Judge agrees with Tamara Lich’s counsel that saying ‘hold the line’ was not a call to insurrection

What the Freedom Convoy leader told truckers in the Ottawa anti-COVID jab mandate protest ‘could mean, stay true to your conscience and convictions,’ Judge Heather Perkins-McVey said on Day 29 of the trial

During the trial of Freedom Convoy leaders Tamara Lich and Chris Barber earlier this week, Lich’s legal counsel argued that her use of the rallying cry “hold the line” during the 2022 protests did not imply she was calling for people to engage in illegal activity.

Attorney Eric Granger said that his client had continually called for peaceful protests in her public statements, noting her social media presence as proof.

Granger then said that Lich’s “hold the line” statement could be interpreted in many ways.

Judge Heather Perkins-McVey agreed, saying, “It could mean, stay true to your conscience and convictions. “

On February 17-18, 2022, video footage emerged of Lich and Barber’s arrest by members of the Ottawa Police Service (OPS).

While being led away, Lich told truckers in the Ottawa anti-COVID jab mandate protest to “hold the line.”

On Day 29 of the trial, which took place on Tuesday, Granger again made it a point to the court that Lich and Barber should not be considered co-conspirators in their criminal trial.

As noted in a Day 29 trial update by The Democracy Fund (TDF), which is crowdfunding Lich’s legal costs, Granger referred to the court a video posted by Lich on February 16, 2022, in which she “appealed for love, respect, and prayers for police officers.”

“Drawing attention to a text exchange between Lich and Barber on February 17, 2022, Granger highlighted apparent disagreements between them regarding the statements made in the video,” the TDF noted.

The trial is currently at the stage when the defense counsel for Lich and Barber take turns calling witnesses before the court.

On Monday, which was Day 28 of Lich and Barber’s trial, the defense argued that a Crown request to make criminal charges against one leader apply to the other leaders should not be allowed because there is no evidence the pair worked in a conspiratorial manner.

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.”

Lich and Barber can’t be treated as a ‘single’ entity, lawyer argues

In court on Tuesday, Granger again emphasized the need for caution in treating “Lich and Barber as a single entity,” as noted by the TDF.

He told the court that he questioned the Crown’s “allegations of conspiracy, particularly in light of Barber’s diverse statements.”

He made it a point that there is no evidence Lich broke the law before her arrest. He argued that trying to interpret Lich’s “hold the line” statement as a call for violence is purely speculation, given that she has a known calm persona.

When it came to connecting Lich with Barber, Granger said there is no evidence “of Lich’s and Barber’s participation in Ottawa coexisting,” as noted by the TDF.

Multiple convoys took to Ottawa organized by various individuals. Granger told the court that the Crown’s evidence fell short for it to make a case for use of the Carter application and urged the court to dismiss it.

Barber’s lawyer stresses that evidence shows protests were peaceful and there was no ‘conspiracy’

Barber’s lawyer, Diane Magas, began her submissions before the court Tuesday and called into question the Crown’s material submissions concerning the date when an alleged agreement to conspire between Lich and Barber took place.

She noted the different legal definitions of riot and unlawful assembly, “arguing that the evidence overwhelmingly contradicted any tumultuous activity during the convoy protest,” as mentioned by the TDF.

“She highlighted numerous text messages and social media statements made by Barber and Lich, with no indication of an agreement for unlawful purposes. She asserted the legality of actions such as setting up a GoFundMe account and obtaining fuel for trucks. Magas emphasized the peaceful nature of the protests and the absence of evidence linking Barber and Lich to any unlawful plan.”

Magas again stressed that when looking at text exchanges and Barber’s public statements, and the fact he had cooperated with police, there was no agreement between the two to engage in an unlawful purpose.

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 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.

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. LifeSiteNews has been covering the trial extensively.

Related Topics:#AnthonyMurdoch #EricGranger #FreedomConvoy #HoldTheLine #JudgeHeatherPerkins-McVey #LifeSiteNews #TamaraLich

Up Next

Danielle Smith warns Trudeau gov’t she’s going ahead with natural gas projects despite regulations

Don't Miss

Trudeau gov’t dept. suggests giving LGBT, minority journalists $45k annually to promote ‘diversity’

Todayville

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

Energy East May be the Nation Building Mega-Project Canada Needs Right Now

Alberta / 3 hours ago

Sentencing outcomes for two of the “Coutts Three” announced

Business / 3 hours ago

TikTok CEO, Trump respond to SCOTUS ruling

COVID-19

Canadian judge rejects complaint against maskless workplaces as frivolous

Published on January 15, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Federal Court Justice Benoit Duchesne ruled that Elections Canada manager Nicolas Juzda’s complaint of feeling ‘unsafe’ following the end of mask mandates in federal workplaces was unreasonable

A federal judge ruled that complaints that maskless workplaces pose a danger to employees’ health are frivolous, ending the final chapter of COVID regulations.

According to information published on January 15 by Blacklock’s Reporter, Federal Court Justice Benoit Duchesne ruled that Elections Canada manager Nicolas Juzda’s complaint of feeling unsafe following the end of mask mandates in federal workplaces was unreasonable.

“The applicant’s concern about an unsafe workplace was based on his assessment that a significant number of people would return to the workplace under the return-to-work model, that any of these people may have contracted Covid-19 and that the non-mandatory recommendations and precautions relating to Covid-19 fell short of what he believes would be a safe work environment,” wrote the court.

Masks were mandated in federal workplaces from April 20, 2020, to February 14, 2023, under the direction of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. At the same time, millions of Canadians were forced to mask in public settings such as grocery stores or hospitals.

After the mandate had lifted, Juzda, a “fully vaccinated” individual without any particular health issues, complained that he felt unsafe in the Gatineau headquarters.

“I must excuse my right to refuse work that constitutes a danger,” he wrote, referencing the Canada Labor Code that allows federally regulated staff to refuse work “that constitutes a danger to the employee.”

Juzda claimed that masking “reduces the risk of contracting Covid-19 but is of limited effectiveness if not combined with other measures, particularly during prolonged exposure to unmasked infected individuals such as being nearby in an indoor office for an entire day.”

“Covid-19 is a disease that in addition to often being extremely unpleasant during the acute period poses significant risks including death,” he continued.

“Handwashing and workplace cleaning are of minimal use in limiting the spread of Covid-19,” Juzda claimed.

Indeed, LifeSiteNews has reported extensively on overwhelming evidence showing that masks are ineffective in preventing transmission of COVID and that they come with harmful effects.

Back in 2021, 47 studies confirmed the ineffectiveness of masks for COVID, while 32 more confirmed their negative health effects.

According to another 2021 report, more than 170 studies have found that masks have been ineffective at stopping COVID and instead have been harmful, especially to children.

In fact, in 2020, before masks were widely mandated, Canada’s chief public health officer Dr. Theresa Tam admitted that masks were not effective in preventing COVID.

“There is no need to use a mask for well people,” she said in the first few weeks of the pandemic. “It hasn’t been proven really to protect you from getting the virus.”

COVID-19

Canadian parents wary of COVID, flu shots for children

Published on January 14, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Government research has found that Canadian parents do not plan to inject their children with COVID or flu shots, pointing to the ineffectiveness of the shots and potential side effects

Canadian parents are remaining wary of COVID and flu shots for children despite ongoing publicity campaigns.

According to in-house research by the Public Health Agency obtained by Blacklock’s Reporter, many Canadian parents do not plan to inject their children with the experimental COVID shots, pointing to the ineffectiveness of the shots and potential side effects.

“Continued monitoring of parental knowledge and views around Covid-19 and influenza are important to adapt public communication and education accordingly,” the report said.

“Monitoring parental attitudes is essential to predict expected vaccine take-up and guide education and awareness efforts to promote vaccination,” it continued.

In Canada, COVID shots are both approved and encouraged for all children over six months of age, despite the fact that the latest Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 shots for children under 12 were only granted emergency use authorization in the U.S.

The research asked parents if they planned to give their children updated COVID shots, to which only 17 percent said they “definitely will”; 26 percent said they “probably won’t”; and 28 percent said they “definitely won’t.”

Those who planned to refuse the reoccurring shots revealed they were “concerned there was not enough research on the vaccine,” questioned the effectiveness of the shots, mistrusted the government information surrounding COVID shots, or their doctor had never mentioned it.

Similarly, 19.5 percent reported being “somewhat hesitant” to give their child the COVID shot, while 21 percent said they were “very hesitant.”

Likewise, parents were hesitant to give their children annual flu shots, over concerns of it being unnecessary and potential side effects.

Parents’ hesitancy to jab their young children comes after research has proven that the COVID shots are not only unnecessary but pose serious health risks, especially to children.

Since the start of the COVID crisis, official data shows that the virus has been listed as the cause of death for less than 20 kids in Canada under age 15. This is out of six million children in the age group.

The COVID jabs approved in Canada have also been associated with severe side effects, such as blood clots, rashes, miscarriages, and even heart attacks in young, healthy men.

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

A report from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) showed at least 21,000 side effects, with 24 deaths of American children ages 12 to 17 after COVID shots.