CTV is reporting that "After 45 days of evidence and legal arguments the criminal trial of Freedom Convoy organizers Tamara Lich and Chris Barber is finally at an end.
A verdict could be as much as six months away.
'I don’t know in this moment when I will be in a position to give my decision,' Justice Heather Perkins-McVey said Friday.
She said 'it's a little daunting,' given the unusually great volume of evidence and legal questions associated with the case."
That is ridiculous.
As I said in my interview with Tamara Lich, the case never should have went to trial. It's that simple.
This whole kangaroo court is a stain on the nation.
Western Standard article.
Elizabeth May & Kennedy Stewart
defied a court order. Tamara Lich & Chris Barber did not.
One rule for the elected elite another rule for the working class plebs. Just because E. May and K. Stewart were sitting MP's at the time.
ReplyDeleteActually it's not. Peacefully defying a court order is a very Vancouver thing to do. Everyone does it. You get arrested and released right away. It's a symbol gesture of recording one's dissent. This bogus trial never should have happened. The right to peaceful protest is a Charter right.
DeletePerkins-mcvey is known for being a pretty soft judge. Be interesting to see what kind of verdict she comes up with.
ReplyDeletePretty sad eh when a judge is assessed for their decisions based on “hard/soft” approach. Thought the law was to be based on “law” not “character references.”
DeleteTheoretically.
DeleteYes the law is supposed to be the law but we see Republican judges and Democrat judges interpret the law very differently. In Canada the way the law has been interpreted towards Elizabeth May, Kennedy Stewart and everyone else has been very different than how it has been applied to Chris Barber and Tamara Lich.
DeleteThis is a big part of the problem, ego overcomes these judges of all varieties. The law is actually pretty clear to all as it can be read by all. It's not written in Latin and any terms in there that are, you look them up, easily done. What we are really talking about is judges subverting the law, intentionally or not.
DeleteI have no trust in our judges or the courts. They are extremely partisan in their decisions, It’s painfully obvious.
ReplyDeleteI do not understand why any judge didn’t dismiss any residual charges from invoking the “EA” to be unconstitutional. Seems to me, as a common sense/common rule this case is based on that violation therefore it has no merit to be heard. Period.