Connect with us

COVID-19

Freedom Convoy leaders’ defense argues Crown has failed to meet legal threshold for conspiracy

Published

7 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

In court on Monday, the defense teams of Freedom Convoy leaders Tamara Lich and Chris Barber again argued that the Crown has failed to establish that a criminal conspiracy existed between the two defendants

The trial of Freedom Convoy leaders Tamara Lich and Chris Barber resumed Monday with the defense arguing that a Crown request to make it so that criminal charges against one leader should apply to the other leaders as well should not be allowed to take place, as there is no evidence the pair worked in a conspiratorial manner.

The trial is currently seeing the defense counsel for Lich and Barber take their turn in calling forth witnesses before the court.  

On Monday, counsel for Lich, Eric Granger said to the court, “Ultimately, our submission is what’s required in order to invoke the co-conspirators exception, if there’s something more, a plan that’s more focused and specific than an overarching commonality of purpose.” 

Granger said that there needs to be a “very specific plan or common design that’s criminal in nature” in order to prove that Lich and Barber are somehow legally responsible for leading the Freedom Convoy in the commission of alleged crimes, a case he says the Crown does not have.  

“And that’s where we ultimately are to say that the evidence falls short of establishing circumstantial evidence and agreement between more than one individual to engage in one of the various criminal plans alleged by the Crown,” he said.  

As noted by  The Democracy Fund (TDF), which is crowdfunding Lich’s legal costs, in a Day 28 trial update, Granger contended that after “27 days of trial and testimony from 16 witnesses, the Crown had failed to provide enough evidence to satisfy the three required elements of the Carter test [to prove conspiracy].” 

“He particularly emphasized the absence of evidence pointing to a conspiracy between Lich and Barber, the lack of direct evidence against her, and the dearth of admissible acts or declarations,” added TDF.  

Lich and Barber are facing multiple charges from the 2022 protests, including mischief, counseling mischief, counseling intimidation and obstructing police for taking part in and organizing the anti-mandate Freedom Convoy. As reported by LifeSiteNews at the time, despite the non-violent nature of the protest and the charges, Lich was jailed for weeks before she was granted bail.   

Last week, on sitting day 27 of the trial, Lich and Barber’s legal counsel argued that the Crown to date has not been able to prove the organizers participated in a conspiracy to break the law or encourage others to break the law, and that therefore the case should be tossed altogether. The defense’s application came after the Crown abruptly decided to end its case last Monday, telling the court it would not call forth any new witnesses.

Defense argues Lich and Barber shouldn’t be responsible for each other’s statements 

On Monday, the defense teams for Lich and Barber told the court they intended to bring forth two applications, the first being a call to dismiss the Crown’s “Carter application.”  

The Crown’s so-called “Carter Application” asks that the judge consider “Barber’s statements and actions to establish the guilt of Lich, and vice versa,” TDF stated.  

TDF noted that this type of application is very “complicated” and requires that the Crown prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that there was a “conspiracy or plan in place and that Lich was a party to it based on direct evidence.”  

Granger argued that a specific and inherently unlawful “criminal plan was a prerequisite for establishing a conspiracy.”  

He said that the alleged plan to lift “COVID-19 restrictions lacked inherent unlawfulness, distinguishing it from cases involving crimes like murder or drug trade.” 

Granger then unpacked the “‘furtherance’ requirement, asserting that declarations were only admissible if made within the course of the conspiracy.”

Granger then scrutinized the “five conspiracies alleged by the Crown, highlighting their divergence from established legal precedents.” 

TDF noted that Granger underscored the absence of “evidence linking Lich to any inherently unlawful objectives, pointing to instances where police provided assistance during protests. Granger further challenged the Crown’s claims of aiding and abetting, emphasizing the lack of any witness interactions with Lich.”  

The full details of the defense’s second application brought before the court are not yet known, but the Crown, as noted by TDF, “expressed uncertainty about the nature of the second application and sought a court order compelling the defense to disclose details.” 

Justice Heather Perkins-McVey however intervened, “asserting that she would not order the defense to reveal their case on record.” 

In early 2022, the Freedom Convoy saw thousands of Canadians from coast to coast come to Ottawa to demand an end to COVID mandates in all forms. Despite the peaceful nature of the protest, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government enacted the Emergencies Act on February 14. 

During the clear-out of protesters after the EA was put in place, one protester, an elderly lady, was trampled by a police horse, and one conservative female reporter was beaten by police and shot with a tear gas canister.  

Lich and Barber’s trial has thus far taken more time than originally planned due to the slow pace of the Crown calling its witnesses. LifeSiteNews has been covering the trial extensively.  

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

COVID-19

Trudeau’s public health agency recommends another experimental COVID booster

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

The recommendation for increased doses of the experimental COVID shot comes as Canada’s Vaccine Injury Support Program has only paid out 138 of 2,233 claims made.

The Liberal-run Public Health Agency of Canada is recommending Canadians take another COVID shot despite the litany of reported side effects.

On May 3, 2024, the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), headed by Liberal Minister of Health Mark Holland, released the National Advisory Committee on Immunization’s (NACI)’s fall vaccine advisory which instructed Canadians to receive yet another COVID booster shot.  

“COVID-19 vaccination is strongly recommended for previously vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or severe COVID-19 disease,” the recommendation claims. 

Interestingly, the advisory lists pregnant mothers as those who are of increased risk of contracting COVID and should receive a vaccine.  

The suggestions comes as recent Ontario data revealed that reproductive diseases skyrocketed with the distribution of the experimental vaccine. Additionally, many experts have warned that receiving the experimental shot while pregnant poses a significant risk to both mother and child.  

NACI also claimed that “individuals in or from First Nations, Métis and Inuit communities” and “members of racialized and other equity-deserving communities” should receive a booster shot as they are at increased risk of infection from COVID.  

The NACI failed to explain how being ‘racialized’ or ‘equity-deserving’ made a person more likely to contract a virus. 

The recommendation for increased doses of the experimental shot comes as Canada’s Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP) has only paid out 138 of the 2,233 claims made to the program. 

Similarly, Statistics Canada report revealed that deaths from COVID-19 and “unspecified causes” rose after the release of the so-called “safe and effective” jabs.   

The mRNA shots have also been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects in children.    

Nevertheless, Health Canada still promises, “[I]t’s safe to receive a COVID-19 vaccine following infection with the virus that causes COVID-19. Vaccination is very important, even if you’ve had COVID-19.”   

However, many Canadians seem to have realized the dangers of the COVID shots as recent government data revealed that most Canadians are flat-out refusing a COVID booster injection.   

Continue Reading

COVID-19

The New York Times Admits Injuries from COVID-19 Shots

Published on

From Heartland Daily News

By AnneMarie Schieber

“This is a promising start, but what about the dead?”

The COVID-19 shots have caused multiple, serious injuries, an article in The New York Times acknowledged on May 4.

It is the first time the self-described newspaper of record has reported on the severe side effects from the vaccines, since the massive inoculation campaign that went into full swing starting in January 2021. The article profiled several health professionals with advanced degrees who suffered debilitating injuries ranging from neurological disorders, shingles, hearing loss, tinnitus, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, and racing hearts, weeks and months after their COVID-19 shots.

‘I’m Told I’m Not Real’

The patients, all familiar with the internal workings of the health care system, described their utter frustration with their complaints not being taken seriously.

“I can’t get the government to help me,” Shaun Barcavage, a 54-year-old nurse practitioner from New York City told the Times. Barcavage now suffers from tinnitus after suffering from stinging in his eyes, mouth, and genitals upon getting his first COVID shot. “I’m told I’m not real. I’m told I’m coincidence.”

Similarly, Gregory Poland, editor-in-chief of the journal Vaccine, found little interest in his condition, according to the Times. Poland has urged his contacts at the Centers for Disease Control to examine the connection between the shots and tinnitus, which has afflicted him.

“I just don’t get any sense of movement,” Poland told the Times. “If they have done studies, those studies should be published.”

Changing Times?

The 3,244-word article—which the Times says was the result of months of investigation—highlights reports of COVID shot injuries reported by patients, conservative media outlets, and courageous doctors almost immediately after the vaccine campaign got underway, but were dismissed by the Times and other mainstream media outlets.

“That it took The New York Times more than three years to report on COVID side effects is just the latest indictment against our corrupt corporate legacy media,” said Jim Lakely, vice president and communications director at The Heartland Institute, which publishes Health Care News. “Back when such reporting would have been just as true, and actually mattered, the likes of The New York Times characterized all talk of negative side effects of a rushed COVID treatment as ‘disinformation’ and unproven ‘conspiracy theories.’”

Traditionally, journalism’s role was to remain neutral and to be skeptical of power, but the pandemic proved that corporate media outlets can no longer be trusted to report the news, and the article is the Times’ attempt to rehabilitate its image, says Lakely.

“The same legacy media that led the charge to de-platform and shame any free-thinking American who dared to question government narratives and mandates during the pandemic does not get points, for now, starting to gently report what has been true since the spring of 2020,” Lakely said.

Never Mind Deaths

“This is a promising start, but what about the dead?” wrote Jeff Childers on May 4 in his Coffee and COVID Substack. Childers has meticulously documented the “sudden deaths” of young, healthy people who received the COVID shots.

“Never mind!” wrote Childers. “Here we find the first serious gap in the article’s coverage. The Times avoided this difficult issue, only briefly referring to possible deaths. But maybe it was too much to expect in this cautious, tentative first step toward officially acknowledging that ‘Houston, we may have a problem.’”

Sudden deaths began getting serious attention late in 2022 after insurance executives started noticing a rise in death claims of young, working-age people.  Pilots, whose health is closely monitored, oddly began dying mid-flight.

     Also missing from the article is any mention of Peter McCullough, M.D., who has become one of the most recognizable names around the globe warning people about the mRNA shots. “No, I was not contacted,” McCullough told Health Care News.

‘Politics At Play’

Childers says the timing of the Times article is suspicious, noting that former CNN anchor Chris Cuomo, who championed pandemic mitigation measures, went on national television recently to discuss his COVID shot injuries.

“I’m speculating, a lot, but cynically I sense politics at play,” wrote Childers. “We’re six months out from the election. Who does admitting even partial failure of the vaccine program help, politically, and who does it hurt? The acknowledgment of the reality of widespread, unaddressed vaccine injuries would seem to hurt President Trump the most.”

AnneMarie Schieber ([email protected]is the managing editor of Health Care News.

Continue Reading

Trending

X