The judge in the trial of two Freedom Convoy protest organizers has ordered access to internal police documents so that she can determine whether they should be admitted as evidence.
Justice Heather Perkins-McVey says she must review unredacted copies of police communications to determine whether they are protected by solicitor-client privilege and also whether they are relevant to assessing the credibility of police liaison witnesses.
Defence lawyers for Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, who are on trial for their role in the massive demonstration against COVID-19 public-health measures in early 2022, have asked to see emails that show what evidence police officers were asked to hand over as part of the case.
They also want to see any instructions given to officers about updating the software on their cellphones when the protest ended, as the judge says that update deleted messages between Mr. Barber and Ottawa police Const. Nicole Bach, considered a primary contact of Mr. Barber.
The defence had received only heavily redacted documents in response to their request, with the Crown and Ottawa police saying the only information omitted was irrelevant or protected by solicitor-client privilege.
Ottawa police Sgt. Jordan Blonde, who described himself as a “secondary” contact for Mr. Barber, is back on the stand today, but defence lawyers say they will not be able to cross-examine him until the judge rules on the admissibility of the internal police documents.
On Friday, Sgt. Blonde described “hostile” scenes leading up to a police operation to forcibly remove demonstrators out of Ottawa’s downtown during the protests that gridlocked Canada’s capital city for three weeks beginning in late January 2022.
Ms. Lich and Mr. Barber face multiple charges including mischief, counselling others to commit mischief and intimidation in relation to the protests.
The Crown seeks to prove the two high-profile organizers had influence over the actions of protesting crowds.
The trial has been frequently delayed by challenges around the admissibility of evidence.
