The ongoing trial of Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, key organizers of the 2022 Freedom Convoy protest in Canada, took a pivotal turn as defense lawyers argued there is “no case” against Lich.

The defense’s claims rest on the assertion that the evidence presented by the Crown does not prove any unlawful activities by Lich, as the Post Millennial reports.

The trial, which began on Sept. 5, 2023, centers around the involvement of Lich and Barber in organizing the Freedom Convoy, a large-scale protest against COVID-19 mandates.

The defense team made up of three lawyers, has focused on dismantling the Crown's case, particularly the admissibility of a Carter application that allegedly links Lich and Barber as co-conspirators.

Defense Argues Lack of Unlawful Activity

Defense attorney Eric Granger took the floor on Tuesday, challenging the notion that Lich engaged in any unlawful activity during the protests. He argued that while the Crown characterized the evidence as largely uncontested, it did not indicate any illegal actions by Lich.

Granger highlighted the consensus between the defense and the Crown on the factual evidence but insisted that it failed to demonstrate any criminal behavior by Lich. He pointed to the fact that Judge Heather Perkins-McVey herself noted the absence of evidence showing Lich blocking streets or roads during the protest.

Moreover, Granger stressed that Lich did not collaborate with Barber in unlawful activities, a crucial point in refuting the co-conspirator narrative suggested by the Crown. He further argued that the actions of other participants in the Freedom Convoy should not be attributed to Lich or Barber.

Videos Show Lich Speaking to Protesters

The defense presented videos that showed Lich in Ottawa, where she is seen speaking to Freedom Convoy participants. Granger argued that these videos do not demonstrate any unlawful conduct and that the phrase “hold the line,” often associated with Lich, could be interpreted in various ways.

The phrase became a point of discussion between Granger and Judge Perkins-McVey, who acknowledged that its meaning could differ based on the context in which it was used. Granger emphasized that Lich’s actions were lawful and that the videos did not support the Crown’s allegations of criminal intent.

The courtroom, filled to about half capacity with public attendees, has seen significant support for Lich and Barber, reflecting the widespread attention and controversy surrounding the trial.

Legal Defense Stresses Right to Protest

The trial resumed after a brief hiatus, with defense lawyer Diane Magas underscoring the legality of protests in Canada, regardless of their size. Magas argued that the right to protest does not become unlawful simply because a protest is large or lasts for an extended period.

Magas’s arguments reinforced the defense’s stance that the Freedom Convoy, despite its unprecedented scale and duration, was within the bounds of legal protest. She contended that the charges against Lich and Barber do not hold up under scrutiny, given the lack of evidence linking them to any illegal activities.

Eric Granger echoed these sentiments, arguing that even when the broader context of the protest is taken into account, there is still no case against Lich. He noted that many individuals and groups “appropriated” the Freedom Convoy name but may not have been directly involved with the trucker convoy that Lich and Barber organized.

Trial Could Be the Longest Mischief Case in History

The trial, which is being closely watched by both supporters and critics of the Freedom Convoy, could potentially become the longest mischief trial in Canadian history. Defense lawyer Lawrence Greenspon is scheduled to deliver his summation on Friday, which could mark a turning point in the proceedings.

Both Lich and Barber have pleaded not guilty to the charges against them. The trial’s outcome could have significant implications for future protests in Canada, particularly regarding the legal limits of civil disobedience and the right to protest.

As the trial progresses, the defense continues to argue that the evidence does not support the Crown’s case against Lich. With the potential for a lengthy legal battle ahead, the eyes of the nation remain fixed on the courtroom.

Conclusion: Legal Arguments Highlight Freedom to Protest

The trial of Tamara Lich and Chris Barber has brought to the forefront critical issues surrounding the right to protest and the legal boundaries of civil disobedience.

The defense’s arguments, centered on the lack of evidence for unlawful activity, challenge the Crown’s case and underscore the importance of legal protections for peaceful protest.

As the trial unfolds, it could set a precedent for how future protests are handled under Canadian law.