In a passionate conclusion to his summation at the trial of Tamara Lich and Chris Barber, defense counsel Lawrence Greenspon said “it would be wrong to criminalize [their] behavior in these unique circumstances.”

“I want to recite the words from Benjamin Franklin, who said that ‘those who would sacrifice essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety,’” Greenspon said, noting that Canada has sacrificed the liberty of other groups in history and ultimately apologized for violating “Constitutionally entrenched and protected fundamental freedoms.”

In the final day of the defense’s closing summation, Freedom Convoy lawyer Lawence Greenspon railed against the Crown for trying to “criminalize the words and actions” of Freedom Convoy organizers Tamara Lich and Chris Barber and pretending “enjoyment of property” trumps freedom of speech and freedom of expression. He derided the Crown’s contention that the “evidence in this case is overwhelming” as a means of convicting Lich and Barber. He said what is overwhelming is the massive cost the Crown produced in prosecuting Lich and Barber.

“The Crown seeks to criminalize the words and actions of leaders of a protest, a protest in which those leaders consistently urged others to be peaceful and to cooperate with police,” Greenspon said. “The Crown asks that those leaders be held criminally responsible for the actions of unidentified others who were directed into the downtown core of Ottawa and they were allowed to stay for a three week period of time without so much as a single parking ticket being issued to anyone.”

“It was only after the two leaders had been arrested that any arguable obstruction took place. This is a case which the crown is referred to as overwhelming, and I submit the only thing that is overwhelming are the unprecedented resources that have been afforded for prosecution of the case,” Greenspon continued.

Greenspon argued that the Crown is seeking a unique judgment: “that is, to find a conspiracy based on a common lawful purpose and the acts of unidentified groups and individuals who carry out interference with downtown residents despite the repeated message of peaceful protest and cooperation with police.”

The lawyer said that the Freedom Convoy planned and implemented a “lawful democratic purpose that thousands of Canadians sought to achieve over a three week period here in Ottawa.” Greenspon noted how the prosecution has attempted to link Lich’s words—which the Crown had repeatedly played for the court in audio and video records—to the actions of “others.”

“The Crown seeks to do this despite Ms Leach's repeated and consistent messages of peaceful protest and cooperation with police” even as she worked with former Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson to “reduce the [protest] footprint and thereby reduce the impact on Ottawa residents.”

Greenspon declared that this trial is about potentially denying fundamental rights in Canada and the Crown’s efforts to make it “a contest between Constitutionally protected fundamental freedoms and the right to enjoyment of property. There is no contest. And I will take your honor to the case law that establishes that principle.” Greenspon did so later in his presentation, citing examples of rulings upholding the right to protest over any presumed right to “enjoyment of property.” The lawyer said any protest is designed to induce some level of “disruption” to “make a point” but causing inconvenience does not make that protest illegal.

Many Ottawa residents complained about the gridlock in the downtown core but Greenspon blamed that squarely on the Ottawa Police Service Greenspon and their “obvious and admitted failure … in first directing the demonstrators into the core of the city and then failing or refusing to enforce any bylaws or laws which would reduce the impact of their presence.”

Judge Heather Perkins-McVey interjected at the point, asking Greenspon to clarify what he meant. “There's no evidence, your Honor, of any enforcement by way of parking tickets, trespass notices … In fact, it was left to civil council to go and get an injunction in terms of the [honking] horns,” Greenspon responded, noting that the police did not even issue a citation if a truck blocked an emergency lane. “Probably a pretty pricey ticket,” the judge said.

Greenspon spent considerable time demonstrating how it was the Ottawa Police Service that told the Freedom Convoy truckers where to park and then closed multiple roads leading into the downtown core of Ottawa, causing traffic congestion. He also emphasized that Lich never urged anyone to do anything unlawful.

The trio of defense lawyers have been presenting its final summation in the trial over the past two weeks. Both Lich and Barber have pleaded not guilty to charges of mischief, intimidation, obstruction and other counts related to their roles in organizing, promoting and raising money for the Freedom Convoy trucker protest. The two did help organize that protest in February 2022, which galvanized opponents of Covid mandates. The protest was abruptly halted by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau when he invoked the never-before-used Emergencies Act that brought down the full force of the police on the protest in the nation’s capital.

The trial began on Sept. 5, 2023. Defense lawyer Lawrence Greenspon told The Post Millennial that a verdict is not expected until the opening months of 2025 – at the earliest. It is now the longest mischief trial in Canadian history. The Crown will present its final summation on Friday Sept. 13, making the trial itself over one year in duration. Lich and Barber have been granted a request to join the trial via Zoom.