Click image or link above to watch. It’s the same video as below.
Here is some video reportage of the scene at this week’s trial and of farmer Michael Schmidt talking to the press. This video was shot by a citizen who considers this case a matter of public interest. To watch the video, click here. Video by Marianne Else.
Click image or link above to watch movie.
We look forward to more videos from the same source, as the trial proceeds.
Here’s Kate Hammer of the Globe and Mail reporting again on what we hope will be the landmark raw milk trial of farmer Michael Schmidt. Nice that the Globe editors have assigned someone who’s covered the story before. Here an excerpt from Kate’s report:
“NEWMARKET, ONT. — Ontario’s dairy dissenter, Michael Schmidt, told a packed courtroom yesterday that the laws that criminalize the sale of raw milk compromise rights protected by Canada’s Constitution and are therefore invalid.
Mr. Schmidt faces 20 charges relating to the “cow share” program he operates from his dairy farm in Durham, Ont., near Owen Sound. Drained of funds after 15 years of battling the provincial government over the sale of unpasteurized products, Mr. Schmidt represented himself at his trial, which began yesterday in Ontario Court in Newmarket.
Mr. Schmidt pleaded not guilty on all counts.
It is not illegal to drink raw milk and Mr. Schmidt has attempted to tiptoe around the law by selling “shares” in his cows rather than bottles of milk. Co-owners pay for the room and board of their cattle at Mr. Schmidt’s Glencolton Farms, then enjoy the byproducts of their investment – raw milk and raw milk products.
About three years ago, Mr. Schmidt’s scheme came to the attention of the Grey Bruce Health Unit and the Ministry of Natural Resources. The ministry infiltrated the cow-share group and purchased raw milk cheese with the help of two undercover agents, lawyers for the Crown revealed in their opening statements. Continue reading
Seems like the facts of the raw milk case are finally becoming clear, at least to people like Karen Selick, writing here in yesterday’s National Post:
“Last month, Ontario farmer Michael Schmidt was sentenced to pay $55,000 for contempt of court. He had persisted in delivering unpasteurized milk to the members of his cow-sharing program, contrary to a court order. He goes to trial today on his main charges of violating the Milk Act and related legislation.
What’s a person to do when the laws themselves are contemptible, and the people who hold the power to change them are behaving contemptibly?
Twenty years ago, Toronto furrier Paul Magder answered that question this way: You continue doing what you believe is right until the lawmakers finally smarten up. Magder racked up huge contempt fines merely by opening his store on Sundays. But the province eventually yielded to public pressure and legalized Sunday shopping. The sky didn’t fall, and today Ontarians take Sunday shopping for granted.
I see Michael Schmidt as the Paul Magder of this era — the unsung hero who will make it possible for us, 20 years hence, to say, “Was it not always thus?” Continue reading
It is an honor to be here. It is an honor to be here because I feel that I am standing here to defend provincial offences charges, which many can face, given the nature of our current acceptance of Government’s role and assumed responsibility, but also because of our own lack of understanding of our individual rights. What we are dealing with here, is so fundamental for our future, for the future of our individual rights and for society at large.
The core issue at stake here is not really about milk. Anybody can drink milk in Canada; there is no regulation, either federal or provincial, that in fact has outlawed the drinking of raw milk. No, the issue here is about something other than milk, something much more important than milk. The issue in front of this court deals with the most fundamental elements of our human nature.
It touches the core values of our God-given rights, our rights as spelled out in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, our rights as spelled out in the Canadian Bill of Rights, and our rights and freedoms protected by our own Constitution.
These rights are not only endangered by government or bureaucracy; they are endangered because we ourselves are afraid to set boundaries. And we don’t set boundaries because we don’t know our rights. We assume too easily that government, bureaucrats and law enforcement know and respect our rights. It is a known fact as well that, with apparent ignorance, democratically-elected governments pass laws that, in effect, limit the liberties of everyone without giving due respect to the reality of our individual unalienable rights.
This case before us here, Your Honor, is straight forward. Continue reading