OTTAWA, ON /CNW/ – The Supreme Court of Canada has chastised the Ontario and federal governments for an “egregious” breach of a 175-year old treaty, and ordered them to move quickly to compensate a group of First Nations located north of Lake Superior and Lake Huron.
Using unusually harsh language in its unanimous decision, the Court gave the governments six months to pay just compensation for its refusal to increase the annuities under the Robinson Treaties of 1850, in keeping with the “honour of the Crown.”
Representatives of the Robinson Superior Treaty group hailed the decision as a major landmark along the road to reconciliation that demands governments make good on their promises.
Harley Schachter, counsel for Red Rock First Nation and Whitesand First Nation, expressed delight at the Supreme Court’s recognition that the governments neglected their First Nations treaty partners – even as they permitted the rampant exploitation of natural resources from land within the treaty territory; wealth that they had promised to share, but did not.
“The Court took these breaches very seriously,” he told reporters. Mr. Schachter said the Court made it clear that judges have an important role to play in future treaty disputes to ensure that governments uphold the honour of the Crown so that true reconciliation is achieved.
“The Supreme Court has ruled today that governments are not above the law,” he said. “It is a sacred relationship between First Nations and the Crown. It is a partnership, not a dictatorship.”
The Supreme Court found that the government’s attitude made “a mockery” of the treaty promise and left the Anishinaabe with “an empty shell of a treaty promise.”
Chief Lawrence Wanakamik, Chief of Whitesand First Nation, said that he was overcome with emotion when he heard of the Court decision.
“We have struggled a lot over the last 175 years,” he said. Once his communities have been properly compensated. Chief Wanakamik said, upgrading health services is likely to be their highest priority.
The Court found there was a flagrant disregard of promises made in the 1850 Robinson Superior and Robinson Huron treaties, and that the Indigenous signatories received next to nothing.
Advertisement
“The Crown has severely undermined both the spirit and substance of the Robinson treaties,” the Court said, adding that governments must now act quickly to fulfill their dishonoured promises.
Prior to the Supreme Court hearing the appeal last fall, the trial judge in the sprawling case – Justice Patricia Hennessy of Ontario Superior Court- had embarked on the final phase of the litigation, which involved an assessment of how much the plaintiffs are owed in compensation.
Her decision on the compensation issue is currently under reserve and will remain so for another six months to give the parties time to try and come to a mutually acceptable agreement in relation to past compensation to be paid.
Justice Hennessy heard intensely human testimony from Indigenous chiefs and elders about the abject poverty their people have lived in at the same time as logging and mining companies were exploiting their natural resources. They told of growing up in tarpaper shacks where large families had no plumbing or insulation, and slept on floors. Food was scarce or unobtainable. Winters were virtually unbearable.
Yet, just kilometres away, large companies such as Kimberley-Clarke were reaping handsome profits from sawmills or mining operations located on their land.
Under the treaties, the annuity was to be augmented over time in keeping with the rising economic value of the land. However, a recalculation took place only once – in 1874. It has remained at $4 per person since 1875.
The Ontario government’s legal position was that the province suffered a net loss in developing this resource-rich region over the past 150 years. It claimed that the costs of colonization – building railroads, roads, insect control, land surveys, and so on – should be subtracted from its net value. It alleged a net loss of $7-12 billion.
Economists testified that as much as tens of billions of dollars are owed to the Indigenous communities. Included in their calculations were the opportunity cost of wasteful decision-making; the giving away of free hydroelectricity and undervalued stumpage rates and mining rights to industry; the deprivation of the ability of the Anishinaabe to create proper educational and health facilities; and the fact they Ontario procured the treaty acting in a monopolistic manner.
In stark contrast to Ontario’s position, the federal government conceded that the treaty beneficiaries are owed a considerable sum.
Unless the governments meet their obligations honourably for payment of past breaches of the treat by Jan. 26, 2025, the Lake Superior plaintiffs will return to the Court to seek compensation for these historic wrongs.
STM Daily News is a vibrant news blog dedicated to sharing the brighter side of human experiences. Emphasizing positive, uplifting stories, the site focuses on delivering inspiring, informative, and well-researched content. With a commitment to accurate, fair, and responsible journalism, STM Daily News aims to foster a community of readers passionate about positive change and engaged in meaningful conversations. Join the movement and explore stories that celebrate the positive impacts shaping our world.
Veteran actor T.K. Carter, best known for his roles in The Thing and the popular 1980s television series Punky Brewster, has died at the age of 69.
Authorities confirmed Carter was found unresponsive at his home in Duarte, California. No foul play is suspected, and an official cause of death has not yet been released.
A Career Spanning Decades
Born Thomas Kent Carter, T.K. Carter built a career in film and television that spanned more than four decades. He became a cult favorite portraying Nauls in John Carpenter’s 1982 horror classic The Thing, a film that continues to influence the genre today.
Television audiences widely remember Carter for his role as Mike Fulton on Punky Brewster, where his comedic timing and grounded performances helped make the show a lasting favorite of the era.
Film and Television Legacy
In addition to his best-known roles, Carter appeared in films such as Runaway Train, Ski Patrol, and Space Jam. His television work included guest appearances on a wide range of series throughout the 1980s, 1990s, and beyond.
Known within the industry as a reliable and versatile performer, Carter often brought authenticity and warmth to supporting roles that left a lasting impression, even in brief appearances.
Remembering T.K. Carter
As news of his passing spreads, fans and colleagues alike are reflecting on T.K. Carter’s contributions to film and television. While he may not have always been the leading name on the marquee, his work helped shape stories that continue to be watched and appreciated by new generations.
T.K. Carter is remembered for his enduring performances, professional dedication, and the quiet but meaningful legacy he leaves behind.
Stay with STM Daily News for updates to this developing story and more independent coverage of entertainment, history, and culture. Visit www.stmdailynews.com for the latest.
Gregory Outreach Services Expands Food Access with Addition of Third Refrigerated Van
Gregory Outreach Services expands its mission to fight food insecurity with the addition of a third refrigerated van, doubling food access for low-income seniors and veterans in Phoenix.
Gregory Outreach Services’ newest refrigerated delivery van expands food access for low-income seniors and veterans across Phoenix.
Phoenix, AZ — Gregory Outreach Services has taken a major step forward in its mission to fight food insecurity with the addition of a third refrigerated delivery van, significantly expanding its capacity to serve low-income seniors and veterans across the Phoenix area.
The new refrigerated van was made possible through the support of a generous anonymous donor. The expansion is further strengthened by the continued generosity of the BHHS Legacy Foundation, who donated fresh produce to support the organization’s growing distribution efforts.
As rising food costs and inflation continue to place pressure on individuals living on fixed incomes, the need for reliable access to nutritious food has never been greater. This latest addition to the organization’s mobile fleet allows Gregory Outreach Services to double the number of individuals served, while maintaining strict food safety and quality standards.
“As the cost of living continues to rise, more seniors and veterans are struggling to afford nutritious food,” said Diana Gregory, Founder and CEO of Gregory Outreach Services. “This van allows us to bridge a widening gap for individuals living on fixed incomes, many of whom face mobility challenges and limited access to fresh food options.”
Meeting a Growing Community Need
Gregory Outreach Services works directly with seniors and veterans who are disproportionately affected by inflation, medical expenses, and transportation barriers. For many, simply reaching a grocery store can be a challenge. Refrigerated vehicles are essential to ensuring that fresh fruits and vegetables arrive safely and consistently at senior housing communities, veteran shelters, and community distribution sites.
“This third van complements the two already in operation and represents a critical milestone in our growth,” Gregory added. “We are deeply grateful to our anonymous donor for investing in our mission, and to BHHS Legacy Foundation’s Board of Directors and its CEO, Jerry Wissink for Legacy’s generosity in donating fresh produce. Together, this support allows us to scale our impact and respond to the increasing needs of our community.”
Expanding Impact While Preserving Dignity
With an expanded fleet and increased food supply, Gregory Outreach Services is better positioned to address food insecurity, promote healthier outcomes, and serve seniors and veterans with dignity, respect, and care. The organization’s mobile delivery model ensures help reaches those who need it most — directly and reliably.
About Gregory Outreach Services
Advertisement
Gregory Outreach Services is a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving health outcomes for low-income seniors and veterans through mobile produce delivery, nutrition education, and community-based wellness programs. By bringing fresh food directly to those most in need, the organization works to reduce food insecurity and strengthen community wellness.
Discover inspiring stories of changemakers making a positive impact. Explore videos and articles of people tackling today’s biggest challenges with action and hope. Visit: https://stmdailynews.com/stories-of-change/
Dive into “The Knowledge,” where curiosity meets clarity. This playlist, in collaboration with STMDailyNews.com, is designed for viewers who value historical accuracy and insightful learning. Our short videos, ranging from 30 seconds to a minute and a half, make complex subjects easy to grasp in no time. Covering everything from historical events to contemporary processes and entertainment, “The Knowledge” bridges the past with the present. In a world where information is abundant yet often misused, our series aims to guide you through the noise, preserving vital knowledge and truths that shape our lives today. Perfect for curious minds eager to discover the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of everything around us. Subscribe and join in as we explore the facts that matter. https://stmdailynews.com/the-knowledge/Get The Knowledge. Read more community news and local stories at STM Daily News.
Slayer Rule Explained: How Rob Reiner’s Estate Could Be Handled After the Killings
After the deaths of Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner, legal experts explain how the “slayer rule” can block a killer from inheriting—and what could happen next in probate court.
All states have some form of a slayer rule that prevents killers from inheriting from their victims. While the rules differ slightly from state to state, they always bar murderers from profiting from their own crimes. Simply put, if you’re found guilty of killing someone or plead guilty to their murder, you can’t inherit anything from your victim’s estate. In some states, this might go beyond inheritance and apply to jointly held property, insurance policies and other kinds of accounts. Most of these slayer rules, including California’s, apply only to “felonious and intentional” killings, meaning that they don’t apply if you accidentally kill someone. Although there doesn’t have to be a guilty verdict by a judge or a jury, or a guilty plea from the accused, there must be some finding by a criminal or civil court of an intentional and felonious killing. These rules, known as slayer rules, have a long history in the United States. They became more prominent following an 1889 murder case in New York state, in which a 16-year-old boy poisoned his grandfather to get an inheritance that was written into his grandfather’s will.
How often are slayer rules invoked?
It’s hard to say for sure. As far as we know, nobody’s tried to keep track. Slayer rules come into play whenever someone who would otherwise inherit assets from an estate is convicted of or found liable for murder, and the slayer is entitled to inherit from the victim. These tragic cases almost always involve murders committed by relatives. Many of the high-profile ones have been tied to murders that occurred in California. Famous disinherited murderers include Lyle and Erik Menendez, the Californians known as the Menendez brothers. In 1996, a jury found them guilty of the first-degree murder of their parents, José and Mary Louise “Kitty” Menendez. The Menendez brothers’ parents, who were killed in 1989, had a fortune that today would be worth more than $35 million. The brothers, who became eligible for parole but were denied it in 2025, have been in prison ever since. Once there has been a finding of an intentional and felonious killing, even if the slayer is later released on parole – or even if they serve no prison time at all – they would still not inherit anything. In practical terms, that means if one or both of the Menendez brothers were to win parole in the future, they would still be ineligible to inherit any of their parents’ wealth upon their release from prison. California’s slayer rule also meant that salesman Scott Peterson, who was convicted of killing his pregnant wife, Laci Peterson, in 2002, couldn’t collect the money he would otherwise have been due from her life insurance policy. Peterson has been in prison since 2005.Erik Menendez, left, and Lyle Menendez, seen standing trial for their parents’ murders, in 1994. They were convicted in 1996.Ted Soqui/Sygma via Getty Images
What can block its application?
In the absence of a murder conviction, the slayer rule may not apply. For example, a conviction for a lesser criminal offense, such as manslaughter, might allow the accused – or their lawyers – to argue that the killing was unintentional. This exception could be relevant to the prosecution of the Reiners’ murders if it were to turn out that Nick Reiner’s defense can show that substance abuseor schizophrenia rendered him insane when he allegedly killed his parents at their Los Angeles home. On the other hand, under California law, even if there is no conviction the probate court administering the murder victim’s estate could still separately find that the killing was intentional and felonious. That civil finding would bar the slayer from inheriting without a criminal conviction.Rob Reiner and his son Nick, seen in 2016 speaking about ‘Being Charlie,’ the movie about a young man’s struggle with substance use that they made together.Laura Cavanaugh/FilmMagic via Getty Images
Does this only apply to families with big fortunes?
Slayer rules apply to anyone who kills one or more of their relatives, whether their victims were rich, poor or in between. When large amounts of money are at stake, cases tend to garner more attention due to media coverage during the criminal trial and subsequent inheritance litigation.
Who will inherit Rob Reiner’s and Michele Singer Reiner’s wealth?
It’s too soon for both the public and the family to know who will inherit ultimately from the Reiners. Wills are typically public documents, although the Reiners may have also engaged in other types of estate planning, such as trusts, that do not typically become public records. And celebrities with valuable intellectual property rights, such as copyrights from the Reiners’ many film and television properties, tend to establish trusts. Assuming that, like many parents, the Reiners left most of their fortune – which reportedly was worth some US$200 million – to their children, including Nick, then California’s slayer statute may come into play. The couple had two other children together, Romy and Jake. Rob Reiner also had another daughter, Tracy Reiner, whom he adopted after his marriage to his first wife, the actor and filmmaker Penny Marshall. It’s also likely that the Reiners included charitable bequests in their estate plans. They were strong supporters of many causes, including early childhood development.
Might the slayer rule apply to Nick Reiner?
It’s much too soon to know. It is important to emphasize that the wills and other estate planning documents of Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner have not yet been made public. That means what Nick Reiner might stand to inherit, if the slayer rule were to prove irrelevant in this case, is unknown. Nor, with the investigation of the couple’s deaths still underway, can anyone make any assumptions about Nick’s innocence or guilt. And, as of mid-December 2025, an unnamed source was telling entertainment reporters that Nick Reiner’s legal bills were being paid for by the Reiner family. Naomi Cahn, Professor of Law, University of Virginia and Reid Kress Weisbord, Distinguished Professor of Law and Judge Norma Shapiro Scholar, Rutgers University – Newark This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
