my background and then I’m going to tell my story. And then I’m going to get into the mistakes that were made.
Thank you. Please proceed.
“Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law.” This is the first sentence in the Canadian Charter of Rights that was written and established in 1982, the same year that I started my career in policing. I was very familiar with the Canadian Charter of Rights. And I was issued, upon my probationary period when I first started with the organization, a Bible. I was issued a King James Bible. And the question needs to be asked: Why? Why was I issued a Bible? And that is something that I carried with me during my service and every time I testified.
And I have testified hundreds of times, actually thousands of times, in various courts. I became an expert witness in forensic reconstruction. And every time I testified, I did it by placing my hand on the Bible to swear an oath. I’m very familiar with the police oath that I’ve taken. And it is the same oath that all police officers in the province of Ontario take. The oath varies from province to province depending on the police services involved but, in Ontario it’s the same oath. And my oath is to the Constitution in Ontario. I’m very familiar with it and I would hope that other police officers would be familiar with the oaths that they had taken.
It’s very important, the first opening sentence of the Canadian Charter of Rights.
And I know that you mean section 1. Or the part you just read, which is often omitted?
The part that I just read because it is the foundational component. And that foundational component— People need to understand that our Constitution and our Charter is not a federal law; it is not a provincial law; it is national. It is agreed upon by the entire nation of this country. And it is our primary law. It is the most important law of the land.
My story started at the beginning of the pandemic, when I was present. A restaurant in Toronto serving brisket barbecue, known as Adamson’s Barbecue, had been shuttered and shut down by 200 police officers and a team of horses that had come in to push back people and prevented that restaurant from staying open. I had already been following the science. I am very familiar and done my research regarding mask issues, regarding transmissibility and other issues, and I just could not comprehend what I was seeing with the amount of police deployment at that location. I’ve since became very active in speaking out against these types of measures that were taken against Canadians. Things continued to ramp up and get worse very, very quickly, as you well know. So I won’t bother to get into those details.
I will say that over the last three years, I had two arrest warrants issued for me because I was in a park, outdoors, speaking to a group of people on two different occasions about the importance of our Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and how they were being abused. These arrest warrants came just prior to, and just after, my attendance in Ottawa during the trucker Freedom Convoy that had arrived in Ottawa.
I attended there just to see what was going on. There seemed to be quite a bit of discussion about trucks arriving in Ottawa and it sounded exciting, so I attended. When I got there, I could see the level of deployment there that was taking place and I wanted to reach out and help in any way I could. So I took on various roles, one of them being a police liaison. I had received through the Ontario Provincial Police the Police Liaison Officer of the Year Award. I guess I did a pretty good job at it. And so I was also liaising with police services in Ottawa during the Trucker Convoy.
I did not go there by truck. I don’t own a truck. I don’t know how to drive a truck. But I was there strictly helping, acting in any helpful capacity that I could. The temperatures were very cold. Things were very disorganized, so I tried to offer some form of organization there. As a result, my bank accounts were frozen. And I eventually left at the end when things were dismantled. I was issued a fine for attending a church service and received a $10,000 fine for doing so.
Ten thousand dollars?
Yes, the prosecutor was asking for a ten thousand dollar fine for my involvement in attending a church service in Aylmer, Ontario. And that was issued by the Aylmer Police Service. That matter has since been resolved but that was the fine that the prosecutor was requesting.
I must say, I’m very proud of a number of members of the Aylmer Police Service—at least six of them. I’m very proud that they have made the decision to quit within a one-year period. That is approximately 50 per cent of the number of officers that are employed by that police service. The amount of tyranny I saw come out of that police service towards the Church of God in that town was deplorable and in complete violation of our Constitution and the Charter. Many criminal offenses have taken place by the police against the church, because it is a criminal offense to interfere with church service. That essentially is my story and I’m going to now get into the other aspects.
I had been asked in April of 2021 by an international organization known as Police for Freedom if I would join that organization. And I did so under the condition that I would not be silenced. I had belonged to another organization of police officers in this province and I felt that I wasn’t able to speak freely, so I’ve since moved on. And I wasn’t about to be silenced in discussing what I felt was very important to discuss.
So I am now the Canadian representative of Police for Freedom International.
And there are quite a few police officers that I am in contact with. I would say over the course of the last three years, I’ve been in contact with hundreds, if not a thousand or more police officers across this province and internationally that think in the same purview that I do. We share the same conclusions. And I’m going to go through those.
Now, when I would conduct a forensic investigation—and it doesn’t matter if it’s forensic investigation or just an everyday investigation within policing services—there is protocol that we follow. There’s procedure that we follow and it’s very, very simple. It’s not rocket science. In conducting investigations, we look at other people’s perspectives, other people’s statements. We want to know what happened in any investigation. And in order to find out the truth—and the truth is a hard thing to describe, if you ask somebody like Jordan Peterson, he’ll probably give you a one-hour explanation of what truth is—basically, the truth is what happened. That’s it. In policing, we want to know what happened and we need to know what happened so that we can decide whether criminal offences have been committed and by who, and how, and why. So we need to answer a lot of questions.
And when we conduct an investigation, the best way to come up with the truth is to acquire as many statements—and I’ll call them perspectives, as many perspectives as possible. Anybody standing in front of me looking at me has a view of what I look like. If somebody’s standing behind me and they’re looking at me, they have a different perspective. So ultimately, the more perspectives you can get on anything, or person, or issue, the better equipped you’ll be to understand what is really going on.
It’s also about collecting information. It’s about collecting physical evidence, documentary evidence, testimonial evidence. And then we come up with our conclusions, ultimately. The more information that is available, the more accurate of a decision we could make and the better understanding we have of what is real, what is really true, and what really happened.
It is my understanding that there’s nobody here present from mainstream media. Is there anybody? If you are, can you put up your hand? CBC, CTV, Global? No, I didn’t think so. So evidence is also the absence of something. So when mainstream media is not here, that is evidence of something.
Now, I’ve done a Google search recently—yesterday, as a matter of fact—on the National Citizens Inquiry. I’ve done it through a number of browsers. If I search the National Citizens Inquiry, it will come up. But if you click on the “news” tab associated to these browsers and search over the last 90 days, nothing comes up. That’s evidence of something. That’s very telling.
So the media not present brings me to the issue of COVID-19 and other issues that are in the media that have, what I would call, a single perspective. Some call it a narrative, that’s just a flowing individual path. I call it a single perspective. So on the issue of lockdowns that we faced, there was only one perspective that had ever been in the media. On the issue of mask-wearing, one perspective. On the solutions to this problem and the way out, one perspective. Vaccine acceptance, one perspective. Vaccine hesitancy, one perspective. Vaccine safety, one perspective. Vaccine efficacy, one perspective. Vaccine injury, no perspective, no comment, no discussion. Vaccine death, no perspective, no comment. Died suddenly, no perspective, no discussion.
So we see a lot of contradictions. There’s certainly available data—data that I was able to find. And if I’m able to find it, I think just about anybody’s able to find it. And it’s not about what people knew; it’s about what people should have known. I’ve seen this numerous times in the Ontario Provincial Police when it came to officers’ disciplinary measures. Somebody should have done something; somebody didn’t do something. And it really comes down to, if you didn’t know, you should have known. It would have been your responsibility to know.
And in this case, in the medical profession, in the healthcare profession, it’s incumbent upon those individuals within the profession to do their research and to know. And to look at other perspectives because they are available, and they were available to probably just about everybody here in this room. Those perspectives were very readily available. The information that was coming out was very readily available if you just chose to look. And of course, there’s a much higher threshold and level of responsibility that comes with your position within health services.
The term that was used as “safe and effective” probably should have been “use at own risk,” would have been more accurate to describe this product that had come out: this product with no known long-term data, not knowing what the content within the product is yet being pushed as safe and effective. My own personal physician was trying to shove “safe and effective” down my throat when I spoke with him. Certainly, he was not aware of the information that I was aware of; unfortunately, he was not interested in being aware of that information. The one thing that we did agree upon was that our trust in health care services in this province was paramount—it was very important that we trust health care services—and that there was nothing worse than forcing a jab in someone’s arm to lose that trust.
So I had mentioned that I’m a representative of Police for Freedom, which is this international organization and consists of many police officers in Canada as well. I can tell you that we have incredible concern about the unfolding of these incidents. I fully concur with the comments made by Dr. Trozzi in his last testimony that he had just given. We are very much aware of the World Economic Forum, the World Health Organization, the CDC [Center for Disease Control and Prevention] working in conjunction with many other similar type organizations.
And it appears that Publicis and McKinsey are companies that are advertising PR firms and consulting firms that seem to be integrated with those organizations. The Brighton Collaboration is often mentioned in health care services in Canada as a reference to the Brighton Collaboration. But the Brighton Group, I believe, no longer exists and is now known as the Task Force on Global Health. Task Force on Global Health seems to be working in conjunction with and reporting to and having discussions with CEPI, the Consortium of Epidemic Preparedness Initiative.
People listening to this testimony I’m giving might want to look up those organizations and see who they are. See how they are actually comprised of the pharmaceutical industry, the World Bank, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and so on and so forth—some names that keep coming up. And you know, there’s a very incestuous relationship that ties those organizations to the Government of Canada, with certain members specifically that have already been mentioned.
The World Economic Forum Canadian leadership members is of concern. We know that Klaus Schwab, the head of the World Economic Forum, had made a comment that we have penetrated over half of the cabinet. And he said that rather casually and he seemed quite happy about that. The comment had come up once in Parliament asking the question relative to this connection. And immediately there seemed to be what appeared to be a comment or an excuse to some microphone-related problem. That question has never since come up by any party in Canada. It is very concerning, because it appears that there are members possibly in other political parties as well relative to the World Economic Forum and those things that go on in the World Economic Forum.
I’m not going to comment specifically on what things go on. But I will say that criminal conspiracies do happen. You are not a nut for calling something a criminal conspiracy. I’ve investigated criminal conspiracies and they’re real and they really happen. Organized crime is not some old Italian guy in a wife-beater shirt talking about the mafia
or somebody in a leather jacket riding a motorcycle. Organized crime now is very sophisticated. And generally, those people that are very, very wealthy with incredible power and access are positioned very well to be very effective criminally. Is there any evidence to suspect reasonable suspicion of the need to investigate potential criminal conspiracy? Yes, we believe that there is. Absolutely.
So I’ll say what gives me grounds to say that. Just relative to the vaccination roll-out only, I’ll say that there was the promotion of “safe and effective” with no known long-term data. The contents were unknown. There’s also injury and mortality rate data that was available early on in this that either you could have known, you should have known, and if you’re in the healthcare system, the onus would have been on you.
At some point the death and injury rate became unusually high. And that flag, everybody in the healthcare system should have been aware of it, whether they say they were or not. There appears to be cognitive dissonance on that issue. People are sticking their head in the ground like ostriches and not wanting to know, but unfortunately the data can’t be hidden. The truth is there.
Then there’s the continuous use of the rollout of the vaccine when the available data is still known. Health agencies fail to notify the public. Infant mortality is increasing. Fertility rates are dropping. Menstrual cycles were affected. The media remains silent. And the media and the government relationship appears very suspicious.
During the Emergency Measures Act hearing that took place several months ago—the Emergency Measures Act hearing in Ottawa—Superintendent Pat Morris of the Ontario Provincial Police, who is in charge of intelligence for the Province of Ontario, made a very, very interesting comment. One that I found resonates well with me—because I had made the same comment as well. He said, “I know what the government is saying, I see what the government is saying.” Essentially these were his words roughly: “I know what the government was saying, and I know what the media was saying, but the intel that was coming back to me”— This would be coming back to him from various sources on the ground, whether it is people reporting or interacting with other police agencies or whatever his format of intel was— He said, “My real intel was inconsistent with what they’re saying.”
So they know what they’re seeing. They know what they’re hearing by their sources, which is inconsistent with what the media is saying and with what the government is saying. We see that type of inconsistency over and over. So I do have a suit that has been launched with a number of other individuals against the Attorney General of Canada and the Ministry of Public Safety regarding my rights violations for having my accounts frozen in Ottawa. And I had indicated in my testimony there as well that when I was in Ottawa, I spent a lot of time walking the perimeter of what was going on and conversing among my colleagues there about what they’re seeing and what’s happening. And there were no concerns, no concerns of violence or these types of issues. But in the evening, when I would go back to my hotel room every night and turn on the TV and look at the CBC to see what their reporting was, I indicated that I was seeing an inversion of reality on television. And they didn’t seem to understand what I meant by that. And I said, “What I’m seeing on television is completely opposite of what I’m actually seeing there. The news is lying. They’re being deceptive.”
So Vincent, can we get you to describe what you were watching on television and what you were seeing? Just so that it’s crystal clear for everyone listening to you what exactly what you are telling us.
Right. So what I’m seeing are a bunch of happy people. Very happy. It’s a very positive vibe. A very positive environment. Everybody was happy, hugging. I mean, I’ve hugged more people than you can hug at a Greek or Italian wedding. There’s no doubt about the level of joy that people were displaying and having. I saw no violence and I saw nothing to be concerned about other than it was just a great time overall.
But what I’m hearing on the news, the reporting, was that there were acts of violence that were taking place. There was arson that was taking place. There was assaults and Nazis; the people there were being labeled as Nazis and this type of thing. All of that reporting from the CBC was just completely false. It was just completely wrong.
It didn’t surprise me because I was already familiar with that type of reporting from the CBC and our mainstream media. And essentially, I find the media is a propaganda machine. They have been paid very handsomely by a number of organizations, including the Canadian government. They are spewing propaganda.
But even worse, they are suppressing information that people should really know. So it’s a joint issue of propaganda being distributed, and censorship of the information that you should know, information being withheld.
So a number of lies that I found have been exposed in media over the last three years that are of most concern: The COVID-19 threat assessment, that COVID-19 was super, super dangerous and super scary, and you should all be locked up. That whole threat assessment and that whole narrative is a complete lie. That the mRNA gene therapy, the safety level of that, was a lie. That lock-down measures and the efficacy of the vaccine and the lockdown measures as well, separate categories there, was just a lie. Not required. And that there were no available therapeutics, as the media had stated, that was a lie as well.
In order to keep the lie going, I think it’s important—it’s critical to all those involved in what had taken place both in the medical profession and in government. In order to keep that lie going, it’s an indication of a totalitarian regime, by definition. Clearly, we see if you can control the health care, if you’re interested in firearms confiscation and you move in that direction, you censor people and control the media. You control the education and enable indoctrination. You control the currency with intended CBDCs, that’s the central bank digital currency, controllable currency that appears is on the horizon. And if you control movement, fifteen-minute cities, that would be an ideal system for a totalitarian regime.
We know that the the initial lockdowns and the fear-driven mandates have resulted in, initially, a police state. And then it continued on to what we are becoming as a corporate, fascistic governance. There’s no question. When the media works in collusion with the government and corporations, when they’re all working together, that clearly is fascism at its best. And it appears that that is what is happening.
Now, I have what I would call a way out. And by no means am I suggesting that this is the answer, but it’s the best I can think of. And this would be, in consultation with a number of other police officers in agreement, that establishing a national COVID-19 forensic task force that is completely independent of government interference, vetted by a judicial body with arrest warrant and search warrant authorization, would be a good start.
And I’ll summarize what I find are the failings in the police community. They failed to adhere to established plans. In policing, we have a plan for everything. Our command staff is very well-organized and they plan for all worst-case scenarios. In the OPP, it’s a common mantra to say, “Plan for the worst, hope for the best.” We say that all the time and we believe in that. Plan for the worst, hope for the best.
And you can bet that there were pandemic plans in place already. Imagine spending a lot of time, money, and resources on planning for a pandemic: planning when things are calm, when heads are level, when you’re not afraid, when you can liaise comfortably with the health agencies. You can liaise with all kinds of other agencies to come up with what you would say is the best plan you can possibly come up with. And then when a pandemic is introduced, let’s throw that in the garbage.
And let’s just wing it. While we’re afraid and while we’re scared, let’s just forget about that plan we have.
No, we put that plan in place for a reason. It was the best thought-out plan and it was a very rational plan. Now, I’m not familiar with what the plan is but I do know that there are other people who are going to be testifying here as to the content and detail surrounding that.
The police failed to understand information. They accepted a single-sided narrative where additional counter-narrative information was available. How do I know it was available? Because I provided counter-information. And I did so by helping other people across the country that had compiled a number of reports, that appeared to be very concise and detailed with information.
A number of people across this country were distributing hundreds, if not thousands, of copies of actual information to police agencies, to health agencies, to government agencies. And they were documenting their service upon those agencies. And the police agencies failed to respond. They failed to understand their oath. They failed to understand section 52 of the Constitution and the ramifications. Section 52.1 of the Constitution essentially says, “Any law that is created, that is inconsistent with the Constitution, which includes the Charter, has no authority whatsoever.”
Vincent if I can help you out with that, I think the probably the exact quote is section 52(1): “The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect.”
The police service essentially over this three-year period became the Praetorian Guard, following political pressure and interference. Let me make it very clear that— Our system and the way it’s supposed to work, I will try to describe it for you. If you can imagine a horizontal line, a membrane if you will. And on the top of that membrane, up above, is politics, the political sphere within this country. And below this membrane is civil service. And there is a membrane that separates the two. Civil service includes police services like the Ontario Provincial Police, the RCMP, and all other police services. And I would say that those services are pretty high up near the membrane. They’re pretty high up in priority and importance.
And it’s important that that membrane stay in existence because we can’t mix politics with policing agencies. We need to have independence of the two so that we don’t have corruption. But it appears that, over the years, that membrane seems to have torn and disappeared. There doesn’t seem to be any service, any dedicated agency in this country to be actively involved in looking into allegations of crime. There’s nowhere to go. There’s nowhere, seemingly, to report these problems.
Vincent, can I just interject for a second? Just because you’re in contact with so many police officers, are you aware of any police investigations concerning potential crimes in this COVID saga that have been allowed to proceed? Because I understand people have made complaints to the police alleging crimes but my understanding is that most of them are stopped by management. Are you aware of any that have been allowed to proceed?
No. I am not aware of anything being investigated. Not that I should be. It wouldn’t be in my purview. But I know that many people have provided information and the least that you should be aware of is some kind of a response. Some kind of a response notifying that, “We have that information. We’re looking into it.” And usually the police services would get back to you and say, “We might need some more information. Can you help us? Guide us? Direct us? Give us some more.” Nothing. No contact. I’m not aware of any of it.
So it’s imperative that we do the right thing.
I’m going to say: Do not fear doing what you know to be right. Fear the consequences of the fruits of failing to do the right thing.
And that concludes my testimony, unless somebody has some questions.
I’ll ask the commissioners if they have any questions.
Good afternoon, Mr. Gircys. Thank you for your service to our country and for coming here and testifying today. I have a few questions, probably more related to policing because of course you had 32 years of experience as a police officer.
Yesterday—I believe it was yesterday—we had Mr. Tom Marazzo here testifying with regard to the truckers’ convoy. And he described and showed video of an incident in front of the war memorial where police officers pulled aside and injured a veteran: took him to the ground, kicked him multiple times. He showed the video. It’s in evidence here. And one of the questions I asked Mr. Marazzo was, “Was there any security camera footage?” The only footage that we saw was from participants, amateur people, with phones filming it. But in our nation’s capital, in front of the Parliament buildings on Wellington Street, between where the War Memorial is, I asked, “Were there not security camera footage that could have been referred to?” Because I hadn’t seen any of it. And his response to me was that he believed the cameras were shut off.
Do you have any information about the security camera footage?
No, I do not. And you know, when it comes to security cameras, I have a rather sensitive spot to that—understanding the level of surveillance mechanisms that we already have in place in this country. And I certainly wouldn’t be asking for more surveillance equipment. To answer your question, I’m not familiar with that. And to the point on that, we have seen a lot of police violence and brutality in the final phases when police moved in very heavy-handed in Ottawa. And there’s no doubt in my mind that the tactical officers, the emergency response team officers that were responding, were not only ill-informed; they were provided, I believe, false and misleading intelligence.
And I say that because I watched the behavior of those officers. And, you know, police officers are not generally stupid people. And I’m not suggesting they’re stupid, but they’re put into a situation where they believe they can be harmed. They believe they need their weapons out. They believe that there is a serious threat against them. And I have to ask: Where did they get that information? Because all of the intel that I was aware of, and I got to know, I can’t say I knew everybody in Ottawa; there were hundreds of thousands of people there. But all of my observation continuously being inconsistent with what the media was saying, the media operating in collusion with our government, there’s no question that there was false or misleading intelligence that was provided to those officers that were shutting things down at the end. And that’s also consistent with the evidence of the Commissioner of the OPP and the Superintendent, Pat Morris.
Those two individuals from the OPP giving testimony seemed inconsistent. Because the Commissioner is saying he believed—and I’m not going to repeat his exact words—but essentially, he believed that there was perceived violence. And the Superintendent of Intelligence is saying he had no concerns. So where did the concerns come from? And I don’t believe we’ve ever gotten an explanation. The closest I came to getting an explanation was, I believe, that during a debrief— One of the Ottawa police officers had said at some point during a debrief, shortly after things had shut down, that information came from something he saw on the CBC.
Well, that’s an interesting response. Because unlike the horses that were used in Ottawa, which have blinders on so they can’t see where the police officer is directing them, the police didn’t have blinders on. And I refer you to your earlier testimony where you said that you saw with your own eyes, by walking through the crowd, that it was peaceful. I think you said there was more hugs than an Italian wedding, and I’ve been to a few of those.
How is it that you were able to visualize and see the reality on the ground and these officers, despite being briefed but being present and having their own eyes open, could not see what you saw?
Well, the best explanation I have for that is that I was walking those grounds for over three weeks. I was there for quite a long time. And the atmosphere and the mood never changed until the end, when the police came in to shut things down. Then I did see violence. And the violence came on the part of the police officers. And it is possible— And it is a realistic possibility that— Because of the uniform difference, it appears that the frontline officers that were working at the function on a regular basis were pulled offline at those last two or three days. And that a whole new contingent of officers coming from other parts of the country and the province were brought in, kept to the rear, and then marched out.
And they never had the opportunity to see what was going on at the event but they were primed with various forms of intel that gave them the mindset that we’re dealing with a lot of very crazy, violent people. And you know, I don’t know what intel they were provided with. But they were certainly provided with some intel, I believe, that would have given them the mindset that they were dealing with a dangerous issue.
So you’re suggesting that they were just following orders?
Yes, that’s right. Absolutely.
And I need to finish with one final point. That these police officers— I’ve said at the beginning, they are ordinary men. They are ordinary men. In Germany, in 1942, there was a police battalion, PB101, and stories and books have been written about them. And it is called and they are referred to as the “Ordinary Men.” It’s ordinary men that can be provided with false information and misleading information, that can develop a very violent mindset against a group of people. And extreme, extreme horrific atrocities can occur and can be brought on, as example of Police Battalion 101, from ordinary men.
We all have that ability within us to do that if we’re provided with extreme fear and false intelligence. And the greatest concern that I had over the last three years was, how far is this going to go? What are these individuals? What are these police officers going to be provided with? Which kind of information? How misleading is this going to go? How are we—the people who are concerned, pushing back, and protesting—how are we going to be treated if the lies continue, knowing that the police officers are ordinary men? And there’s nothing in training that I’ve ever experienced to identify that problem and make police officers aware of what they could become.
I’d like to know what is required in normal times for the police to initiate an investigation, a criminal investigation.
That’s a great question. I can tell you that, as a police officer, I cannot initiate an investigation without permission of my command staff when I was working. So you know, there are things you can do in policing. If you’re given an area to police, you police it. You’re given certain criteria of what the organization wants policed, then you police it. But for the most part, when it comes into something more extensive, you do need authorization from your organization, from your command staff.
And I think you said earlier that to your knowledge—and of course you wouldn’t have detailed knowledge of what’s going on behind closed doors—but to your knowledge, the police have not instigated a criminal investigation concerning any issue with regard to the pandemic, mandates, and treatments.
Again, I’m not aware of that. I haven’t been provided with any information to believe that that would be the case.
Just one question. Another question is:
You talked about the WEF. I personally had a meeting some time ago with a MP, Member of Parliament, Canadian Member of Parliament, who said to me the WEF is no different than the Lions Club. Do you believe that the WEF is no different than the Lions Club?
No, sir. I believe that the WEF is an extremely powerful, influential, well-equipped, well-financed organization of the wealthiest, most elite people on this planet, working together with a number of other organizations and corporations. They are extremely well-organized and well-structured and well-positioned.
You know, my last thing is: I’m sitting here and I’ve been listening to testimony for the last three days here. And I was in Truro prior to this and listening to testimony. And it shocks me to the core to hear people like yourself and other people making certain comparisons or analogies to what’s going on in Canada, which include the Schutzstaffel, which is the SS, and other things in Germany.
We’ve heard that as a common theme: that people compare what’s been going on in our country to that era. And it shocks me to death. I don’t know if you have any other comment on that.
My parents came from Eastern Europe. They lost their country. If they would have stayed, they would have been executed. They spent a year living in the forest in Western Germany fleeing from the Bolsheviks and fleeing from the Nazis. I understand what fascism and totalitarianism is.
Thank you, sir.
Mr. Gircys we are going to— I’m sorry, we have one more question.
Thank you for your testimony. And I may be remembering wrong, but I do remember in 1982 when the Constitution was enacted, or the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, that all levels of government had three years at that time to bring their laws into alignment with the Charter.
If we fast-forward to where we are in terms of the Church of God, for example, in Aylmer, or the church in Kitchener, who also suffered huge fines and losses and then they went into court and had to deal with it at the court level: Do you have any idea how we can convince the judges that were responsible for those decisions that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms still stands as under the supremacy of God and rule of law in this country, as the supreme law? So that decisions that go against the freedom of religion, for example, in this case, will not take away from the churches but actually show how much churches in a community enhance that community going forward.
Well, I think the only way to make a change at the judges’ level is the judges are utilizing jurisprudence to make their decisions. That is, they are saying, “The pandemic was extremely dangerous and we were all going to die. And you didn’t do your part because we knew we were all going to die and you just weren’t doing your part. And so there are limits to the Constitution and we don’t think this was unreasonable.”
I refer to that—and so do many others—as the Great Lie. And that great lie needs to be exposed and broken before we can see a change.
Yes. I guess the irony in that mindset of the judges is that we’re still all here and we’re still all alive. Thank you.
So Mr. Gircys, we will enter your CV as an exhibit with your permission [Exhibit TO-26].
Thank you. And on behalf of the National Citizens Inquiry, we sincerely thank you for your testimony today.
Final Review and Approval: Jodi Bruhn, August 16, 2023.
The evidence offered in this transcript is a true and faithful record of witness testimony given during the National Citizens Inquiry (NCI) hearings. The transcript was prepared by members of a team of volunteers using an “intelligent verbatim” transcription method.
For further information on the transcription process, method, and team, see the NCI website: https://nationalcitizensinquiry.ca/about-these-transcripts/
- Mr. Gircys is a retired member of the Ontario Provincial Police with 32 years of experience.
- He received a number of commendations and received the Police Exemplary Service Medal.
- Experience in forensic investigations and reconstruction and a member of the OPP emergency response team.
Speaks about the Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the most important law of the nation, and how they were abused. He was also a police liaison during the trucker freedom convoy in Ottawa yet was forced to leave and his bank accounts were frozen. He has received arrest warrants because he was in a park, outdoors, speaking to a group of people on two different occasions during the pandemic. He also was issued a ten thousand dollar fine for attending a church service in Elmer. After the fact approximately 50 percent of officers in the Elmer Police Service quit within the year.
He is now the Canadian representative of Police for Freedom International. There has only been a single perspective throughout the pandemic regarding the virus and the vaccines, and the media remained silent. During the convoy there were no concerns of violence, and his colleagues reported a positive environment with happy, hugging people. The reports on the television were stating the opposite. There were stories of arson, acts of violence, assaults and people being labeled as Nazis. He states that the media have been paid very handsomely by a number of organizations, including the Canadian government. The police accepted a single-sided narrative when additional counter-narrative information was available. A number of people across this country were distributing hundreds, if not thousands, of copies of actual information to police agencies, to health agencies, to government agencies, but police agencies failed to respond. The tactical officers and emergency response team officers that were responding during the trucker’s convoy were not only ill-informed, they were provided false and misleading intelligence.