The sentencing hearing for Freedom Convoy organizers Tamara Lich and Chris Barber resumed for its second day in Ottawa, with Lich’s defence attorney Lawrence Greenspon delivering a passionate argument against the Crown’s position, asserting that the case hinges on “criminalizing expression” rather than prosecuting unlawful acts.Greenspon said his client should receive an absolute discharge because she and Barber tried to mitigate the protest’s effects on downtown Ottawa.Barber's lawyer, Diane Magas, is also seeking an absolute discharge for her client because he has been on bail for the last three-and-a-half years without incident.Both Lich and Barber were previously found guilty of mischief in April for their roles in the 2022 protest.The Crown is seeking a prison sentence of seven years for Lich and eight years for Barber — attending remotely via Zoom — who was also found guilty of counselling others to disobey a court order.Greenspon opened by refuting the Crown’s claim that the case was not about free speech, calling it “facile and inaccurate.”.‘UNDER SIEGE’: Crown insists Convoy was an occupation, as Lich faces seven years, Barber eight.He argued that the Freedom Convoy’s methods were consistently peaceful and outlined five key factors distinguishing Lich from other protest organizers: she used a truck but did not block roads or honk her horn, never advocated for violence or mischief, had no control over other protest groups, actively mitigated the protest’s impact on Ottawa residents, and inspired thousands of Canadians.According to a post on X by Right Blend, Greenspon told the court, “there is no reported case where all five of these elements are present,” emphasizing Lich’s cooperation with police to minimize the disturbance.Citing a February 12, 2022, letter from then-Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson, Greenspon noted that Watson acknowledged the convoy’s lack of intent to cause harm and requested a reduction in its scope.Lich responded the same day, affirming the organizers’ commitment to work with authorities to alleviate pressure.Greenspon highlighted that both Lich and Barber took steps to reduce the protest’s footprint, an effort he described as “unprecedented” in protest history.He referenced the Freedom Convoy code of conduct — Lich oversaw this — “be respectful, not promote harmful media, remain peaceful and encourage peace,” as per a post on X from Mark Joseph, litigation director for The Democracy Fund (TDF), live-tweeting from the courtroom..GIESBRECHT: What the trial of Tamara Lich means to all of us.The court acknowledged the absence of violence or intimidation by the defendants as a mitigating factor.Right Blend said the defence detailed the personal cost of the charges to Lich, 51, and her family. Both she and her husband lost their jobs, her bank account was frozen for three weeks, and she has endured hate mail and death threats over the past three-and-a-half years.Greenspon argued for an absolute discharge, citing her 74 days of credited pre-trial custody, restrictive bail conditions — including a year-and-a-half social media ban and prohibitions on supporting the Freedom Convoy or opposing COVID mandates — and her community contributions, such as raising funds for vaccine-injured individuals.Addressing the Crown’s victim impact statements, Greenspon noted that only three of the 12 statements named Lich or Barber, with others prepared for unrelated proceedings, such as a civil class action led by plaintiff Zexi Li or the Public Order Emergency Commission (POEC).During a recess, Greenspon told Rebel Media commander Ezra Levant that it was clear these statements “were prepared for some other proceeding...a number of them had no indication of which case they were there for.”Justice Heather Perkins-McVey expressed skepticism about the relevance of these statements, stating she would focus solely on trial evidence and take external claims “with a grain of salt.”.Tamara Lich’s lawyer unpacks trial of Freedom Convoy organizers.Co-counsel Eric Granger challenged the Crown’s reliance on case law, distinguishing Lich’s actions from cases such as Van Huigenbos, Dubé, Blanchfield, and Pat King.In an X post, TDF said Granger argued that unlike those cases, which involved deliberate or planned unlawful conduct, Lich’s actions were lawful, peaceful, and aimed at resolving the protest’s impact.Granger emphasized the court’s finding in the dismissed Carter ruling, which rejected claims of a criminal conspiracy, noting that Lich’s messaging focused on peaceful protest and fundraising, not disruption.The defence highlighted Lich’s oversight of the convoy’s code of conduct, which promoted respect, peace, and lawful behaviour.Supporters’ statements read in court described the convoy’s positive impact, with one former United Way employee noting he saw “no violent behaviour” and another saying it “gave her hope.”Right Blend said Granger argued the defendants had already paid a heavy price through employment loss, restricted freedoms, and a taxing legal process, urging the court to grant an absolute discharge..MARRIOTT: Why Tamara Lich matters.In its response, the Crown stated that victim impact statements were relevant to show the convoy’s community impact and could also be accepted for the economic impact, but Perkins-McVey reiterated that only evidence presented in the trial would guide her decision.The Crown said it was the actions of Lich and Barber that “created the conditions that impacted the community” and “although Barber was directed to park by police, the directions were not considered by the truckers.”As a result, the Crown said a bail bond should not be considered as a “collateral consequence.”According to TDF, Perkins-McVey countered that Barber did attempt to cooperate with police.The Crown also said their Carter application was more than two weeks’ notice and not all of the delay falls on them, something Perkins-McVey agreed with, saying this was “a test case in many ways.”The Crown said it rejects Lich’s claims she is being punished for her beliefs and that her words “influenced events on the ground and contributed to mischief.”The court has now set a Sept. 12 date for the forfeiture hearing of Barber’s truck, “Big Red.”The date for the sentencing decision is Oct. 7, 2025.Both Barber and Lich must appear in person that day.
