Legal Battle Resumes as Lawyers Debate Evidence in Freedom Convoy Organizers Trial
As the trial of Freedom Convoy organizers Tamara Lich and Chris Barber resumed following a break, the lawyers for the accused individuals and the judge engaged in a discussion about whether statements made by the two defendants could be used as evidence.
Eric Granger, representing Ms. Lich, sought to introduce statements made by the convoy organizer into evidence for their truthfulness. He argued that specific statements by Ms. Lich should be admitted, while others should be disregarded by the Crown.
Justice Heather Perkins-McVey expressed concerns about the lack of connection between the statements, emphasizing that the mere introduction of a statement during cross-examination did not automatically make it admissible for its truthfulness. Given that many statements were made at different times, they appeared to stand alone.
Defence counsel for Mr. Barber, Diane Magas, also pushed for some of her client’s statements to be considered as evidence. A decision from Justice Perkins-McVey is expected on March 14.
Ms. Lich and Mr. Barber are currently facing charges of mischief, obstructing police, counseling others to commit mischief, and intimidation in relation to the trucker protest that took place in early 2022. The protest saw hundreds of vehicles flooding the streets of downtown Ottawa to oppose vaccine mandates related to the pandemic.
In response to the protest, the government invoked the Emergencies Act on Feb. 14 to disband the demonstration, granting law enforcement broader powers to arrest protestors and freeze the bank accounts of individuals associated with the protest. A recent court ruling in January by Justice Richard Mosley found that invoking the act infringed on Canadians’ Section 2(b) and Section 8 Charter Rights.
Trial Delays
Throughout the trial that began in September 2023, Crown lawyers have argued that Ms. Lich and Mr. Barber exerted control and influence over the protestors, crossing a line by encouraging them to “occupy” downtown Ottawa. They are also seeking for any criminal charges applicable to one organizer to apply to the other.
On the other side, defence lawyers have argued that there is insufficient evidence to prove a conspiracy between the defendants to commit crimes. They assert that for the Carter test to be met, there must be a conspiracy with a “common unlawful design” between the parties and direct evidence against them.
The defence has also pointed out that none of the witnesses who testified at the trial, many of whom were Ottawa residents and business owners, had direct interactions with Ms. Lich. This implies that the only admissible evidence against her comes from social media posts, videos, and text messages.
To expedite the trial and avoid further delays, the Crown prosecutor dropped a bail violation charge against Ms. Lich in October. The trial has been ongoing for such a long time that Ms. Magas has considered filing a Jordan Application, guaranteeing that individuals accused of crimes have the right to a timely trial.
