Trial of Freedom Convoy Organizers Returns as Lawyers Argue Admissibility of Evidence

Freedom Convoy organizers Tamara Lich and Chris Barber wait for the Public Order Emergency Commission hearing to begin in Ottawa on Nov. 1, 2022. (The Canadian Press/Adrian Wyld)

OTTAWA—As the trial of Freedom Convoy organizers Tamara Lich and Chris Barber returned from break, lawyers for the two accused and the judge debated whether statements from the two could be admitted as evidence.

Eric Granger, a lawyer for Ms. Lich, sought to admit into evidence statements from the convoy organizer for the truth of their contents. He said the Crown should not only admit specific statements by Ms. Lich into evidence but ignore others.

Justice Heather Perkins-McVey said she was concerned that the statements were not connected, adding that if a statement was introduced as evidence in cross-examination, that did not make it automatically admissible for the truth of its contents. She said given that many of the statements were made hours to days apart, they appeared to be standalone statements.

Diane Magas, defence counsel for Mr. Barber, also argued for some of her client’s statements to be admitted as evidence. Justice Perkins-McVey is expected to reach a decision on March 14.

Ms. Lich and Mr. Barber are currently on trial for mischief, obstructing police, counselling others to commit mischief, and intimidation related to the trucker protest in early 2022, in which hundreds of vehicles flooded the streets of downtown Ottawa to protest pandemic-related vaccine mandates.

In response to the protest, the government ultimately invoked the Emergencies Act on Feb. 14 to end the demonstration, giving law enforcement expanded powers to arrest demonstrators and freeze the bank accounts of individuals involved with the protest. A recent January court ruling by Justice Richard Mosley found the invocation of the act infringed on Canadians’ Section 2(b) and Section 8 Charter Rights.

Trial Delays

During the trial, which began in September 2023, Crown lawyers have attempted to argue that Ms. Lich and Mr. Barber had control and influence over the protestors and that they “crossed the line” when encouraging the protesters to “occupy” downtown Ottawa. They are also requesting that any criminal charges that apply to one organizer should apply to the other.

Defence lawyers, meanwhile, have argued that there is not enough evidence to prove that the pair worked together at a close enough level where a conspiracy to commit crimes occurred. They have said that in order for the Carter test to be met, the conspiracy must be between the parties and have a “common unlawful design,” and there must be direct evidence against them.

Defence lawyers have also said of all the witnesses who had testified at the trial—many of whom were Ottawa residents and business owners—none had directly interacted with Ms. Lich. This meant, according to the lawyers, that the only evidence admissible against her came in the form of social media postings, videos, and text communications.

In an attempt to limit the scope of the trial and prevent further delays, the Crown prosecutor dropped a bail violation charge against Ms. Lich in October. The trial has gone on so long that Ms. Magas has floated introducing a Jordan Application, which says any person charged with a crime has the right to be tried within a reasonable time.