The "Horror Scene": 44 Asylum Seekers in an Unventilated U-Haul Box at the Vermont-Canadian Border
A Pre-Dawn Interception at Haskell Road
In the early hours of August 3, 2025, the quiet town of Stanstead, Quebec, near the Vermont border, became the site of a harrowing discovery. A routine Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) patrol intercepted a U-Haul truck just yards from the international line. Inside, officers found 44 people—including children and a pregnant woman—tightly packed in an unventilated cargo bay, wet, dehydrated, and barely able to breathe. Some had reportedly walked four kilometers through the woods and waded a river before being loaded into the truck.
Corporal Charles Poirier of the RCMP described the interior as a "horror scene," a phrase now being echoed across news reports and humanitarian advocacy circles. According to RCMP spokespersons, emergency aid—including water, juice, and watermelon—was provided on the roadside. Fortunately, none required immediate hospitalization.
The Safe Third Country Agreement at Work
While the conditions inside the truck drew immediate public sympathy, the legal process that followed offered no such mercy. According to the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), all 44 individuals were formally arrested and processed under the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA)—a bilateral treaty that requires asylum seekers to make claims in the first "safe country" they enter.
Under the March 2023 expansion of the STCA, irregular border crossers—those who enter between official ports—are now also subject to return to the U.S. unless they meet specific exemptions. CBSA Eastern Border Director Miguel Bégin confirmed to media that “some” of the asylum seekers were sent back to the United States almost immediately after their interception.
CBSA declined to specify how many of the 44 were returned, citing privacy concerns, but noted that returns were "highly likely" for any who failed to qualify for exemption under the STCA.
Who Were They, and Why Were They Coming?
According to Canadian immigration officials and multiple news sources, the majority of those found in the U-Haul were Haitian nationals. Many are believed to have been living in the United States under Temporary Protected Status (TPS)—a designation the Trump administration has been working to revoke.
Frantz André, a Montreal-based Haitian advocate and spokesperson for the Action Committee for People Without Status (CAPSS), told Radio-Canada that he's received direct messages from TPS holders in the U.S. who are “terrified” of being deported back to Haiti, a nation plagued by gang violence, political collapse, and economic ruin. “They’re scared of both Haiti and of staying in the United States,” André said.
The humanitarian context is deeply relevant here. Canada's own Immigration and Refugee Board recognizes gender-based violence and persecution based on social group or political opinion as valid grounds for asylum. The United States, especially under recent immigration policy rollbacks, does not offer equivalent protections.
The Alleged Smugglers
Three men—Ogulcan Mersin, 25; Dogan Alakus, 31; and Firat Yuksek, 31—were arrested in connection with the smuggling operation. They were charged under both the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and the Customs Act for aiding and abetting illegal entry. All appeared in court via video with the assistance of a Turkish interpreter and remain in detention pending further hearings.
According to RCMP investigators, the smugglers likely operated a cross-border route timed to avoid detection—a consequence, some say, of border policies that push migrants away from regulated crossings and into criminal networks.
A Consequence of Closed Doors: Roxham Road and the Shift to Shadows
Until March 2023, irregular asylum seekers often used informal crossings like Roxham Road, where they were arrested but permitted to claim asylum. The closure of this pathway under the STCA expansion has had a chilling effect—not on migration itself, but on its visibility.
According to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada data, irregular claims have fallen nationally, but Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, Quebec’s largest land border crossing, has seen a fourfold increase in asylum claims since early 2024. In July 2025 alone, over 750 asylum seekers crossed there in the first week—Haitians being the leading nationality.
The dangerous pivot from open crossings to hidden routes is what led, directly and predictably, to the incident in Stanstead.
Return to the U.S.: A Legal Transfer or a Human Rights Risk?
Though CBSA refers to the transfer of asylum seekers back to the U.S. as a “return” rather than “deportation,” advocates stress that the difference is semantic. “If Canada sends someone back to the U.S., and the U.S. then sends them to a country where they face torture or death, Canada is still complicit,” said refugee lawyer Maureen Silcoff in a statement to The Globe and Mail.
This process—termed "chain refoulement"—lies at the heart of ongoing legal challenges to the STCA. Human Rights First and Amnesty International have documented abuses within U.S. immigration detention centers, including medical neglect, indefinite confinement, and denial of fair asylum hearings.
Unlike Canada, the U.S. does not guarantee legal representation for asylum seekers. Many face hearings without lawyers, in languages they don’t speak, under severe procedural disadvantages.
Legal Standing: The Charter Challenge Continues
The STCA survived a major legal challenge in 2023, when the Supreme Court of Canada ruled it did not violate Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (right to life, liberty, and security). But the Court punted on Section 15—equality rights—sending that issue back to lower courts. Advocates argue that the agreement disproportionately harms women and LGBTQ+ asylum seekers who face persecution not fully recognized under U.S. asylum law.
If that challenge succeeds, it could render the STCA unconstitutional and invalidate its current application at the border.
A Humanitarian Test of Canadian Policy
The “44 in the U-Haul” event is not an anomaly—it is an inflection point. It encapsulates the humanitarian cost of restrictive border policies that shift risk downstream rather than solving the upstream problem: why people are fleeing in the first place.
Advocates argue that the policy—while legally defensible—fails morally. As André told La Presse, “If the only way to make a refugee claim in Canada is to nearly die in a truck, then our system has failed both the people and the principles it’s supposed to protect.”
Policy Questions for Canada
In the aftermath of the Stanstead incident, difficult questions remain:
Does a reduction in border crossings justify an increase in human trafficking?
Is Canada legally responsible for what happens to asylum seekers once they are returned to U.S. custody?
Can a “safe country” agreement be legitimate if the safety it presumes does not exist for all groups?
As legal battles continue and crossings grow more desperate, the case of the 44 migrants in the U-Haul demands more than just a procedural review—it demands a moral reckoning.
This article was based on reporting and public statements from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Canada Border Services Agency, Canadian Council for Refugees, Human Rights First, Frantz André of CAPSS, and federal court documents related to the Safe Third Country Agreement. For further context, see coverage from the Montreal Gazette, Radio-Canada, La Presse, and The Globe and Mail.