Whatcott hearing at BC Human Rights Tribunal
Day 3: The judges reject Whatcott's witnesses, including a well-qualified psychiatrist
Psychiatrist lacked specialty training on "love, hate, and social prejudice," they said.
by Amy Contrada
December 13, 2018
Respondent Bill Whatcott had planned to call in an expert witness, Dr. Willi Gutowski, to testify in his defense. Dr. Gutowski is a retired clinical psychiatrist with degrees from University of Manitoba (BS in Medicine & MD) and many years’ experience in cognitive behavioral therapy. He has an expertise in understanding emotions, and how they are created by repeated thoughts which people choose to have.
But the three-judge Panel rejected the Doctor as a witness because he had not demonstrated specialist expertise on the “origins of love and hate, and origins of social prejudice.” They said that despite his undisputed qualifications as a general psychiatrist, they rejected him because he had not published any peer-reviewed articles or had any advanced education on that specific issue. The Panel then abruptly said “goodbye” to him via Skype. There was no “thank-you for your time,” or any polite gesture.
The psychiatrist would have testified on the “origins of love and hate, and origins of social prejudice.” This would have aided Whatcott’s defense: The psychiatrist submitted an outline of his argument prior to the proceeding. It is no wonder the judges wanted to exclude it. He would have made the point that there is no evidence of causation to prove that Whatcott’s flyer made it likely to move another human being to feel hatred or contempt toward Mr. Oger. “A key point is that people choose to love or hate depending on their own biases. Truth and facts have very little to do with their choice.”
Hatred is complex in its origins, and wouldn’t simply flow from reading a political flyer with Bible quotes. This evidence would have made the point that laws restricting speech don’t do any good anyway; they’re just an infringement on freedom.
(Comment by MassResistance: How is “hatred” defined, anyway? British Columbian law says: “Hatred or contempt refers to extreme signs of emotion of ‘detestation’ and ‘vilification’.” None of that is present in Whatcott’s flyers. That someone else could arrive at hatred towards transgender persons has to do with what’s going on in their own experiences and what they are choosing to dwell on in their negative thoughts – and could not be shown to be causally connected to Whatcott’s writings.)
After the attempt to call Whatcott’s expert witness was shut down, Oger’s attorney tried to introduce “new evidence” – namely “hateful” emails Oger had received the night before which the attorney blamed on Whatcott’s blog and Facebook posts of that night. She said it was an ongoing problem. “Where would it end?” she asked. She wanted guidance from the Panel on this since Whatcott would continue to post his reports which she labeled “improper conduct.” In other words, Oger’s attorney argued that Whatcott’s reports on the Tribunal hearing are ongoing “hate speech” and should be shut down. Essentially, she was calling for a “gag order.” The Panel said they would provide guidance.
Since the expert witness was not allowed, the day’s proceedings ended at mid-day. It was not explained why the hearing didn’t proceed to the next agenda item. Instead, the civil servants had another unexpected afternoon off.
In Bill’s Facebook video (which he posted at the conclusion of today's session) he notes that he wasn’t allowed a single witness on his behalf. His pastor (with a Master’s degree in Theology) was also barred from speaking on the spiritual aspect of “gender identity” issues.
In this video, Bill tells us:
Really, what this is all about is the fix is in. They sort of want to have the air of legalese, they want to have the air of due process. But really, the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal doesn’t want justice. They want to look like they’re administering impartial justice, but it’s very clear that Devyn Cousineau [one of the three judges] and the other lady, [Diana] Juricevic, and Norman [Trerise] – they really are hand-picked leftists and they aren’t interested in the truth in this matter. They’ve already made up their minds that it’s appropriate for the state to use coercion and to impose heavy sanctions if need be on people who will not act the part [and say] that biological males who are gender confused are women. I have been threatened with sanctions for wearing this T-shirt which says:
“Mr. Oger, no matter how you use the state to silence your critics, you are still a guy.”
… There were certainly people who had homosexual propaganda on their clothing apparel or homosexual messages on their shirts. None of them were asked to remove their shirts. Just simply my shirt which said the truth. And it is the truth: Mr. Ronan Oger is a biological male… For Christians, for those of us who value truth, it is very clear from Scripture that God has made us male and female. And it is our position, and it is an unalterable position, and not even open to debate really. It may be open to persecution now in Canada, but it isn’t open to serious debate. Your “gender identity” should align with your biological reality. That is the crux of this case. And the state used coercion to [try to] make me “make-believe” and pretend that something that’s false is true.
Whatcott admonishes Christians to stand for the truth. He warns the imposition of radical gender ideology is about to go nationwide.
This video was deemed an example of unacceptable behavior at the next day’s session, and submitted as evidence against Bill!
Please help us continue to do our uncompromising work!
Your support will make the difference!