Trial for Freedom Convoy Organizer Continues as Defence Argues for Stay of Proceedings

OTTAWA—The lawyer for Freedom Convoy organizer Chris Barber is continuing to argue in court for a stay of proceedings on the basis of an 'officially induced error of law,' claiming that he was given erroneous legal advice on the legality of the trucker protest.
Barber and Tamara Lich were already found guilty of mischief, while Barber was also found guilty of counselling others to disobey a court order, for their role in the 2022 trucker protest against COVID-19 vaccine mandates and other pandemic restrictions.
Justice Heather Perkins-McVey ruled on April 3 that the pair were not guilty of the other charges of intimidation, obstructing police, and counselling others to do the same. Both were also found guilty of counselling others to commit mischief, but that finding was stayed at the request of Crown lawyers.
Crown prosecutors are seeking two years of prison time for Lich and Barber, as well as to auction off Barber's iconic truck 'Big Red,' which he used to travel from Saskatchewan to Ottawa and parked in the downtown core for three weeks. The sentencing for the two organizers has not happened yet.
In the meantime, Barber's lawyers are requesting that the proceedings be stayed because he sought legal advice from his previous lawyers, police officers, and a Superior Court judge on the legality of the protest. A stay of proceedings would lead to Barber's case being put on hold, and he would likely not face any charges.
Defence lawyer Diane Magas has said that the Ottawa Police Service was aware of the protest ahead of its arrival and directed Barber where to park his truck. At two injunction hearings around silencing the honking of truck horns, Barber was also told by his lawyer at the time that he could continue protesting as long as it was done peacefully and safely, and that he could honk his horn in situations of emergency, and that breaching this injunction against honking would not be a criminal offence.
Related Stories
10/28/2023
4/3/2025
Barber was charged with counselling others to disobey a court order for a Feb. 7, 2022, TikTok video where he encouraged protesters to honk their vehicle horns if they saw police arriving. This violated the court injunction that had come into force the same day, Perkins-McVey ruled.
Arguments Over Officially Induced Error of Law
On May 23, defence lawyer Magas said Ottawa Police Service officers suggested that Barber could remain at the protest. She said that since Barber coordinated with the police to move trucks out of the downtown core on Feb. 14, 'from that conduct and words, he was induced into believing that what he was doing was lawful.'
Magas also said Barber had asked his lawyer at the time to seek guidance from the lawyer imposing the injunction about whether they could continue protesting. She added that during this injunction hearing, the justice also said it was a civil process and not a criminal one.
Justice Perkins-McVey pushed back and said Barber had not specifically asked the police officers whether what he was doing was legal, and said the injunction hearing was only ruling on the issue of horn honking.
Crown attorney Siobhain Wetscher said that while Barber had received 'bad legal representation' from his lawyer, that was not an error on the part of an agent of the state. She said that in order for an 'officially induced error of law' to apply, the erroneous legal advice needed to come from a government official responsible for administering the law.
Wetscher also said that Barber had confirmed during cross-examination on May 22 that nobody from the office of the mayor of Ottawa told him that the Freedom Convoy was lawful, peaceful, or safe.
Justice Perkins-McVey said if Barber or the other Freedom Convoy organizers had sought specific advice on where they were or were not acting unlawfully, then 'we wouldn't be here.'
Crown attorney Wetscher also said that while Barber was told by a police officer that parts of the demonstration were unlawful, but was told by his lawyer that it was not illegal, 'there were no steps taken by [Barber] to get clarity on those two very divergent positions.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Forbes

5 hours ago

• Forbes

The MeidasTouch Podcast Now Has 5 Million Subscribers

The MeidasTouch podcast just hit 5 million subscribers, cementing its status as a breakout force in ... More progressive media. Launched during the isolation of the pandemic lockdown era, a group chat between three brothers has transformed into one of the most influential voices in progressive media. The MeidasTouch Podcast — the flagship show of the MeidasTouch Network — has just crossed 5 million subscribers, a milestone that cements its place as not only a media juggernaut but a dominant force in independent political commentary. Founded in 2020 by Ben, Brett, and Jordy Meiselas, MeidasTouch first made waves as an anti-Trump political action committee during the height of the COVID pandemic. At the time, all three brothers were generally frustrated by the state of the world and looking for a productive outlet for their time and talents. 'It felt like screaming into the void,' Brett recently told Vanity Fair. 'So we committed to doing what we could — writing articles, making videos, just getting our thoughts out.' The rise of the MeidasTouch podcast They've been doing that same work, just more of it, ever since. What began with viral videos evolved into a full-fledged media network, now home to a multiple shows including Leigh McGowan's PoliticsGirl, and the legal commentary series Legal AF. But it's the core MeidasTouch Podcast, hosted by the three brothers, that's leading the way and drawing major guests like President Biden and Senators Elizabeth Warren – and racking up viewership numbers that rival cable news. A celebratory tweet posted by the network's senior digital editor Acyn Torabi (@Acyn on X) marked the subscriber milestone, reading in part: 'As we hit 5 million subscribers, I want to say this: this is one small step for the MeidasTouch Network, but I think one giant leap for independent journalism and democracy generally.' As far as who the brothers are: Ben is a lawyer and Colin Kaepernick's business partner, Brett is a two-time Emmy-winning video editor, and Jordy is a top advertising executive in New York. Their network has seen explosive growth so far this year, with Podscribe data showing that the podcast jumped from 57.7 million downloads and views per month in mid-February to 115 million the following month. And even after that surge, the numbers remained strong, with April 2025 data showing 107.3 million downloads. The brothers' YouTube channel alone averages 33 million views every 48 hours, according to Acyn, while the podcast's momentum has been enough to briefly dethrone even The Joe Rogan Experience. In February 2025, MeidasTouch pulled in 57.5 million downloads, outpacing Rogan's 51.5 million for the month. While comparisons to right-wing media stars are inevitable, however, the Meiselas brothers push back on the idea that the left needs its own Rogan. 'Right-wing podcasters weren't cooked up in a lab,' Ben continued in the Vanity Fair interview. 'They developed audiences organically over time.' Brett added that the key isn't finding someone who mimics Rogan's tone or beliefs — it's the authenticity that matters. That's a major part of MeidasTouch's appeal. Brett Meiselas has said in the past that the goal is to make listeners feel like they're part of the same experience the brothers share in private. The vibe, in other words, is supposed to feel like a conversation among friends. As for what's next, Acyn made it clear in his message on X, adding: 'We use our platform for good: to always shine a light on the truth, to expose the injustices taking place, and to confront the authoritarian Trump regime head-on, where corporate news has utterly failed and betrayed us all.' Five million subscribers in, the MeidasTouch Network clearly isn't slowing down. Based on the trends this year alone, there's every reason to believe that this is just the beginning.

The Hill

5 hours ago

• The Hill

Trump hits Iran: 5 questions on what comes next

President Trump's decision to authorize a military strike on Iran is a seismic moment that could reshape the future of the Middle East and his presidency. The administration on Sunday signaled it wants to contain the conflict, underscoring that it does not want an all-out war with Iran but will not accept a world where Tehran has a nuclear weapon. Whether it can contain the fallout is a different proposition and one that may depend largely on Iran. Politically, the vast majority of Republicans are sticking with Trump, while many Democrats are expressing outrage over what they see as a lack of strategy, as well as a lack of notification to Congress ahead of the strikes. The move by Trump is, in some ways, a surprise, as he came to office promising to keep the U.S. out of foreign conflicts. Now, less than six months into his second term, he is on the brink of a larger battle. Here are five big questions. This is the most important question. Administration officials on Sunday signaled that they are hopeful Iran will return to the negotiating table, but signs quickly emerged of a more aggressive response from Tehran. Iranian television reported that Iran's parliament had approved a measure to close the Strait of Hormuz, a key shipping route between Iran and Oman. State-run Press-TV said a final decision on doing so rested with Iran's Supreme National Security Council. Shutting off the waterway could have major implications for global trade, leading to increased oil and gas prices in the U.S. That would bite at Trump, who vowed to bring down prices after years of high inflation under former President Biden in the post-COVID era. It also risks turning the conflict into a broader war. Iran could also launch strikes against U.S. military targets, though its abilities to do so have been hampered by more than a week of strikes by Israel, which has allowed U.S. and Israeli planes more security to fly over Iranian skies. Another widely-discussed possibility is that Iran could back terror attacks around the world on U.S. targets. Of course, there would be serious risks to such actions by Iran. Just taking steps to move forward with its nuclear program, let alone striking out at the U.S., would lead to negative consequences, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned on Sunday. 'Look, at the end of the day, if Iran is committed to becoming a nuclear weapons power, I do think it puts the regime at risk,' he said during an appearance on Fox Sunday Futures. 'I really do. I think it would be the end of the regime if they tried to do that.' Before this week, Trump's Make America Great Again movement looked divided on a strike on Iran. Trump has long criticized past U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and a big part of his draw to many voters was his promise to keep the U.S. out of foreign conflicts. MAGA voices from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) to political pundit Tucker Carlson to former Trump strategic adviser Steve Bannon have all cast doubt on getting the U.S. more directly involved in the Iran-Israeli conflict. In the immediate aftermath of the strikes, Republicans were notably united, with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) being a notable exception. And administration officials with non-interventionist records were taking rhetorical steps to keep the doubters in line. A chief example was Vice President Vance, who said the U.S. was at war with Iran's nuclear program, not Iran as a country. Iran may not see things that way, and if Tehran takes steps to hurt the U.S., GOP voices who doubted the wisdom of a strike may get louder. That will be something the administration watches closely going forward. Trump, in a Sunday Truth Social post, also touted 'great unity' among Republicans following the U.S. strikes and called on the party to focus on getting his tax and spending legislation to his desk. On the left, Democrats have hit Trump hard over the strike on Iran. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), speaking at a rally on Saturday night, reacted to unfolding events live, arguing Trump's action was unconstitutional as a crowd changed 'no more wars.' Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said Trump's action was an impeachable offense. That was a bold statement in that Democrats largely have avoided impeachment talk with Trump after twice voting to impeach him during his first term. Both of those efforts ultimately ended with Senate acquittals and, finally, with Trump's reelection last year. Presidents in both parties have taken limited military strikes without first seeking permission from Congress, but Democrats have also brought up the War Powers Act, saying Trump went too far with the strikes. At the same time, many Democrats are concerned about Iran's potential to go nuclear, and the party does not want to be cast as soft on Tehran. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), a vociferous opponent of Iran, called for his GOP counterpart, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), to put the War Powers Act on the floor so senators could vote to authorize Trump's actions. Going a step further, Schumer said he would vote for it. 'No president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy,' Schumer said in the statement. 'Confronting Iran's ruthless campaign of terror, nuclear ambitions, and regional aggression demands strength, resolve, and strategic clarity. The danger of wider, longer, and more devastating war has now dramatically increased.' 'We must enforce the War Powers Act, and I'm urging Leader Thune to put it on the Senate floor immediately. I am voting for it and implore all Senators on both sides of the aisle to vote for it,' he said. Another Democrat further to the center, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, retweeted Trump's Truth Social post on the attack and said he fully agreed with it. In general, the strikes on Iran may further divide Democrats on liberal-centrist and generational lines. Yet much, again, depends on events. A successful Gulf War by former President George H.W. Bush did not save his presidency in 1992. And the second Gulf War ended disastrously for the Republican Party led by Bush's son, former President George W. Bush. Trump justly had a reputation as a president who is averse to foreign conflicts, given his criticism of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and his repeated calls that he would keep the U.S. out of such wars. So how did this Trump end up bombing Iran, becoming the first president to authorize the dropping of some of America's most lethal non-nuclear bombs? It's more likely Trump's shift is a bit of a one-off based on current world events than a complete change in philosophy. After Israel's initial strike on Iran on June 13, the administration distanced itself from the decision. Trump previously has been seeking to get Iran to agree to a nuclear deal, and many reports suggested he was not keen on an aggressive Israel attack. But that attack happened, and it went well. Israel had control of Iranian airspace, potentially clearing the way for U.S. B-2 bombers. Action by Russia was unlikely given its own war with Ukraine — something that was not part of the political fabric in Trump's first term. Iran's backers in Hamas and Hezbollah also have been devastated by Israel since Hamas launched its attack on Oct. 7, 2023, an event that has had a number of serious repercussions. Some U.S. officials on Sunday called for peace, a sign that Trump is not seeking a prolonged conflict. That could also be a message to his supporters who did not think they were voting for a leader who risked getting the country into a Middle East War. At least some of those voters may be asking questions in the days and weeks to come, and what comes next will make a big difference in shaping their views. Trump's decision to attack Iran and enter the Israeli-Iran war is a big win for hawkish supporters and allies of the president, most notably Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). It is also, oddly, something that will be cheered by certain Republicans who are more often critics of Trump, such as former National Security Adviser John Bolton and former Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). It seems clear Trump is listening to the voices of Graham, Rubio and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, despite the sometimes-tense relationship between the U.S. and Israeli leaders. Vance is clearly a part of the president's inner circle, and it was notable that he, Rubio and Hegseth were at Trump's side when he announced the strikes on Saturday night. Trump 2.0 has been notable for having few voices that offer pushback to Trump's decisions. It is difficult to see Hegseth pressing Trump to move in a different direction on a national security issue, for example. And Trump twice this week described assessments by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard that Iran was not close to developing a nuclear weapon as wrong. So, who has Trump's ear? Most of these key people surround Trump and others, like White House chief of staff Susie Wiles. But Trump is his own decider-in-chief, and the Iran strikes are a reflection of his own unpredictability.

San Francisco Chronicle​

11 hours ago

• San Francisco Chronicle​

Climbers find upside-down American flag signaling ‘distress' on Tahoe summit

An upside-down American flag atop Flagpole Peak above Echo Lakes near Lake Tahoe is drawing attention after two climbers encountered the display during a summit last week. Tadd Perkins of South Lake Tahoe and Nicholas Schwab of San Francisco climbed the peak on June 10, initially noticing the flagpole from a distance. As they neared the summit, they saw the flag was flying upside down — a symbol of distress under the U.S. Flag Code. Visible from Meyers (El Dorado County) and the Echo Lake trailhead into Desolation Wilderness, the flag appears to be part of a broader wave of symbolic protest on public lands. In recent months, upside-down flags and large banners have been used to criticize cuts to environmental and emergency services carried out by the Department of Government Efficiency, a federal group led until recently by Elon Musk. In February, an upside-down U.S. flag was unfurled on Yosemite's El Capitan during the park's annual firefall spectacle. In May, a 1,925-square-foot Transgender Pride flag was draped over the same cliff face, prompting Yosemite officials to ban banners larger than 15 square feet in designated wilderness areas. Perkins, a retired Federal Emergency Management Agency official and firefighter, said he wasn't involved in the Flagpole Peak display but empathized with its message. 'Even prior to recent DOGE cuts, public lands staffing was in decline while recreational visitation was at or near all-time highs,' Perkins said. 'Most of us can see why this is not a good equation for the health of the resources over time.' He warned against the long-term impact of slashing public service jobs that support outdoor infrastructure. Last month, 16 AmeriCorps members in the Tahoe Basin were laid off mid-term due to canceled federal grants — a decision tied up in litigation. Although a U.S. District Court has ordered some AmeriCorps funding restored, the Trump administration is expected to appeal by August. 'We can't use a chain saw against the places that sustain us and the agencies and workforce that support them,' Perkins said, referencing Musk's widely publicized appearance wielding a chain saw at the Conservative Political Action Conference in February. 'These public lands are so great because they have had tireless public servants dedicated to them.' The U.S. Forest Service, which manages Flagpole Peak, acknowledged the display and noted it could be considered abandoned property under federal regulations. However, no national policy prohibits such symbolic expressions. 'We are aware of the public attention surrounding the display of an upside-down United States flag at this location,' said Lisa Herron, a spokesperson for the USDA Forest Service's Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit. 'On the national level, there is no policy prohibiting hanging of banners, flags or signs, and it is considered a protected form of speech.' Perkins pointed out that outdoor recreation contributes an estimated $1.2 trillion to the U.S. economy annually, according to the latest data from the U.S. Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic Analysis. 'When I'm climbing and hiking, I admittedly am not thinking about the economic benefit from time outside,' Perkins said. 'I am thinking about the person it's helped me become and how it has brought me the best experiences and friends in my life.' He added that this is why 'someone might want to hang an American flag on public lands, to signal the distress we are in.'