The trial for two central figures in the Freedom Convoy will continue Tuesday with defence lawyers challenging the prosecution’s portrayal of the three-week Ottawa protest as a single event under the sole direction of Tamara Lich and Chris Barber.
The two have pleaded not guilty to charges of mischief, intimidation, obstruction and other offences related to the February 2022 protests against COVID-19 mandates that saw trucks block downtown streets in Ottawa’s core.
At issue is whether Barber and Lich crossed the line into committing crimes and encouraged others to come to the city.
The trial, which began in September, has suffered multiple delays but has now reached the closing argument phase.
Prosecutors are attempting to link Lich and Barber as co-conspirators who worked together to finance, fuel, promote and organize the Freedom Convoy, asserting evidence against one should apply to the other.
The defence contends the co-defendants should not be seen as leaders of a unified protest because the events in Ottawa were not part of a single, orchestrated demonstration but involved many players not working as a coherent whole.
Two defendants, same evidence
Through what’s known as a Carter application, the Crown is seeking the court’s permission to use its evidence against Barber in its case against Lich.
Prosecutors have highlighted social media references to Lich as the “great leader of the truckers’ movement” and the “spark that lit the fire.” They argue the “megaphone” Lich and Barber wielded was crucial, pointing to videos showing people’s enthusiasm in meeting them as leaders.
Earlier in the trial, prosecutors showed a video of downtown Ottawa congested with protesters and told the court “this doesn’t happen by accident” and was the result of planning by Lich and Barber.
Prosecutors have also pointed to text messages sent by Barber stating the protest was supposed “to cause grief” and that they “trainwrecked traffic” after the convoy’s arrival in the city.
Barber and Lich were together on several occasions throughout the protest and referred to the events in Ottawa as “our protest,” Crown lawyers added.
The defence has argued that while Lich and Barber shared the goal of persuading the federal government to lift pandemic mandates, they did not conspire to commit illegal acts and promoted peace throughout the protests.
They deny any joint wrongdoing and attribute illegal actions to individuals making their own choices.
Barber defends against individual charge
Barber faces an additional charge of counseling others to disobey a court order by encouraging protesters to honk their horns. He’s accused of doing this after a court had granted an injunction preventing that specific action.
Two days after the Ontario Superior Court granted the injunction against honking, Barber posted a video to TikTok warning supporters there were rumours police action could be coming within days.
“Let that horn go, don’t let it go when you see that mass force of police heading toward you,” Barber said in the video, played throughout trial and again during closing arguments on Monday.
Barber’s lawyer, Diane Magas, said the court order banning honking in Ottawa’s downtown was not clear enough.
Magas argued Barber was trying to explain an exception that allowed for honking in emergency situations but was doing so “in his own words.”
Justice Heather Perkins-McVey didn’t accept Barber asking protesters to warn of a police operation qualified as an emergency.
“That’s a stretch,” she told the court.
Magas said when Barber made the video there was heightened tension over a potential police operation.
She also argued that police had failed to download all of the videos Barber posted online during the protests, resulting in an incomplete record lacking the context needed to make a proper determination on whether his actions were criminal.
Earlier in her closing submissions, Magas argued Barber was “morally innocent” and had done everything possible during the protests to work with authorities.
Prosecutors will have an opportunity to reply, likely on Friday, when the trial is expected to end.