Justice Heather Perkins-McVey has made the decision to not dismiss an application brought by Freedom Convoy organizers Tamara Lich and Chris Barber to dismiss the Carter Application. Lich and Barber appeared for Day 35 in court Thursday to hear the judge's decision on their defence lawyers’ application to throw out the Crown’s conspiracy charge. The Carter Application is an attempt by prosecution to prove there was a conspiracy planned between the two convoy leaders — and therefore charges can be laid against one for the statements or actions of the other. In this case, according to Canadian nonprofit The Democracy Fund (TDF), the Crown seeks to have all statements made by Barber during the 2022 Freedom Convoy in Ottawa attributed to Lich. That means, if the Carter Application stands, all evidence documenting Barber’s statements at the time could be interpreted as if Lich made them too. The Crown argued there can be a “reasonable inference” drawn by Barber “encouraging people to participate in the protest and blocking roads,” TDF said. .Perkins-McVey said she found there were reasonable inferences in support of the Crown — but reiterated the ruling does not have any weight on the final Carter decision. Lich and Barber’s defence has argued the conspiracy application should be dismissed because of the Crown’s piecemeal reasoning, including erroneously assuming collaboration between Lich and Barber, according to TDF. Though Thursday’s decision was not for the Carter Application itself, but “an application to dismiss on a directed verdict standard,” it means the court will hear submissions on the Carter Application at the end of the trial.Perkins-McVey “notes that, at times, it seemed as though counsel was arguing the merits of the Carter Application,” TDF tweeted from the courtroom. “She states that there needs to be evidence of specific unlawful design and furtherance of the objects of the conspiracy. The common unlawful design must be proven by the crown beyond a reasonable doubt.”“The test here is whether there is any evidence of common unlawful design.”Perkins-McVey also advised “the court is required to consider the inference most favourable to the Crown.”“She adds that the judge must determine whether an inference can be made. Where more than one inference can be drawn on a directed verdict, the judge must side with the inference that favours the Crown,” TDF wrote, adding the judge “states that she agrees that there is no direct evidence of common unlawful design between Lich and Barber. There is however, some circumstantial evidence to be considered.”“A trier of fact must be able to draw inferences that flow from established facts.”The trial will resume March 13 for three consecutive court dates.
