Two brothers who were ticketed for something they supposedly said on Calgary’s C-train last year received 104 pages of completely redacted information in response to a Freedom of Information (FOIP) request surrounding the incident. As the Western Standard exclusively reported at the time, the brothers were confronted by peace officers when they exited the train while en route via Calgary’s C-train to the 2023 One Million March for Children.The men, who the Western Standard referred to as Paul and Luke to protect their identities, were ticketed, and Paul arrested, September 20, 2023. The Calgary Police Service (CPS) abruptly dropped their charges November 6, 2023 after the brothers’ lawyer repeatedly asked for disclosure. Having never received answers as to what they were accused of saying — that would warrant being ticketed and arrested on the C-train platform — the duo filed a FOIP with the City of Calgary with intent to obtain all internal communications relevant to the event. They also filed one with Calgary Police Service (CPS). "The city was relatively hassle-free and did not take an exceptional period of time," the brothers told the Western Standard. "CPS was the real problem."They said they spoke with officer Tim Lee a number of times, in efforts to get through to his superior, director of access and privacy Jill Merritt. After numerous attempts over several months to get in touch, they learned CPS has "no record of this particular incident as it was city of Calgary peace officers who detained us.".EXCLUSIVE: Calgary brothers ticketed on C-Train decry lack of free speech and privacy in Canada. Almost a year after filing their FOIPs, they received the redacted pages along with video footage of them riding the train. The footage contained no audio, so it was impossible to ascertain what was said. The brothers were accused of "unlawfully contravening" municipal bylaw 4M81 on their way to the march, according to the ticket they each received last year. The peace officer wrote they were charged for "molest/interference with the comfort/convenience of another person."The Democracy Fund (TDF) lawyer Alan Honner pursued an explanation of what exactly was said that day on the C-Train, and submitted two separate formal requests for disclosure. Both went unanswered — however, the charges were then dropped. To this day, the only explanation they've received is that a passenger had complained they made "racial comments.""None of it in any way was race-related," Luke told the Western Standard last year, and reiterated the same story December 17 in a follow-up interview. "We may have said we're going to a march with the Muslims," he said. "I've had friends of just about every ethnic background colour. I take people at face value. Who you are as an individual. I don't care what colour your skin is."“Anybody who understood what this march was about would have understood that we're not some kind of racist," added Paul, "but it might have been people who didn't understand what the march was about and where we were coming from."The march consisted largely of parents who don't want their children to be taught sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) ideologies in school. "Leave the kids out of it. That's what this whole march was about. And that's why we were there. Plain and simple," said Luke at the time. .EXCLUSIVE: City of Calgary silent on park exhibition falsely claiming hoax of ‘indigenous children found buried’.The brothers asked the city/CPS to disclose all “information CPS has in relation to the (march) and “any communication between CPS and Calgary Transit and/or CPS and the City of Calgary (in particular the mayor’s office) about enforcing transit bylaws during the (march).They were told CPS "does not have any records from the mayor's office" to CPS, and added that CPS Sgt. Blindenbach of the Major Events and Emergency Management Section (MEEMS) "has advised that CPS does not have any communication nor take any directions from the mayor's office regarding enforcing transit bylaws during the Million March for Children."Enclosed with the city’s response was "the remainder of their request" — a total of 104 redacted pages in a PDF document. City staffers noted "some of the information in the included records contains information that is withheld from disclosure under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.""The detailed sections supporting the excising of particular information are indicated on the face of each page in lieu of the original text. We have severed the excepted information so that we could disclose to you the remaining information in the records," wrote the city. .EXCLUSIVE: City of Calgary posts traffic sign degrading Trump on election day. Upon receiving the 104 redacted pages from the city, which were reviewed by the Western Standard, Paul said he was "a little bit shocked.""Useless. What a waste of time," he said, recounting the efforts he and his brother went through to obtain the information. "I firmly believe that they intentionally stonewalled us at every turn," Luke added. "It makes me wonder if they're hiding something."When asked what he meant by "stonewalling," Luke said "they probably suspect why we want that information ... It's not good for the city.""I think initially it was a delay tactic, he added. "We had to chase them for eight months. I must have phoned them at least eight times.""Well, if you're going to redact 104 pages, I guess that takes a while," joked Paul. The brothers said finally they threatened to call the mayor, and early the next morning they finally got a callback on their FOIP. After reviewing the video footage, the brothers speculated the lack of audio could be attributed to one of two reasons: either they didn't include the audio because it's not incriminating, or there simply is no audio."If they had included the audio, and there's nothing incriminating, and we got that, then we would be able to argue that we got arrested, guilty by appearance, such thing, rather than somebody uttered a 'racial' comment."Luke noted they were accused of making "racial" comments, not "racist" ones. "And if we didn't utter such a thing, then their whole premise for stopping us goes out the window," he argued. "It could either be a, the audio isn't included because they listened to it and they found nothing incriminating, or there is no audio, which means that they were bluffing/lying.".EXCLUSIVE: Calgary dad warns of ‘mature minor’ designation allowing children to transition without parental consent.As for moving forward, Luke says "everything is on the table."Paul added they're looking into retaining a lawyer, as per Honner's suggestion, to “push back on these overreaching by-laws in Calgary and some other Canadian cities.”"Luke and I would like the same, to have these by-laws repealed," he said. "We require some legal representation and/or some advice and direction.""We are looking for an opinion as to whether or not our charter rights have been violated," said Luke. "If we have a legal opinion that the city has violated our charter rights, we can decide to move forward."He said that he "would like to see the by-laws repealed as unconstitutional," but noted that he was "also open to suing the city for what they have done," suggesting it was "the only thing that they will understand."
