On November 29, 2025, Frances Widdowson announced that she would be coming on campus with Dallas Brodie and Jim McMurtry to discsus two questions with faculty, staff, and community members on a sandwich board that she would be wearing: “What Remains [of children exist at the former Kamloops Indian Residential School]?” and “Denial or Truth [with respect to Dallas Brodie’s claim that “zero bodies” had been found at Kamloops]?”. In this communication, Widdowson let it be known that she would be “in front of the McPherson Library” to discuss these questions.
A few hours later, Widdowson put out a press release about the discussion that would take place.
This led University of Victoria faculty member Carey Newman (Impact Chair in Indigenous Art Practices) to organize a protest.
Newman was the person who created the “215+” banners that were put up all around the University of Victoria until September 2024.
On December 1, 2025, University of Victoria’s Director of Campus Security Services sent Frances Widdowson, Dallas Brodie and Jim McMurtry an email to Widdowson’s email address. This email made the false claim that Widdowson was coming to “University of Victoria property for the purpose of a public talk”, when there would only be an informal discussion with people who wanted to be involved. She also noted that “Petch Fountain is already booked for university events at this time”, when Widdowson was not demanding to have this space allocated to her.
As Widdowson was not holding an “event”, she ignored this message and hoped to take this up with security when she arrived on December 2.
Later that day, President Robina Thomas sent out a message stating that “a divisive public talk is being planned on our campus” that would cause “harm” to “members of our community”. She provided links to a number of psychological “supports”.
When Widdowson arrived on campus, she was met by about six police officers. Jessica Maclean, Director of Campus Security Services, presented her with a “Notice of Restriction From Campus”.
Widdowson explained that she was not holding an event, and so the booking policy did not apply. This argument was ignored, and Widdowson was asked to leave the property. When she said that she would not leave, she was arrested, put into a police car, and taken to the Saanich Police Station.
While Widdowson was being arrested, the “counter event” was proceeding. This event was recorded by Carey Newman.
Simon Hergott also compiled a video of other things that were going on.
At the Station, Widdowson was held for about an hour, and given a ticket. The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is being retained by Widdowson to contest the ticket.
On December 2, 2025, UVic President Robina Thomas put out the following message.
On December 4, 2025, Kevin Byrne made the following astute observation. He pointed out that the University of Victoria had said that my “conduct on university property is contrary to university policy expectations”, when I had not yet been on the property.
On December 10, 2025, Victoria News published an article that included an emailed statement from the University of Victoria. It stated that “We do not limit debate or prohibit the reasonable exercise of freedom of expression on campus. However, it is imperative that activities on campus take place in a respectful manner…”.
This led Glenn Blackett, as the lawyer Widdowson had retained from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, to make a video pointing out that “respectful” seemed to mean “ideologically compliant”.
Thank you Frances! I’ll gladly pay your ticket. We appreciate everyone who is challenging this information about graves. Until excavation is completed, no one truly knows what’s there. Canada is NOT guilty of genocide and I’m angry that useless politicians allowed that utter crap to happen in my once proud country.
Why would you pay her ticket? She’s not guilty of anything! Get a grip on your emotions.
As an indigenous Métis 62 year old who attended day-school, I find this protest legal in Canada. However; never should a protest be led to violence where law officers allow violence by anyone. As for Frances’s motives and determination to hold a public discussion on the alleged 215 bodies found in Kamloops, she too, by Canadian law has every right to follow her right to do so. I attended the University of Winnipeg front lawn when Frances was there because I wanted to engage in that discussion led by her. Plus, being a double degree academic who graduated from that university, I felt assured this elder would be treated with respect. Well, sorry to say, that was the furthest from the truth. Shame on u of w, shame on the mob on the lawn that day, shame on the security, and the city police who ignored calls due to violence and mob mentality witnessed by many there and later seen by video. Propaganda is a tool used in warfare. As far as I am concerned, this tool has been used in Canada today and for years…between Canadians and FNs. Many academics (no matter who) today have benefitted financially and politically in our country in promoting the ideology of victimization and oppression. They are leading children of tomorrow down the primrose path of hatred and lack of self-esteem as these young people today possess a mob mentality toward anyone not like them, or people that question lies and beliefs. Beliefs are not facts.
Hello Frances:
I love this clause of the longer sentence. Quote:
CAMPUS SECURITY: “Your conduct on university property is contrary to university policy expectations (and therefore etc.)!!!”
The sentence was written before Frances was on university property!!! That sentence is reasonable evidence of an attempt to fabricate bogus “evidence” against Frances, contrary to Sect. 137. C.C.C. Alternatively it is evidence that someone misled this peace officer, who, in turn. misled Saanich police constables into arresting Frances for “conduct on university property” that was impossible for Frances to “conduct” having not been on campus since she graduated previously (long ago).
The arrest is proof of someone [Maybe Jessica MacLean; maybe others who misled MacLean] committing a public mischief offence by alleging to police that Frances had engaged in “conduct” that she could not have engaged in BEFORE she actually came to the campus! The offence of public mischief [Causing a peace officer to enter into or continue an investigation because of a false statement.] is a Sect. 140. CCC offence — MacLean or her informants are guilty of that offence if and only if they are not guilty of the more malicious Fabricating Evidence (contrary to Sect. 137. CCC) offence. Those offences are what you OUGHT TO talk about at Court, Frances.
Frances! When you go to court you NEVER go to Court to play “defence” because the law PRESUMES YOU ARE INNOCENT. So you don’t have to prove anything at Court. You’re INNOCENT in the “eyes” of The Law. It is the other guys who have to prove their case against you. And they can’t prove their case when it begins with THE LIE that you engaged in some sort of “conduct” at the University before you had even attended at the university. Everything they say or do at Court makes your counter-indictments of fabricating evidence or mischief more obvious.
Kevin James “Joseph” Byrne
Carey Newman says that Widdowson, McMurtry and Brodie ignore official school and Church records, dismiss the work of the TRC, and disrespect the testimony of survivors. In the case of the Kamloops KIRS , I do not believe that to be true. First of all, the Kamloops First Nation itself has changed the wording on its site from “missing children” to “anomalies, i.e. “soil anomalies”. For starters, 15 of the 215 soil disturbances (“anomalies”) have already been excavated and contain no human remains. There is zero evidence of a “mass grave”. There is zero evidence of a multiple grave of any kind. The school records are consistent with the possibility that there may be some potential graves in the remaining 200 soil anomalies, but they do not indicate that that is a high probability. As for the testimony of the survivors, some Indigenous knowledge is better than others. If there were 100 families with the names of 200 relatives who are buried there, along with proof that they are not buried anywhere else, then that would be strong evidence. What sounds suspiciously like the misremembered dream of a 6-year old would be less strong. No disrespect. Just the truth.
Carey Newman says that Widdowson, McMurtry and Brodie ignore official school and Church records, dismiss the work of the TRC, and disrespect the testimony of survivors. In the case of the Kamloops KIRS , I do not believe that to be true. First of all, the Kamloops First Nation itself has changed the wording on its site from “missing children” to “anomalies, i.e. “soil anomalies”. For starters, 15 of the 215 soil disturbances (“anomalies”) have already been excavated and contain no human remains. There is zero evidence of a “mass grave”. There is zero evidence of a multiple grave of any kind. The school records are consistent with the possibility that there may be some potential graves in the remaining 200 soil anomalies, but they do not indicate that that is a high probability. As for the testimony of the survivors, some Indigenous knowledge is better than others. If there were 100 families with the names of 200 relatives who are buried there, along with proof that they are not buried anywhere else, then that would be strong evidence. What sounds suspiciously like the misremembered dream of a 6-year old would be less strong. No disrespect. Just the truth.
P.S. I forgot to mention their attitudes toward the TRC. Is the TRC gospel? Beyond critique? Speaking for myself, I see no reason to doubt what the TRC Report said about most unmarked graves being previously marked graves, or about the number who didn’t come home being 6,000. I am still inclined to believe that at least 3,200 are buried around former schools, but I mistrust the subsequent inflation of these numbers in certain quarters. Are some people counting every soil anomaly that is suspected or alleged to contain a body as another “grave”? I think people should listen to what Dr. Widdowson and McMurtry and Brodie have to say about these and other matters.
people in British Columbia always had the right to freedom of association, and the right to freedom of speech. thus, section 3 (c ) of the Trespass Act pertains
underscore “may not be convicted”… Professor Widdowson always had color of right to walk on her alma mater, to converse with Canadian citizens who are interested in what she’s saying.
Defences to trespass charge
3 A person may not be convicted of an offence under section 2 in relation to premises if the person’s action or inaction, as applicable to the offence, was with
(a)the consent of an occupier of the premises or an authorized person,
(b)other lawful authority, or
(c) colour of right.