Volume 16 (November 3, 2022)

Dan Sheppard, Senior Counsel (POEC)

Yes. Good morning, Mr. Commissioner. It’s Daniel Sheppard for the Commission. If Mr. Clerk could bring up the PowerPoint presentation.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 7 16-007-10

Dan Sheppard, Senior Counsel (POEC)

Mr. Commissioner, today the Commission is presenting its next overview report dealing with fundraising in support of protesters. Next slide, please. COMOR00000005 describes the major fundraising activities that took place to provide money to support protestors in Ottawa. This overview report describes a variety of entities that were involved in this process including crowdfunding platforms, financial institutions, payment processors, as well as cryptocurrencies. The report provides a narrative of meetings and decision-making that took place with respect to how these fundraisers would be organized and constructed, and how money would be distributed, and it provides information available to the Commission about the ultimate sources and disposition of approximately $24M in donations. Next slide. Before getting into the results of the investigation, a few words about the process that the Commission used. It began by reviewing information provided by the parties to the proceeding, however, a great deal of the information necessary to complete this investigation was not in the hands of the parties. The Commission, using its powers of summons, as well as negotiations, obtained additional documents from six non-parties to this proceeding as well as engaging in a open- source investigation for further information. Commission counsel also interviewed 10 witnesses who provided statements that then were used to complete this report. Next slide, please. There were certainly a number of fundraisers that were in play during the Ottawa protests. This overview report focuses, however, on four main sources of funding, the GoFundMe and email money transfer campaigns associated with the Freedom Convoy, the Adopt a Trucker crowdfunding and email money transfer campaign, the second Freedom Convoy fundraiser posted on the GiveSendGo platform, and a subset of cryptocurrency campaigns that raised virtual currencies in support of protestors. Next slide. This represents the results of the investigation. Each line depicts a different source of funds and tracks how those funds were distributed and how they were dealt with at various points by a number of different intermediaries. The thickness of each line represents the amount of funding in question. I’ll return to this slide towards the end of my presentation to review exactly what the Commission learned about the sources and final destinations of funds. Next slide, please. Before turning to that, however, it’s useful to review some of the individuals and entities that played significant roles in the fundraising associated with the Freedom Convoy. Some of those individuals include Tamara Lich, who was the creator of the original GoFundMe and email money transfer campaigns for the Freedom Convoy; Chris Garrah, the organizer of the Adopt a Trucker Campaign and its associated funraisers; Chad Eros, an accountant who provided advice to the Freedom Convoy organizer, created the Convoy Corporation and played a significant role in the creation of the GiveSendGo campaign; and Jacob Wells, the co-founder of GiveSendGo who was also involved in the move of the Freedom Convoy crowdfunding campaign to his platform. Next slide, please. There are also a number of companies that were involved in the various forms of fundraising. You’ve already heard me refer to GoFundMe and GiveSendgo which are two crowdfunding platforms that take in donations in support of causes. There are also Canadian financial institutions that had important roles, such as the Toronto Dominion Bank and the Royal Bank of Canada. These were two financial institutions that received some of the funds. And finally, payment processors like Stripe and it’s Canadian subsidiary, Stripe Payment Canada Limited, played an important role in the background to these fundraisers, as I’ll discuss later in my presentation and is set out in more detail in the overview report. Next slide, please. One thing that will become apparent as one reviews the overview report is that frequently there were events that were taking place in parallel. It is not a strictly linear story that can be told, but rather one has to understand that different actors were engaged in different forms of fundraising conduct at the same time. The first part of the story that the overview report details has to do with the period January 14 to February 2nd of 2022 associated with the creation of the Freedom Convoy GoFundMe campaign and its associated e-transfer campaign. Next slide, please. The story begins with Tamara Lich and the creation of a crowd funding campaign on the GoFundMe platform on January 14th of 2022. At the same time, or rather four days later, Ms. Lich also made a post to Facebook that put forward an email address that solicited direct email money transfer donations in support of the Freedom Convoy. Both the GiveSendGo campaign and the email money transfer campaign were associated with a bank account at the Toronto Dominion Bank in Ms. Lich’s name. And both campaigns began to receive funds on the days that they were created. Nest slide, please. In its interview with Commission counsel, representatives from GoFundMe indicated that they became aware of the crowd funding campaign on their platform within hours of its creation. This was because it was flagged through its algorithms due to the very high rate of donations that were made very early in its creation. This flagging caused individuals within GoFundMe to review the campaign and relatively early on those individuals began to be concerned about the ability of this fundraiser to comply with the GoFundMe terms of service. In particular, the concern related to the GoFundMe terms related to campaigns distributing money in accordance with their description. When an individual creates a crowd funding campaign they have to describe what it is that they’re going to do with the money that’s raised. GoFundMe requires people who organize campaigns on their platform to actually distribute money in accordance with what they tell the public they will do with it. In the case of the Freedom Convoy fundraiser the description said that it would do certain things with the money such as: “We are asking for donations to help with the costs of fuel, food, and lodgings. Funds will be spent to help cover the costs of fuel for our truckers first and foremost will be used to assist with food if needed, and contribute to shelter if needed. Any leftover donations will be donated to a credible veteran’s organization which will be chosen by the donors.” GoFundMe reported that it had concerns with these statements. They indicated that, for example, they were uncertain how it would be possible for what was now thousands of donors to all agree on a credible veteran’s organization that could receive leftover funds. Because of these initial concerns they tasked what they called their VIP team to reach out to Ms. Lich. This is a group of GoFundMe employees who are responsible for dealing with high profile fundraisers and they reached out to Ms. Lich starting on January 16th of 2022 to discuss the fundraiser and how the funds might be spent. Next slide, please. These communications continued between the 16th and January 27th, initially with Ms. Lich abut very quickly turned over to a group of other individuals who were working with her to manage the campaign and to deal with GoFundMe. Over the course of this period, GoFundMe representatives posted questions and received answers. And by January 27th they had reached the part where they felt comfortable releasing at least some of the money that had been raised. Up until this point, donations remained in the control of GoFundMe. On January 27th, in order to formalize the assurances that Ms. Lich and her associates had provided GoFundMe, they provided something that they referred to as the attestation letter. The attestation letter was a document that they asked Ms. Lich to sign that set out a number of obligations on her part that she would have to agree to in exchange for access to the first $1 million of funds. This included pledges that she would act as a fiduciary for the beneficiaries of the fundraiser -- that is to say the truckers involved in the Ottawa protests; that she would deliver funds in a manner that was consistent with what she had set out in the fundraiser itself; a series of accountability mechanisms such as requiring truckers to sign registration forms and to provide receipts in order to receive reimbursement; and to make reimbursements through email money transfers to create a form of a digital paper trail that could be tracked. Finally, there was a requirement for the group of advisors that had surrounded her on these matters to form a formal finance committee that would be involved in overseeing the distribution of funds. Ms. Lich signed the attestation letter on January 27th and returned it to GoFundMe. Next slide. It is at this point that GoFundMe decided to release $1 million Canadian to Ms. Lich’s bank account. However, the money did not actually get transmitted on January 27th and this led to some confusion amongst the various actors. As the Commission discovered, while GoFundMe had reached the decision to release the funds on January 27th it wasn’t until February 1st that an actual transaction was initiated. In the time between January 27th and February 1st, Chad Eros, the accountant who had by this point had been brought in by the organizers to assist them in their dealing with GoFundMe, began to express concerns about the idea that funds would be sent directly to Ms. Lich’s personal bank account. In his view it would be more appropriate for there to be a non- profit corporation that would received donated funds and would manage their distribution. To that end, on January 30th, again after the money was agreed to be released but before any release of funds took place, Mr. Eros incorporated the Freedom 2022 Human Rights and Freedoms non-profit corporation which is referred to in the overview report as the Convoy Corporation. As I've mentioned, February 1st was the date which the actual fun fund transfer from GoFundMe was initiated. Records obtained from Toronto Dominion Bank indicate that on that date Chris Barber was added as a second signatory to Mms. Lich’s account that was receiving the funds. Records also showed that second account at TD Bank was opened jointly between Ms. Lich and Mr. Barber on that date. The overview report refers to these as the first and the second TD accounts, respectively. February 2nd, in the early morning hours was when the $1 million was in fact deposited into the first TD account. However, for reasons that I'm going to get into later in my presentation, very little of that money was ever accessed. And on February 3rd, TD Bank itself placed holds on both the first and the second TD account. Next slide, please. Before continuing the story of the GoFundMe fundraiser I'm going to speak a little bit about a second fundraiser that was taking place during the same period of time, the Adopt-A-Trucker fundraiser on the GiveSendGo platform. Next slide, please. Chris Garrah articulated the concept of Adopt-A- Trucker on Facebook. The idea was to pair Ottawa area residents with incoming truckers so that the truckers could receive support like showers, food, and billets. In order to support this concept, Mr. Garrah created a crowd funding campaign on January 18th on GiveSendGo. This campaign was attached to a bank account in his name located at the Royal Bank of Canada. Sometime after the creation of that crowd funding campaign he also, with the assistance of a man known to the Commission as Serge created a website. The website did a number of different things including soliciting email money transfer donations. Those donations were associated with an email address that was also connected to the same RBC account. And again, on January 18th, these campaigns began to raise funds. Next slide, please. So I'm going to return now to the GoFundMe campaign and discuss the events that took place that eventually led to that campaign being shut down. Next slide. Now, I've already indicated that on January 27th, GoFundMe had authorised the release of $1 million in funds. We'll recall that January 28th was the first day on which protesters, as part of the Freedom Convoy, began to arrive in Ottawa. GoFundMe representatives told the Commission that on January 28th they began to receive conflicting media reports about the nature of the protests that were taking place. They were aware of some media reports that described the protests as peaceful, and other reports that described it as involving harassment or unlawful activities. This led GoFundMe to have concerns about term service compliance, not only with respect to whether the funds would be distributed in accordance with the description, but also their requirement that funds not be used to fund unlawful conduct. A series of further communications between GoFundMe and convoy organisers then took place. On January 31st, GoFundMe sent emails to organisers asking a series of questions, and in particular, asking them to confirm that no funds would be given to protesters that were engaged in a range of unlawful activities. One of the activities specifically mentioned by GoFundMe in their communications was blockades of roads. Subsequently, on February 1st, the day in which the $1 million transition was actually initiated, GoFundMe emailed organisers asking a further series of questions, including whether or not they would agree to publicly disavow unlawful conduct that GoFundMe was concerned may be taking place in Ottawa. GoFundMe asked the organisers to respond to their questions within 24 hours. A response was not received within that timeframe, and on February 2nd, the same day that $1 million was received into the First TD account, GoFundMe decided to suspend the fundraiser pending further investigation. Over the course of the next two days, a series of important meetings took place. On February 2nd, representatives of GoFundMe met with Deputy Chief Bell, of the Ottawa Police Service, and on February 3rd, with Mayor Watson, of the City of Ottawa. On February 3rd, the Freedom Convoy organisers also had a series of communications with GoFundMe. A letter drafted by Keith Wilson, acting as counsel for the Convoy Corporation, was sent responding to the questions posed in GoFundMe's February 1st email. Subsequently, a telephone conversation took place involving Mr. Wilson, Mr. Eros, other associates of the fundraisers, and the GoFundMe platform. In their interview with Commission Counsel, GoFundMe representatives indicated that they left that meeting unsatisfied with the responses that they had received, and they continued to have concerns about the lawfulness of the protests and the role that the funds might play in those protests. On February 4th, GoFundMe had a second meeting with Deputy Chief Bell. It was also on that date that representatives of GoFundMe reported that they believed that individuals associated with the Freedom Convoy leadership were using social media to encourage harassment of GoFundMe employees. GoFundMe reported that its employees had received a number of threats after the decision was made to suspend the fundraising campaign, and those threats increased in frequency on February 4th. In the evening of February 4th, GoFundMe made the decision to cancel the fundraiser, and over the course of the next 24 hours arrived at the conclusion that they ought to refund all donations made to the platform. Next slide, please. The Overview Report also describes the events that took place surrounding the move of the Freedom Convoy fundraiser from the GoFundMe platform to the GiveSendGo platform. But as I mentioned before, often events were taking place in parallel, and as it turned out there were critical events involved in that move to GiveSendGo that were taking place as early as January 26th, even before Ms. Lich had signed the attestation letter, let alone the GoFundMe campaign being shut down. Next slide please. In order to understand this part of the story, there is some additional individuals who have to be introduced. On January 26th, a man named John Ballard reached out to Jacob Wells, the co-founder of GiveSendGo. Mr. Ballard is understood by the Commission to be associated with an American-based social media platform called CloutHub. In the January 26th meeting, Mr. Ballard spoke to Mr. Wells about the possibility of the two men working together to convince the Freedom Convoy organisers to move their crowdfunding campaign off of GoFundMe and onto GiveSendGo. In furtherance of this discussion, on January 27th, Mr. Wells created what he described to the Commission as a mock-up of a campaign on his platform, showing what a Freedom Convoy fundraiser would look like on GiveSendGo. Although to be clear, this was not active campaign; it was not capable of receiving funds. On January 28th, Mr. Ballard obtained Mr. Eros's contact information by way of Mr. Garrah. Mr. Ballard contacted Mr. Eros and asked him to join a phone conversation to discuss the possibility of the Freedom Convoy raising funds on GiveSendGo. Mr. Eros agreed to join that conversation. However, before that phone call took place, Mr. Eros reports receiving a phone call from another man named James Peloso, who is associated with the organisation Taking Back Our Freedoms. Mr. Eros and Mr. Peloso had not previously had interactions with each other. Mr. Peloso indicated that he should be involved in any phone call involving GiveSendGo because Taking Back Our Freedoms had funders who would not agree to fund the Freedom Convoy unless one of their individuals was on the inside for discussions related to fundraising activities. On January 31st, a meeting took place between Mr. Eros, Mr. Wells, Mr. Peloso, Mr. Ballard, and another individual named Jeff Brain, who is the founder of CloutHub. During that meeting, Mr. Ballard described a plan to move the Freedom Convoy off of GoFundMe and onto GiveSendGo. As part of this plan, he also suggested that Freedom Convoy organisers should use CloutHub as their main web presence to advertise their campaign, and indeed, their movement as a whole. Mr. Ballard also described how CloutHub would provide a secure means of communication between organisers of the Freedom Convoy. Mr. Brain, again the founder of CloutHub, also offered to provide Freedom Convoy organisers a quarter-million dollar loan to finance their operations, pending the ability for them to access donated funds. At the end of this meeting, no decision was made with respect to taking CloutHub up on its offer to use its services, or indeed to accept a loan from them. Indeed, Mr. Wells and Mr. Eros, in their interviews with the Commission, found it confusing that CloutHub was involved in these meetings at all. However, as a result of this meeting, Mr. Eros and Mr. Wells did form a connection, and as a result of that connection, an agreement was made to create a crowdfunding campaign on GiveSendGo connected to the Convoy Corporation. That campaign was created and went live on January 31st, again prior to the release of funds the next day from the GoFundMe campaign. Ultimately, when the GoFundMe campaign was shut down, Ms. Lich advertised the fact that the GiveSendGo campaign was in existence, and funders then moved and made donations there. Next slide, please. I mentioned before that payment processors played an important role in the story of the fundraising of the Freedom Convoy. This was a role that was played largely behind the scenes, and it had the most significance when it came to the GiveSendGo campaign. To the public, there was only ever one campaign on GiveSendGo associated with the Freedom Convoy fundraiser. However, for reasons connected with how Stripe operates there were in fact, in effect, two campaigns associated with the Freedom Convoy fundraiser on GiveSendGo. And in order to understand why that came to be, one has to understand a little bit about what payment processors are and how they operate. Most crowdfunding platforms don't actually accept and distribute funds themselves. They are, in effect, kind of a social network shell that provides a platform to attract donors. The actual work of receiving electronic donations and distributing those donations to bank accounts are done by payment processors like Stripe. On the GiveSendGo campaign, in order to set up a campaign at all, one needs to have a Stripe account. However, in order to create a Stripe account, an individual has to have a bank account to associate with it. This presented a unique difficulty for Mr. Eros because, at this point, the Convoy Corporation did not have a bank account. Recall that the Convoy Corporation was only created the day before on January 30th. He therefore could not create a Stripe account, and he therefore could not attach it to the GiveSendGo campaign. As a temporary solution to this problem, Mr. Wells suggested that he use his Stripe account, attach it to the campaign on GiveSendGo, and that is what happened. And so between January 31st when the campaign first went live and February 7th, the GiveSendGo campaign was actually attached to Mr. Wells' Stripe account, and through that, his personal bank account. On February 7th, Mr. Eros did create a Stripe account. However, that account was not connected to the Convoy Corporation directly. By February 7th, the Corporation still did not have a bank account. In order for Mr. Eros to create a Stripe account, he reached an agreement with Keith Wilson to have the Stripe account attached to Mr. Wilson's trust account at his law firm. Once this took place on February 7th, the fundraiser was switched over from Mr. Wells' Stripe account to Mr. Eros' Stripe account. And from February 7th until February 10th or 11th, the evidence on that point is conflicting, donations made to the GiveSendGo campaign went into Mr. Eros' Stripe account. On either February 10th or 11th, the Stripe account was switched back to Mr. Wells' Stripe account and all further donations made to the GiveSendGo campaign went there. Next slide, please. I'll return to the crowdfunding campaigns in a moment, but before I do, a few words about some of the activities involving cryptocurrencies that were taking place. The majority of these activities occurred between January 27th and February 17th of 2022. Next slide. There were a number of cryptocurrency campaigns and fundraisers taking place during the Freedom Convoy. This overview report focuses on three main ones. The first was a cryptocurrency campaign associated with Mr. Garrah's Adopt A Trucker campaign. I'd mentioned before that an individual named Serge created a website for Adopt A Trucker. In addition to soliciting email money transfers, that website also provided information that would allow individuals to donate any of six different types of cryptocurrencies to the Adopt A Trucker campaign. However, it appears that those cryptocurrencies were not in the control of Mr. Garrah directly but were rather controlled by Serge. A second different type of cryptocurrency campaign took place in association with Pat King. This was the Freedom Convoy token campaign, a new cryptocurrency that was created and marketed in association with the Freedom Convoy. The idea behind this campaign was that individuals would exchange pre-existing cryptocurrencies for this new cryptocurrency called Freedom Convoy token. Built into Freedom Convoy token was the process by which four percent of every transaction involving it would be diverted to an entity called the Freedom Convoy Foundation, the idea being that this would provide a long-term source of funds for convoy protesters. However, the Commission was unable to determine whether or not such an entity even exists, and it appears that there is not an active market today for Freedom Convoy token, and therefore, funds are not flowing to any such entity. The most significant cryptocurrency campaign addressed in the overview report was the HonkHonk Hodl campaign. Next slide, please. This campaign was started by an Ottawa area resident named Nicholas St. Louis on or about January 27th. While Mr. St. Louis was the creator of the campaign, there were a number of individuals that were associated with it at different stages, including Benjamin Dichter. Using a cryptocurrency crowdfunding platform called Tallycoin, this campaign ultimately raised approximately 22 bitcoin in donations. The value of those 22 bitcoin at the time was approximately $1.2 million Canadian, although today, the value would be significantly lower. Of that money, approximately 800,000 was distributed to protesters involved in the Ottawa protests. This was done by splitting $800,000 worth of bitcoin into 100 individual electronic wallets and then handing out in sealed envelopes 100 sets of instructions on how to access 1 of those unique online wallets. These were distributed to truckers in Ottawa over a 24-hour period on February 16th and 17th of 2022. Next slide, please. We get to the part of the narrative contained in the overview report that deals with how all of the funds we've just been discussed were eventually blocked from arriving in the hands of fundraisers. In order to understand this, it's useful to understand two types of court orders that were involved in the process that led to these funds being blocked. The first is something called a restraint order. This is a type of order that can only be obtained by the Attorney General of a province or of Canada, and it exists within the Criminal Code's proceeds of crime provisions. In essence, a restraint order is obtained by the Attorney General when they're able to show that there are reasonable grounds to believe that some property meets the definition of offence-related property. Offence-related property is defined to mean any property that is used in any manner in connection with an indictable offence or is intended to be so used. The effect of a restraint order is to prohibit anyone from dealing in any way with the property in question unless in accordance with the terms of the order. The second type of order to understand is called a Mareva injunction. A Mareva injunction is a civil court order. It is ordinarily obtained by plaintiffs in civil proceedings against defendants. It is used to freeze and preserve a defendant's assets and funds where there is a risk that they may be dissipated. Its purpose is to freeze those funds in place, so that if plaintiffs are successful in their lawsuit, there will be assets that they are able to execute judgment against. Both of these types of orders, restraint orders and Mareva injunctions, played a significant role in how funds that were raised were ultimately disposed of. Next slide. On February 10th, the Attorney General of Ontario applied ex parte to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice and obtained a restraint order against the funds that had been raised on the GiveSendGo platform, those being the Freedom Convoy campaign, as well as the Adopt-a-Trucker campaign. As a result of the restraint order, Stripe froze the accounts of Mr. Garrah and Mr. Eros. It did not, however, freeze the account of Mr. Wells, as it was held not by Stripe Payment Canada Ltd., but by the American payment company Stripe, which Stripe felt was beyond the reach of the Ontario restraint order. I’ve mentioned before that it is either February 10th or 11th that Mr. Wells changed over the Stripe account associated with the Freedom Convoy fundraiser from Mr. Eros’ frozen strip account to his own active Stripe account. Mr. Wells also took action with respect to the Adopt-a-Trucker campaign. While Mr. Garrah’s stripe account was frozen by the restraint order, Mr. Wells switched that campaign over to a backup payment processor based in the United States called RallyPay. Thus, while both of the fundraising campaigns remained attached to active payment processors and could continue to receive funds, it would be difficult for those funds to arrive in the hands of the organizers. By this point in time, both TD Bank and RBC had been put on notice of the restraint order and they too were prevented, by its terms, from dealing in any way with the funds raised on GiveSendGo. On February 17th, Zexi Li, in her role as the representative Plaintiff of a proposed class action of Ottawa residents, obtained a Mareva injunction. This order applied to a broader set of categories -- assets. It included those assets covered by the restraint order, but also applied to several other individuals and other assets. For example, it applied to assets that were raised by Mr. King and it applied to a range of crypto currencies that were not the subject of the restraint order. On the same day, the Toronto Dominion Bank applied to court to pay in, through an interpleader, approximately $1.4 million that were in the first and second TD accounts in the joint control of Ms. Lich and Mr. Barber. They did so on the basis that the true owners of those funds were unknown and that the funds should be held by the Court until such time as the proper recipients of that money could be determined. The money then stayed in these various bank accounts in various locations, frozen by both the restraint and the Mareva orders. This changed on March 9th, when the Mareva injunction was varied to allowed these funds essentially to be pooled in the hands of an escrow agent, who would hold them all, pending the outcome of the Ottawa litigation. And in the days and weeks that followed, the funds that we have been discussing so far were transferred to the escrow agent, where the Commission understands they remain. Next slide, please. This then takes us, then, to what the Commission understands about the sources of the various funds and their ultimate destinations. Next slide. During the events in question, there were many public statements and questions raised about the issue of foreign versus domestic funding. And in the Order in Council creating this Commission, this issue is also flagged for the Commission’s consideration. As a result of this, the Commission made inquiries with various entities about the sources of funds, both in terms of number of donors and in terms of the value of donations. The result of these inquiries show different patterns for different fundraisers. The simplest are the email money transfer campaigns associated with the Freedom Convoy and Adopt-a-Trucker. Those campaigns were 100 percent Canadian, in that they relied on the email money transfer system that exists within Canada. All donations to those fundraisers originated, at least immediately, from a Canadian domiciled financial institution. The Freedom Convoy GoFundMe campaign was also largely Canadian in its origin. GoFundMe reported that 86 percent of donors were based in Canada, and that by value, 89 percent of donations originated in Canada. The two campaigns on GiveSendGo, however, show a different pattern. Both of those campaigns were largely American based, in terms of where donors were located. Freedom Convoy, 59 percent of donations originated from the United States, 51 percent for Adopt-a-Trucker. However, when measured in terms of the value of donations, the values are slightly different. Fifty-five (55) percent in terms of the actual dollars donated through Adopt-a- Trucker originated in Canada. And in terms of the Freedom Convoy campaign, and equal amount of money originated from Canada and the United States at 47 percent each. The remainder, from other countries around the world. Next slide, please. So we’ll return then to this chart that describes the value of money flowing into and out of a number of different entities. I’ll begin with the GoFundMe campaign. The GoFundMe campaign raised in excess of $10 million Canadian. One million dollars of that was released to Ms. Lich’s Toronto Dominion bank account. However, the full amount was also refunded to donors. In other words, while GoFundMe released a million dollars, it also refunded all donors the full amount of their donations, making up the $1 million shortfall themselves. In addition to the $1 million that was deposited into Ms. Lich’s TD account from the GoFundMe fundraiser, she also received $419,416.63 in email money transfer donations. Out of this approximately $1.4 million put into the first and second TD account, only $26,000 was accessed. The remaining $1,393,000 and change was placed ultimately into escrow as part of the Mareva injunction. With respect to Adopt-a-Trucker, Mr. Garrah raised around $800,000 Canadian on GiveSendGo. Of that amount, approximately $330,000 was released by Stripe into Mr. Garrah’s RBC account. The remaining money contained in Mr. Garrah’s Stripe account was either ultimately paid into escrow, or was the subject of a variety of credit card disputes, charge backs, or fees by various financial institutions. In addition to the $330,000 that Mr. Garrah received into his RBC account, he also received approximately $31,000 in email money transfer donations. Of this amount, approximately $220,000 was released from Mr. Garrah’s RBC account and spent on a variety of things. Approximately $141,000 was paid by RBC from that account into escrow. With respect to the Freedom Convoy campaign on GiveSendGo, it begins to become a little bit difficult to provide precise figures. This is because GiveSendGo was reporting donations in U.S. funds, but that those donations were made over a period of time, subject to a number of different exchange rates. What we can say is that GiveSendGo reported receiving approximately $9.8 million U.S. in donations and that using the February 10th Bank of Canada exchange rate, that would be equal to roughly $12.4M Canadian. Of this, around $3.75M was put into Mr. Eros’ Stripe account and the remaining approximately $8.6M went into Mr. Wells’ Stripe account. The money in Mr. Eros’s Stripe account was sent into escrow; it was not provided to Mr. Eros or into the trust account of Mr. Wilson. There is a bit of a discrepancy there which was explained by Stripe being taken up again by credit card chargebacks and a variety of fees. In terms of Mr. Wells’ Stripe account, while we - - the Commission did not have access to any banking records associated with this, in communications between Mr. Wells and Stripe that the Commission did review, it appears that all donations made and put into his Stripe account were refunded to donors with the exception of certain fees that were subtracted as well as components of those donations that donors had indicated should go directly to GiveSendGo. With respect to the HonkHonk Hodl Campaign, as I mentioned before, out of approximately $1.2M of Bitcoin that was raised, $800,000 of that was distributed to protesters. Paid into escrow was 7.57 Bitcoin which at the time was worth approximately $413,000. Finally, there was a $10,000 bank draft that was also paid into escrow. This money originated from a very brief period of time when the Convoy Corporation did have a bank account at the Steinbach Credit Union. Next slide, please. The overview report contains substantially more detail about these transactions and the events surrounding them. For the parties, the overview report is available in the participant database. And for members of the public, this overview report will soon be published in both English and French on the Commission’s website along with over 100 source documents that provide further detail on the things that I’ve discussed in my presentation. With that, Mr. Commissioner, I’d ask that COMOR00000005 be entered into evidence.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 7 16-007-14

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Yes, sir.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 31 16-031-15

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

The next witness is Benjamin Dichter.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 31 16-031-17

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Good morning, Mr. Dichter.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 32 16-032-07

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

While the registrar takes the Torah, your counsel here, Jim Karahalios, I believe, wants to make a brief statement before we begin.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 32 16-032-09

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Thank you, Mr. Mather. My name is Jim Karahalios. I’m counsel for the witness, Mr. Dichter. My last name is spelled k-a-r-a-h-a-l-i-o-s. Thank you, Mr. Commissioner, for giving me a minute in the introduction. Mr. Dichter has a couple of requests. As the Commission had posted on their website, Mr. Dichter made a late application for standing. That was dismissed. In that application, the application for standing was done jointly with Mr. Christopher Garrah who, as we saw in the previous report, was the lead on Adopt a Trucker Campaign. Mr. Garrah has standing as a member of the -- what we are calling “the convoy organizer group”. Mr. Garrah’s in attendance here today. We received yesterday the time allocations today with regards to after the evidence in-chief is provided. It provides for 15 minutes for the convoy organizers and five minutes for, I believe, the Democracy Fund, the JCCF, and 10 minutes for Mr. Dichter’s counsel. Given that the convoy organizers and the JCCF Democracy Fund have very similar interests, Mr. Dichter would like to ask the Commissioner, with the approval of Mr. Garrah who’s a member of, jointly, the convoy organizers in standing, and gives his approval, to consider -- and I hope my friend from the convoy organizers would agree to reallocate some of the 15 minutes provided to the convoy organizers to Mr. Dichter’s counsel at the end for further questions.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 32 16-032-14

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

That’s correct. I think that would better balance the time allocation after the evidence in-chief with the interests of everyone involved.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 33 16-033-16

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

I haven’t had a chance to discuss with my friend but Mr. Garrah is here today in attendance and he’s a member, jointly having standing with the convoy organizers, and he gave his blessing. So I apologize, Mr. Commissioner, I haven’t had a chance to talk to legal counsel of the convoy organizers in advance.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 33 16-033-21

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. The second brief thing I’d like to ask on behalf of Mr. Dichter is, in his application to have his counsel lead his testimony here today, you correctly pointed out, Mr. Commissioner, Rule 59 that allows Mr. Dichter to apply for additional time in the evidence in-chief led by his counsel, if I understand it correctly. At the end of Mr. Mather’s evidence in-chief, if you could just give Mr. Dichter a little bit of time to decide whether he want that Rule 59 Application to be brought forward to you for more time in evidence in-chief by me, that would be appreciated.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 34 16-034-06

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Different periods of the testimony but yes, similar.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 34 16-034-20

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Okay.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 34 16-034-23

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Thank you, Mr. Commissioner.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 34 16-034-27

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Good morning again, Mr. Dichter.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 35 16-035-02

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

My name is John Mather. I’m Commission counsel.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 35 16-035-05

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

I just have a few questions about your background to start. I understand you’re from Toronto; is that correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 35 16-035-08

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And what’s your current occupation.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 35 16-035-17

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

How long have you been a trucker?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 35 16-035-21

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And can you just give the Commission a sense of the nature of your trucking business, where you travel, what sort of loads you carry?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 35 16-035-26

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And can you give the Commission a sense of the sort of podcasts you produce?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 36 16-036-07

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Any other podcasts?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 36 16-036-17

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Sometimes podcast companies have -- or they fall under an umbrella. Like, is there a name for your podcasting publishing platform?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 36 16-036-24

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

"Possibly Correct", okay.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 37 16-037-01

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And were you podcasting with "Possibly Correct" in January 2022?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 37 16-037-04

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And the Commission has read reports that indicated that you've also had jobs including being a gemologist, designing safety equipment for motorcyclists, and owning a commercial printing shop. Is that accurate?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 37 16-037-13

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

I also understand you ran for city council in 2014; is that correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 37 16-037-24

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Right, and that was in 2015?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 38 16-038-01

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And I should -- when I say "city council" in this setting, I should say that was the city council of Toronto, not ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 38 16-038-03

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

--- the city council of Ottawa; is that correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 38 16-038-07

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And you've also founded a group called "LGBT" -- sorry, "LGB Tory"?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 38 16-038-10

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Can you tell the Commission what that group is?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 38 16-038-13

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And is that group still active?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 38 16-038-26

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Shifting now to the protest in Ottawa in January and February 2022, how did you get involved?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 39 16-039-04

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And how did you first meet Ms. Lich?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 39 16-039-15

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

When you say you connected with her, it was through some other people. Who were those people?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 39 16-039-21

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And what was that podcast that they were fans of?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 39 16-039-27

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

"Quiggin Report", okay.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 40 16-040-02

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So sorry, you said that was around 2017, 2018?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 40 16-040-04

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And after you first met Ms. Lich, how frequently were you in contact between then and January 2022?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 40 16-040-08

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

What did you come to learn about Ms. Lich's political interests?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 40 16-040-22

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

But it sounds like you had subsequent conversations with her about politics; is that right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 41 16-041-02

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And through those conversations, what did you learn about Ms. Lich's politics? What was she trying to do? What was she hoping to achieve? What was her interest?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 41 16-041-08

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And I'm not asking to put a label on Ms. Lich. What I'm interested in understanding is, through your conversations with her, what did you understand, you know, the causes that she was interested in, what was she trying to achieve, regardless of what the label is?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 41 16-041-21

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So the sense I get from that response is that she was involved in the Maverick Party and you raised with her, "You know, this is tied to the Conservative Party or has a relationship and that’s an establishment party." It sounded like that was something you weren’t in favour of; is that fair?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 42 16-042-15

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

At that point in time, in December 2021, were you still a supporter of the Conservative Party?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 42 16-042-28

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Again, setting aside labels, how would you describe your political views in December 2021 to January 2022.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 43 16-043-11

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So Ms. Lich calls you and I forget you said what day you thought it was, but it was January 2022 and she asks you if you can come and assist with messaging and press releases.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 43 16-043-21

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

I think we know from the evidence that you took her up on the request; is that fair?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 43 16-043-26

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Why did you want to participate in the convoy?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 44 16-044-01

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

What day did you arrive in Ottawa?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 44 16-044-12

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And how did you get there?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 44 16-044-15

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Your truck?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 44 16-044-17

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Did you consider at all whether or not you could find a truck or another commercial to bring with you in solidarity with the other truckers that had arrived?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 44 16-044-22

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

What did you hope to achieve by participating in the convoy?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 45 16-045-03

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And so again you said that you were there to assist with messaging and public relations. Is that fair?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 45 16-045-23

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And was there anyone else who was working on that aspect of the organization?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 45 16-045-28

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And maybe if you could assist the Commission and give us a sense of what it involved to be doing messaging and press releases, and public relations. What did your day to day involve?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 46 16-046-06

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And as the Commission understands, you gave some television interviews during the convoy; is that correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 46 16-046-18

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And those included with outlets like FOX News?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 46 16-046-22

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And you, as I understand it, you also gave at least one interview with Russia Today; is that correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 46 16-046-28

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And you say you gave interviews with what you view as current media. Could you just explain what you meant by that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 47 16-047-04

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So when you say “current media” you were looking for, in your view, the media that had the largest platforms that would reach the largest audiences? Is that what ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 47 16-047-16

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And I understand that you would not give interviews to media organizations such as the CBC, the Toronto Star, the Globe and Mail; is that correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 47 16-047-22

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And why wouldn’t you give interviews to those Canadian media?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 47 16-047-26

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

We’ve heard some evidence from different witnesses so far about you having suffered some injuries during -- on your way to Ottawa and during your time in Ottawa.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 48 16-048-08

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

I’ll just give you an opportunity. Can you just explain exactly what happened and when it happened?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 48 16-048-13

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So that was that incident, and then I'm going to return to a second, were you also in a car accident just briefly; is that true?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 50 16-050-26

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So you had a bit of a run of bad luck.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 51 16-051-03

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So I want to pick up on the context or the -- what happened before you slipped and fell.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 51 16-051-09

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

You said that there had been a press conference on February 4th with I think you said the lawyers; is that right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 51 16-051-12

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Oh.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 51 16-051-17

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. So did you see the video yourself?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 51 16-051-23

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And did you recognize the lawyers in the video?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 51 16-051-27

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Who did you come to learn who the lawyers were?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 52 16-052-02

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And so you were staying at the Sheraton Hotel?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 52 16-052-05

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And you went to the ARC Hotel?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 52 16-052-08

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And why did you go to the ARC Hotel to find out who was in the video?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 52 16-052-10

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And who's the "they"?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 52 16-052-14

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And they are at the hotel, the lawyers?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 52 16-052-24

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And then who did you meet at the hotel?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 52 16-052-27

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Yeah, so Keith Wilson?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 53 16-053-06

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Eva Chipiuk?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 53 16-053-08

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Andre Memauri, I believe?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 53 16-053-10

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Chad Eros?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 53 16-053-12

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Brigitte Belton.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 53 16-053-14

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And what -- describe the conversation you had at that point in time.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 53 16-053-17

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So you had this conversation with Mr. Wilson. You expressed your concern. Did things improve after that in terms of Mr. Wilson's messaging?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 54 16-054-11

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And what was your understanding of that direction?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 54 16-054-22

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Did you think that Mr. Wilson and Mr. Marazzo could speak -- had a position of moral persuasion?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 55 16-055-10

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Why not?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 55 16-055-15

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So it sounds to me that you had a concern that they were pursuing political -- a political agenda and/or ulterior motives; is that fair?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 55 16-055-27

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So do you think Mr. Wilson and Mr. Marazzo had the same goals as you in terms of ending the mandates?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 56 16-056-06

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Did you ever speak with Mr. Wilson or Mr. Marazzo about the concerns you had about what they were doing?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 57 16-057-01

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So that's with respect to who's doing the messaging, but ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 57 16-057-11

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

--- your concerns that Mr. Marazzo and Mr. Wilson were seeking to end the protests or find a way for the protest to end, is that something you ever brought to them and asked them about?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 57 16-057-14

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

What did you do to try to understand if this is actually what they were trying to do?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 57 16-057-24

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So Mr. Dichter, I've heard, you know, what you've said about dealing with the messaging and your approach to the messaging, and I understand you're -- what you're saying with respect to "I wasn't going to go to Mr. Wilson or Mr. Marazzo and say I", you know, "I'm concerned you have ulterior motives. Are you trying to ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 59 16-059-03

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

--- end the protest?" Did you raise that concern with Mr. Lich, Mr. Barber, Ms. Belton, anyone who I presume you didn't have a concern about?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 59 16-059-10

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And what did Ms. Lich say in response to your concerns?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 59 16-059-20

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And we'll get to the agreement with the Mayor to move the trucks more in a moment, but ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 60 16-060-13

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

--- I understand that's what you're referring to when you're talking about moving trucks to Wellington. And the evidence we have heard so far is that the Mayor wrote a letter saying that he would agree to meet with some of the organisers if the organisers were able to show that they could move trucks out of the residential areas onto Wellington and perhaps elsewhere. And we'll get to how that came about in a moment. But ultimately, at some point you -- did you learn that Ms. Lich had entered into that agreement with the Mayor?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 60 16-060-16

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Right. But at some point you learned that Tamara had sent those letters. I appreciate, and we'll probably speak to a moment, you -- that it may be the case you didn't understand what was happening at the time, but at some point you learned that yes, Tamara had exchanged letters with the Mayor.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 61 16-061-10

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Have you ever spoken with Ms. Lich about the agreement that she reached with the Mayor?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 61 16-061-20

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So Ms. Lich was arrested after the agreement with the Mayor and after February 14th when we've heard evidence of moving trucks onto Wellington. In that last time you spoke with Ms. Lich, did you ask her at all about whether or not she had agreed with the Mayor to move trucks up onto Wellington?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 61 16-061-27

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So again, I take it you see Ms. Lich as one of the organisers of the convoy; is that correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 63 16-063-13

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Mr. Barber?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 63 16-063-17

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Ms. Belton?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 63 16-063-19

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Anyone else who you think was sort of a key organiser or played an important role?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 63 16-063-21

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

When you arrived in Ottawa, were you aware that Pat King had had involvement in organizing the travel of the Convoy across Canada to Ottawa?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 65 16-065-19

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And when you talk about Mr. King’s rhetoric, what rhetoric?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 66 16-066-14

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Were you able to see Mr. King’s testimony yesterday?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 66 16-066-23

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And some statements were put to him, including statements he made about Indigenous people, statements he made about Asians. Is that what you’re referring to?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 66 16-066-26

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Do you remember, were those the social -- were those the postings that you ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 67 16-067-03

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

--- saw at the time?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 67 16-067-06

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And I take it, and you can correct me if I’m wrong, but were you concerned -- did you - - let me put it to you this way. Were you concerned about the fact that -- the substance of those statements, did they offend you? Or were you concerned about those statements would be associated with the Convoy? Or was it both?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 67 16-067-08

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So as discussed with Mr. King, the media reported on some of his past rhetoric, some of his past statements. The media also reported on statements you had made in the past. Are you -- do you know what I’m talking about?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 68 16-068-05

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And in particular, there was reports that, and in this case from the Globe and Mail, that at some point in 2018, you gave a speech to the People’s Party of Canada in which you allege that Islamic front groups were infiltrating the country’s political institutions. And they quote you as saying: “…the adaptation of political Islam is rotting away at our society like syphilis.” Do you know the media report I’m referring to?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 68 16-068-12

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Is that something you said in 2018?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 68 16-068-25

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Did you have any concern -- and I appreciate you stand by the statements, but do you have any concern about how those statements might affect the Freedom Convoy, given your role in the Convoy?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 69 16-069-06

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

As you’ve noted, you’ve provided context to those statements in the Legislature. Is that correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 69 16-069-11

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

At the time, did you take any steps to contact the media who were reporting on those statements and provide the context you’ve provided the Legislature and now provided today?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 69 16-069-16

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

The Commission has heard a fair bit of evidence about Mr. King’s role, and we’ve spoken about Mr. King, and also about Mr. James Bauder. As someone who was involved in the organization, in your view, how influential were Mr. King and Mr. Bauder to the Convoy?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 69 16-069-27

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

When you say Mr. Mackenzie was your personal troll, can you expand on that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 70 16-070-22

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Do you think what Mr. Mackenzie does is comedy?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 71 16-071-06

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

What do you think it is?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 71 16-071-09

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

I’m going to return now, and we got to it already a bit, but I just have a few more questions about the agreement that was reached between Ms. Lich and the mayor and some of the events that’s surrounding that. So the mayor and Ms. Lich exchanged letters on February 12th. On February 13th, there was a news report that came out saying that the agreement that was reflected in those letters had been reached. And then if we could pull COM831. And so this is a tweet for your Twitter account. If we can scroll down, you can see the timing, just so we can scroll down to the bottom, from 8:24 p.m. And if we could scroll up, it says, “More fake…” -- and this is -- you’re referencing the media report I referenced. It says: "More fake news. This time from CityTV News. No deal has been struck. The federal government has not yet lifted its mandates and passports. Do not watch #fakenews. It’s bad for your mental health. This is completely false." Why did you send that tweet?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 71 16-071-24

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So if we could pull up BJD00000017. And this is a document that you provided to the Commission I believe yesterday.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 73 16-073-20

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

It was February 13th at 8:24 p.m. (VIDEO PLAYBACK)

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 73 16-073-26

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

I must have the wrong number. Perhaps I’ll -- I think we have the message you’re referring to. I don’t have the number now. I thought maybe I’d have an opportunity to show it to you and confirm that’s the message but -- so you had a text exchange with Mr. Wilson, or a messaging exchange ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 74 16-074-01

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Signal exchange with Mr. Wilson on the 14th when you said, “What’s going on?” and he said, “There’s been nothing with the mayor.” And again, we will -- when we have the opportunity, we’ll pull that up. My question for you now is, between when you read the news article that you tweeted about and when you tweeted about it, did you ask anyone whether the news article was true or make any inquiries about the news article?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 74 16-074-08

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Right, but your lawyer told you that on the 14th, not on the 13th when you tweeted it out.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 74 16-074-21

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Oh, sorry.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 74 16-074-25

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So that conversation you had with Mr. Wilson on the 13th, was that in writing or was that ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 75 16-075-03

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And then if we could pull up COM841. So the first -- your tweet, which is there, says: "More fake news from CityTV. No deal has been struck." And then we see this is a retweet by Tamara Lich -- or, sorry, from Ms. Lich’s account, which I think is an important distinction ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 75 16-075-10

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

--- as we’ll get to, three minutes later in which Ms. Lich’s account says: "The media lies to their viewers no ‘deal’ has been made. End the mandates. End the passports. That’s why we are here." The Commission had heard and received evidence that you had access to Ms. Lich’s Twitter account and that you were the one who made this tweet.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 75 16-075-18

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Fair enough. And did you -- did, then, you do this retweet from her account?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 76 16-076-03

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

You were in regular contact with Ms. Lich?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 76 16-076-21

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Is there any reason you didn’t speak with her before you sent out this tweet?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 76 16-076-24

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So, Mr. Commissioner, I’ve come to the end of my time. If I could have five more minutes just to address one more document and then one more item.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 77 16-077-10

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Yes, if ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 77 16-077-15

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Yes. Actually, why don’t we do that document right now. So it’s BJD18. I was one digit off. My apologies, Mr. Dichter. So, on the screen, this appears to be a message you’ve provided to us. I take it this is the message that you sent Mr. Wilson on Signal.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 77 16-077-17

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And then, if we scroll down, we have his response?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 77 16-077-23

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Is that what you’re referring to?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 77 16-077-26

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Mr. Wilson has both given testimony and also had an interview with the Commission. And in his interview, Mr. Wilson stated that you were, at least to his understanding, aware that an agreement had been reached with the mayor -- between the mayor and Tamara, and he expressed some surprise that you sent your tweet and Tamara’s retweet. And specifically, Mr. Wilson has identified this -- the following document as evidencing that knowledge, HRF1491 -- HRF00001491. So we’ll scroll down. You'll see that this is February 12th at 3:47 in the afternoon. Mr. Wilson writes to you. The middle paragraph says: “Hence the drafting committee will keep working on the broader document for review by the Board tomorrow but in the meantime below is a draft communication for the captains/truckers specific to the mayor’s arrangements to allow you to advance into Wellington and Elgin while at the same time taking away the excuse that Trudeau wants to unleash the police goons and seize trucks. Remember, we are trying to block Trudeau from having the justification to cause the police to use the new emergency power against the truckers and to allow the truckers to stay here in Ottawa for as long as it takes, et cetera.” And then if you scroll up, sorry, to the top you then replied shortly afterwards, saying: “Looks good to me.” What did you understand Mr. Wilson to be talking about in his email when you responded, “Looks good to me”?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 78 16-078-01

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

In Mr. Wilson’s email he says: “… below is a draft communication for the captains/truckers specific to the mayor’s arrangement to allow us to advance into Wellington and Elgin.” What did you understand that to mean?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 79 16-079-15

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Did you take any steps to learn what Mr. Wilson was talking about in that email?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 79 16-079-25

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

And my final question for you, Mr. Dichter is you referenced that you had a good working relationship with Mr. Wilson and you were surprised by his testimony yesterday. Other than what we’ve spoken about, is there anything else that surprised you?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 80 16-080-05

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Thank you. Those are my questions.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 81 16-081-16

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

If, Mr. Commissioner, you're going to make us pick between now or the end, I think you're right, the end is better. I think what Mr. Dichter is suggesting that I be able to ask a couple of question now, leading questions, and at the end have the opportunity to close with non-leading questions, as per Rule 59.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 82 16-082-01

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

At this time, five minutes.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 82 16-082-09

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Yes.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 82 16-082-12

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I do have a -- perhaps I had missed but counsel for the witness who was not a party now wants to ask him leading questions? Is that what I'm understanding?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 82 16-082-16

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So I would oppose it because if he was not given standing then I question why he’s allowed to examine his client. I guess further to that, if he is allowed to examine his client, why would he be allowed to ask him leading questions as opposed to non-leading questions?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 82 16-082-25

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

So Mr. Commissioner, just for you assistant and for the assistance of the parties and the public, I just want to read what Rule ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 83 16-083-02

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

--- 59 says. So Rule 59 says that: “If a representative or a witness intends to adduce evidence in-chief not adduced by Commission counsel, the representative will examine the witness immediately following Commission counsel and then will have a right to re-examine the witness following questions by the other parties. There is no reference to leading or non-leading in the Rule.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 83 16-083-06

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So with that clarification, I suppose he can ask his questions now but I would suggest that what’s contemplated and what’s fair is that the questions be asked in a non-leading fashion. He obviously doesn't have the right to cross-examine his client.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 83 16-083-19

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Thank you, Mr. Commissioner.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 84 16-084-02

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

I’d like to point the witness to BJD40, sorry BRB40, my mistake. Mr. Dichter, do you recognize the screen shot?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 84 16-084-04

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

And who was part of this group chat?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 84 16-084-10

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

You made a statement in that group chat on February 14th at 6:51 a.m. talking about how you were being accused of certain things from supporters on your Twitter space the night before or early morning ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 84 16-084-17

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

--- depending how you look at it, 1:00 a.m.. What was the response to your -- if we can scroll down, we can see a response to Mr. Dichter’s statement there. Can you read that out for the Commission?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 84 16-084-22

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Where was Ms. Lich staying during the protest?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 85 16-085-03

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Where were you staying during the protest?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 85 16-085-06

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

What floor were you on?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 85 16-085-09

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

What floor was she on?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 85 16-085-11

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

How often did you guys see each other?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 85 16-085-14

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Did she ever mention to you in those frequent interactions that she was working on or had reached any kind of deal with the mayor?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 85 16-085-18

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

And this exchange on the group chat seems to confirm that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 85 16-085-23

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Mr. Commissioner, am I allowed to ask about the email HR1491 that Mr. Mather was asking Mr. Dichter about just now, a different aspect of the content?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 85 16-085-26

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

HRF1491.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 86 16-086-03

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

I'll do my best. If we can scroll down. This was referenced in Mr. Wilson's testimony yesterday. He suggested to the Commission that this was your sign off on a deal. Can you read the first sentence or line of the first sentence of the second paragraph of this email from Mr. Wilson?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 86 16-086-06

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Did a draft communication ever follow?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 86 16-086-25

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Did you receive any other email?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 86 16-086-28

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Can we scroll down to the attachment that was with this email? Can you have a quick review of this attachment document, Mr. Dichter?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 87 16-087-03

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Let me know when you're done.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 87 16-087-07

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Does this look like a document that’s a deal or a contract between two parties?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 87 16-087-10

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

What is this? Like, in your experience as a communications person, what is this document?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 87 16-087-15

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Like a press release?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 87 16-087-18

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Okay. If I can ask the Commission to pull up a document that I'm -- BJB12? It's an article in the Toronto Sun talking about Dean French working on a deal. If we can scroll down to, I think, the fourth page on some text, maybe go up? Okay, down, sorry, the next line in the article. Maybe it's page 3. Sorry to have you fishing. There's an article in this document, Mr. Dichter. Have you seen this article?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 87 16-087-20

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Where Mr. French gives his public perspective ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 88 16-088-03

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

--- on the protest, and he says, on page 6 of the document, "I don’t believe in protesting or honking on residential streets." Do you know who Dean French is?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 88 16-088-06

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

How did he end his tenure as chief of staff to the premier?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 88 16-088-12

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Did you read or hear the mayor's testimony on Dean French?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 88 16-088-15

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Former Chief Sloly testified that the mood on the ground was a powder keg. If the truckers heard that their interests were being represented by the first chief of staff of the premier who was responsible for most of the mandates in Ontario at a provincial level, how would the mood have changed on the ground, or did it change when reports came out that it was Dean French talking to the mayor and Mr. Wilson and Mr. Marazzo?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 88 16-088-22

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Am I allowed one more question, Mr. Commissioner?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 89 16-089-23

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Thank you. You mentioned a War of the Worlds video. You mentioned dealing with a Jordon Peterson podcast, I think, talking about how we're not here to overtake the government. Specifically, is the War of the Worlds video that you're talking about submitted a video, Mr. Wilson, BJD-8, and the reason that you felt you needed to explain that you guys weren’t here was in response to the February 8th press conference of Tom Marazzo, correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 89 16-089-26

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Mr. Wilson yesterday testified that when he met Tom Marazzo, he was very impressed with his calm demeanour. I'll ask the Commission to pull up a video, BJD-17. It's 20 seconds, starting at 3:40. (VIDEO PLAYBACK)

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 90 16-090-08

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

I think that’s all we need. I'm sure Ms. Zexi Liwould be very proud of Mr. Marazzo talking about supporters of ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 90 16-090-13

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Mr. Dichter, what can you say about Mr. Marazzo's demeanour in the context of Mr. Wilson saying yesterday he found him a good negotiator?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 90 16-090-18

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Okay.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 90 16-090-24

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Thank you, Mr. Commissioner.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 91 16-091-11

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Good afternoon, Mr. Dichter. My name is Andrea Gonsalves. I'm one of the lawyers for the Government of Canada. So as I've understood your evidence, Mr. Dichter, you were the spokesperson and really generally media relations person for the Freedom Convoy; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 91 16-091-14

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

You were one of the directors of the corporation as well?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 91 16-091-22

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And do you have any formal training, degree or professional experience in communications, media relations, anything of that sort?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 91 16-091-25

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And you do your own media?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 92 16-092-06

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yeah. For instance, you've got a book that's set to be released next week that you're promoting through your own website?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 92 16-092-08

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And during the period of the protest, when you spoke or when you approved publications on behalf of the Freedom Convoy, those were -- you were speaking on behalf of the group that the Freedom Convoy represented; right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 92 16-092-21

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Right, and you've said previously you couldn't control the truckers, you couldn't control the protesters?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 93 16-093-06

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

So Mr. Dichter, I've only got a limited amount of time.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 93 16-093-25

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And what I've put to you is a simple question that you have said in the past, in fact you've sworn an affidavit, it's in our documents JCF0000014, where you said, "I do not control the truckers and other participants in the current protest in Ottawa." Do you recall saying that in an affidavit?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 93 16-093-28

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And I asked you about control. So I just want to make sure we're talking about the same thing.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 94 16-094-08

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Right. And do you recall speaking at a press conference on January 30th?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 94 16-094-13

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yeah. We have a transcript of that. It's COM00000895. It's a transcript, as I understand, of a video that has been prepared by Commission Counsel.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 94 16-094-16

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Have you had an opportunity to read that transcript?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 94 16-094-21

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Understood.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 94 16-094-25

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

But you would have no concerns about the accuracy of that transcript?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 94 16-094-27

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Okay. And we can put it up if you need your memory refreshed, but you said at that press conference that there were so many truckers you lost track; right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 95 16-095-03

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And the various participants in the protest had a variety of viewpoints, objectives, demands; fair?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 95 16-095-08

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

That was the baseline, and then there were others who wanted more. There were some, to your knowledge, you know that were interested in a change of government.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 95 16-095-17

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

When you say the Freedom Convoy, you're talking about that organisation where you're one of the board of directors, you've spoken about some others involved, and those who subscribe to that messaging and were following that group; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 95 16-095-26

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And there were others, such as Mr. King, who participated in the protests, he had followers, they had different objectives and views; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 96 16-096-09

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And I know the document you're talking about.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 96 16-096-24

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

It's GFM00000001. And that update to the GoFundMe page, in distancing the Freedom Convoy from Pat King, you felt that was important to pursuing the objectives that you and those you were aligned with ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 96 16-096-27

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And the -- these concerns about what was being seen on the part of the protesters, this in fact prompted you to put out a number of public statements distancing the Freedom Convoy from violence; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 97 16-097-11

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And that had to be done repeatedly. For example, there is a Sun article on January 26th, COM00000630. There was an Official Daily Event and Safety Report put out on January 27th, HRF00000008. And in fact, could we put that document up on the screen? Is this the type of document that would've been approved through you or one of the other three working on Communications?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 97 16-097-17

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Okay.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 97 16-097-28

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Again, I'm going to ask you to just focus yourself on my question. All I did was ask whether you approved these messages before they went out.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 98 16-098-11

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

No. And if we go down maybe on the second page, bullet number 10: "Convoy organizers are developing an internal intelligence capability to identify potential sources of violence. A separate report on identifying violent groups/individuals will follow." And if that's going out in the name of the Freedom Convoy, it's being represented as something true and accurate; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 98 16-098-16

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Right. Now, the objective, as I understood it, from the GoFundMe page of the Freedom Convoy was to stay in Ottawa until all mandates were lifted.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 99 16-099-02

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

You understand, sir, you do legal podcasts, you're a former candidate for Parliament, that the Federal Government does not have the jurisdictional authority to lift all mandates in Canada; right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 99 16-099-07

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yes. Well, no, the wording of the GoFundMe page was "all mandates". I want to make sure we're on the same page that the best the Federal Government could do was lift federal mandates; right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 99 16-099-12

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And sir, you didn't know that, that was something you hoped would happen; right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 99 16-099-21

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

But fair to say there was misunderstanding on the part of at least some participants about what the Federal Government could do with respect to all mandates. And there were times when you found yourself in the messaging ensuring that it didn't give the impression that the Freedom Convoy was asking the Federal Government to do that which it had no authority to do. Right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 99 16-099-25

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yeah, sure, I'll break it down. There was misunderstanding by at least some participants in the protest as to these, you know, notions of jurisdiction and what the Federal Government could or couldn't do?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 100 16-100-06

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And so I’ve seen in the documents -- I don’t have time to take you to them -- that there were times where you had to ensure that the messaging was refined to not leave the impression that the Freedom Convoy was trying to get the federal government to revoke all mandates; right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 100 16-100-17

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And you were asked in January 30th press conference that we talked about ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 100 16-100-28

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

--- about whether there was any point to trying to get the federal government to lift the mandate on truckers crossing the border because there was a parallel restriction in place on the US side; do you remember that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 101 16-101-03

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Sorry, before you go on -- -

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 101 16-101-09

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

--- I just want to clarify that you did in that press conference say -- acknowledge that fact but say that you understood that the US restriction had been adopted at the request of the Canadians -- the Canadian Government.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 101 16-101-12

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

But that’s what I want to make we’re both clear on. The US mandate was announced first; right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 101 16-101-19

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Okay, well, I think the evidence is different on that, but I’ll leave it there.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 101 16-101-25

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And so when you and the Freedom Convoy say, “We are in this for the long haul.” -- you recall using that statement ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 101 16-101-28

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

--- at times?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 102 16-102-04

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

You were not willing to leave until your demands were met; fair?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 102 16-102-06

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And your understanding is that that group would not be prepared to leave Ottawa, that these were committed, dedicated individuals to their cause, yes, as you understood it, and they were not going to leave Ottawa until they had accomplished goals; right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 102 16-102-17

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Mr. Commissioner, I’m one minute over my 15 minutes. Could I have another five, please?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 102 16-102-27

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Thank you.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 103 16-103-03

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Thank you. And so we’ve heard you give some evidence about the agreement, the deal between Ms. Lich and Mayor Watson, and the tweets and your understanding of that series of events. And just to confirm, you did come to understand that there was an exchange of letters that set out an understanding, at a minimum, a deal as to what would happen for there to be a sit-down between the mayor and representatives of the Freedom Convoy; you understand that, yes?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 103 16-103-06

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And you brought -- you discussed Mr. Wilson’s connections with those events this morning. Who did you understand Mr. Wilson’s client or clients was in the course of these dealing?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 103 16-103-19

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And did you ever see the letters that were exchanged between Ms. Lich and Mayor Watson?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 104 16-104-03

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

To this day, you’ve not seen those?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 104 16-104-06

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Now you have, but not at the time?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 104 16-104-09

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And so I gather you did not make any efforts yourself to try and get those who were parked in the residential areas of Ottawa to move their trucks in accordance with this -- with this exchange of letters?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 104 16-104-12

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And you never approved any sort of official written communication from the Freedom Convoy to its group of followers saying, “We need to leave the downtown residential,” or, “There’s a deal with the mayor that we need to make sure we comply with”?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 104 16-104-23

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Okay. Thank you for the indulgence, Mr. Commissioner. Those are my questions.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 105 16-105-03

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Mr. Dichter, Brendan Miller, I’m counsel for Freedom Corp.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 105 16-105-08

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

So just a couple of things. I want to get some things clarified here. You haven’t been very clear the dates about when things happened, so I want to get that hammered down; is that okay?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 105 16-105-12

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

All right. I understand, on February 4th, 2022, or maybe it was the 3rd, you were in a car accident out in Kingston, you ended up in a ditch; is that right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 105 16-105-17

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Yeah.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 105 16-105-23

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. And so you were in Kingston and then, I take it, you got in back to ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 105 16-105-26

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Kemptville, sorry -- in Kemptville and then you got back to Ottawa the evening of February 4th; is that fair?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 106 16-106-01

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

February 3rd.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 106 16-106-05

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And then was it the 3rd or the 4th where you broke your leg?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 106 16-106-09

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

The 4th, so February 4th. And after you broke your leg, I take it you were in the hospital for a brief period of time or were you ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 106 16-106-12

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay, so February 5th, you get out of the hospital.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 106 16-106-21

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right, the morning of February 5th. So you get out of the hospital and your leg is broken. I understand it was a pretty bad break, eh?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 106 16-106-26

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

It still hurts, right. And so said just now you were on a bunch of medication; is that correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 107 16-107-02

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Yeah. And what was that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 107 16-107-06

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. And I take it, then, after that, you would have still been on some form of paid medication, would you not?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 107 16-107-08

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 107 16-107-12

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And so after that time, so after February 4th, you’re pretty restricted mobile-wise. You stayed in your -- essentially in your hotel room for most of the time, right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 107 16-107-14

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. So you weren’t out on the street talking to anybody or anything like that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 107 16-107-19

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right, okay. But other than that, you were pretty much confined to your room; right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 108 16-108-01

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And you weren’t a road captain, right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 108 16-108-09

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. And so it’s fair to say that from February 4th onward, you weren’t really on the street talking physically in their presence to any of the truckers, right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 108 16-108-12

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 108 16-108-26

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

So this person you were saying was keeping you up to date other than Tamara, you said you had somebody in communications working with you. Who was that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 109 16-109-01

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. Thank you. And you had said in your evidence in-chief that Ms. Lich was constantly coming to your room every day and that was happening on time?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 109 16-109-07

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 109 16-109-14

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And I take it that frequency of seeing her, it declined after February 7th; would you agree?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 109 16-109-19

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 109 16-109-22

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

I’m not saying that you didn’t see her; I'm saying the frequency that you would see her from February 7th on declined. Would you agree?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 109 16-109-26

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 110 16-110-03

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Did you know that basically everyone other than yourself and Chris Barber had checked our of the Sheridan on February 7th, 2023 [sic] and were staying at the Swiss?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 110 16-110-06

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. But you can agree then that Ms. Lich wasn’t staying in the same hotel as you from February 7th onward? Can you agree with that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 110 16-110-16

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 110 16-110-21

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. But all of these folks, they had to basically come and see you because you were confined to your room.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 110 16-110-28

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 111 16-111-06

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. So I want to take you to February 11th, 2022.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 111 16-111-10

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

You knew about that meeting that was taking place between the members of the Board and Dean French and the mayor, or through the mayor. You knew about that on that day.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 111 16-111-13

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

You didn’t?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 111 16-111-18

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

You're saying you didn’t know about it?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 111 16-111-20

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Yeah. So there was a Board meeting that you couldn’t attend around that time. You attended by phone conference because you were in your room; do you remember that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 111 16-111-28

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

You don’t? Well, they had a meeting. You were in attendance according to our records. And this was all discussed.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 112 16-112-05

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

You called in. Everyone else was there physically; it was at the Swiss.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 112 16-112-10

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And you called in.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 112 16-112-13

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

You don’t remember?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 112 16-112-15

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. Well, that’s going to be testified to so I have to be fair to you.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 112 16-112-17

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And so all of this was discussed before the deal that was discussed with the mayor. Everybody knew about it and you're saying you didn’t.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 112 16-112-20

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

All right.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 112 16-112-24

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Let me ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 113 16-113-05

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

So the Board, the majority of the Board didn’t agree with you, fair?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 113 16-113-07

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And you were eventually removed from this Board? Is this correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 113 16-113-10

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Yes, because you ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 113 16-113-13

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 113 16-113-15

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Well, I'm going to get into that.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 113 16-113-17

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And some of the animosity that arose was that the Board had voted to do all these things, enter into these agreements. Then you broke into or went into Ms. Lich’s Tweeter or Tweet account, or whatever they’re called.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 113 16-113-20

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Well, you went into it and pretending to be her ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 113 16-113-25

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. But you posted something that you knew was a lie.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 114 16-114-01

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

You knew that they had done this deal. You knew ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 114 16-114-04

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Mr. Commissioner, I'm going to object.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 114 16-114-07

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

I think the questions are getting a little argumentative and accusing the witness of lying. I don’t think that’s their role.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 114 16-114-10

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

So you're saying before you went in to her account, representing to the public at large ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 114 16-114-16

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 114 16-114-21

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

So no one ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 114 16-114-25

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

--- on the Board and no one else told you to do that. You did that on your own initiative.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 114 16-114-27

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Yeah, I’m not asking about that. I'm asking about the ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 115 16-115-03

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

I understand. I would like you to answer ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 115 16-115-07

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. That’s nice. And so that gave you the prerogative to go on to her Twitter and make something up and say that ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 115 16-115-11

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

I’ll move on. So after this deal goes through and some of the trucks did get moved -- are you aware of that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 115 16-115-18

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And so you did get that email with the comms essentially sheet that was supposed to go out to all the truckers about the deal. You did get that and we’ve seen it up there and you replied, “Looks good.”

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 116 16-116-02

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. So what was your expectation? Did you believe that the City of Ottawa was going to enter into a contract?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 116 16-116-08

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. And so again, you're communicating. The truckers are reaching out to you. And who were these truckers reaching out to you that were concerned?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 116 16-116-21

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. But nobody from the Board, from the Board that you were on?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 116 16-116-26

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And so let’s talk about this. So you had said in your evidence that after the police started taking enforcement action ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 117 16-117-04

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

--- that a bunch of people came to talk to you because Tamara had been arrested, Chris Barber had been arrested. And they asked, “What should we do?” And you said, “Leave. You need to leave.”

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 117 16-117-08

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And so the deal that that was being negotiated that I understand you say you didn’t know about it, but the deal there was to get the same sort of thing done but to move the trucks without any violence, right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 117 16-117-24

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

To get them out of the residential areas.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 118 16-118-03

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 118 16-118-07

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

All right.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 118 16-118-10

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

So you were not happy with Mr. Wilson and Ms. Chipiuk and the folks doing the negotiation to try and end things peacefully, but you’re okay with telling everybody to leave once violence has started? That’s what you would rather have done?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 118 16-118-13

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

But you’re on a board. Do you understand how that works?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 118 16-118-23

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

So the Board ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 118 16-118-26

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 119 16-119-01

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

I understand that, but the Board gave him instructions. It’s not just what you want.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 119 16-119-03

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 119 16-119-14

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And I also understand again that you were making the decisions about what media outlets that you would communicate through? Is that correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 119 16-119-17

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 119 16-119-21

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

I understand. So but you specifically mentioned here today Russian Today.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 119 16-119-24

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And I understand that my clients had no input into you communicating with Russian Today, you just did that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 119 16-119-27

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And you’re familiar that Russian Today is essentially a Russian propaganda outfit? You’re aware of that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 120 16-120-04

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

So you went to a Russian propaganda outfit, ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 120 16-120-09

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

--- in order to portray what you believed was the message that you wanted to portray?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 120 16-120-12

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Mr. Commissioner, is he asking the question or answering on behalf of the witness?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 120 16-120-14

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Yeah.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 120 16-120-18

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

So you went to Russian Today on your own accord, which you know is a Russian propaganda outfit, and thought that that would be a good communication strategy?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 120 16-120-20

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

But you weren’t instructed to do that? That was just on your own initiative?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 121 16-121-03

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

But never specifically contacting a Russian propaganda outfit ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 121 16-121-08

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Good morning, Commissioner. Good morning, Mr. Dichter. My name is David Migicovsky and I appear as counsel to the Ottawa Police Service. Am I correct, Mr. Dichter, that when you came to Ottawa, it was not your intention to disrupt the lives of residents?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 121 16-121-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Your beef was with the government?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 122 16-122-02

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so there would have been no reason that the police would expect that when you got here, you or other members of the Convoy would engage in harassment, or honking, or engage in anti-social behaviour with the residents?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 122 16-122-05

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Sorry, perhaps my question wasn’t clear. My question was with respect to the information that was planned by members of the Convoy ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 122 16-122-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

--- before they arrived in Ottawa. They did not plan to do anything illegal, or harass people, or engage in anti-social behaviour? Is that fair?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 122 16-122-25

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. So you would agree with me; correct? That wasn’t the intention ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 123 16-123-07

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

--- when you came? And you indicated, therefore, I guess that you would agree with me that the police would therefore not expect that there would be anti-social behaviour or breaching bylaws or anything like that, base don what was being talked about before the Convoy got here?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 123 16-123-10

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 123 16-123-17

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You would expect that the police would not have anticipated that the protestors would park their vehicles wherever they want, or honk their horns, or harass people wearing masks, or engage in racist or misogynistic behaviour? That wasn’t your plan, so therefore you wouldn’t expect the police to anticipate that; would you?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 123 16-123-19

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So my question to you again, perhaps I wasn’t clear, ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 123 16-123-28

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

--- and I’ll break it down, ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 124 16-124-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 124 16-124-07

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so therefore, the police wouldn’t expect that either? They would expect what you were promoting was a peaceful demonstration with love and where people got along; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 124 16-124-09

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 124 16-124-18

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. And so you’re aware that the police had Public Order Units on standby in case that was necessary the first weekend; ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 124 16-124-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

--- correct? Right. But you didn’t anticipate it being a problem; fair?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 124 16-124-25

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And certainly what you were reading on social media before you got here, it wasn’t anticipated that this was going to be a problem? What was anticipated was a peaceful protest?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 124 16-124-28

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. In spite of what you anticipated, however, subsequently, when you got here, there was honking of horns?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 125 16-125-06

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And there were residents and businesses who complained about the behaviour engaged in by at least some of the people?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 125 16-125-11

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Many of the businesses were closed downtown; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 125 16-125-16

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so ultimately, there was an injunction issued by a judge about the honking; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 125 16-125-24

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And then there was a further injunction that the City got?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 125 16-125-27

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so at least a couple judges found that conduct had been engaged in that was interfering with the residents and the businesses of Ottawa; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 126 16-126-02

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. But you would assume that our justice system works, where there’s evidence and judges make decisions based on that evidence?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 126 16-126-11

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Treason is a very serious crime; isn’t it?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 126 16-126-17

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. And so one of the things you did is -- if we could please turn up JBA0080? It’s triple fours. That’s something that Mr. Bauder put out. Do you subscribe to the views of Mr. Bauder?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 126 16-126-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. So you can take it off. That’s fine. So I take it then that -- so you don’t subscribe to the views of Mr. Bauder and it sounds to me, from your evidence, that you’ve had some disagreements with some of the other members of the convoy as well, correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 126 16-126-26

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

No, no, no. I'm just asking you, you've had conflict with the views of some of the other members of the convoy, of the Freedom Convoy as well, correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 127 16-127-06

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. And so things, however, fell apart and there wasn’t cohesion within the group any more?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 127 16-127-18

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I've listened to the testimony from convoy protestors all week.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 127 16-127-28

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And it -- and have you as well?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 128 16-128-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And it sounds like there's a lot of disagreements.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 128 16-128-06

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So it sounds like there was a lot of disagreement among your views, Tamara Lich's views.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 128 16-128-11

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. And so as I understand it, you were of the view that Keith Wilson wasn’t honest when he told you that there was no deal?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 128 16-128-17

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Keith Wilson?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 128 16-128-22

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

He wasn’t honest when he told you there was no deal?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 128 16-128-24

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. And he was the lawyer representing some of the group, correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 128 16-128-28

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. So there was some disagreement there, and then I believe Ms. Lich didn’t tell you about the negotiations with the mayor, correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 129 16-129-04

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So there was some withholding of information there?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 129 16-129-09

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Yeah. And so when you got the letter that she wrote, that Freedom Manifest, you didn’t interpret that as telling truckers to leave, right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 129 16-129-12

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Just a -- I just want to have you identify a couple of pictures.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 129 16-129-16

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I just want to move to two sort of final minor points.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 129 16-129-19

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so if I could ask you please, Mr. Clerk, to turn up JBA0000002? And so these are some pictures, I take it, that you took on the day that enforcement action was being taken, correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 129 16-129-22

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay, but you've seen these pictures, correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 130 16-130-02

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Yeah. So all I -- what I'm saying -- in fact, we can see some indications on the picture of some badges of some officers. Then we can see on the back, on the yellow vest, we can see other officers identified by A12, correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 130 16-130-06

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. So you could see where the various police were coming from, correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 130 16-130-12

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 130 16-130-23

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Let me move on just to address my final point. You can take that picture off, please. If I could ask you, Mr. Clerk, to put up JBA000028.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 130 16-130-27

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Mr. Commissioner, just for the record, I thought the parties or the rules were to provide the witness with at least three days of the evidence they were going to call, so I'm just, for the record, the next piece of evidence and the last two, Mr. Dichter was not aware that it was going to be presented to him today.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 131 16-131-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Well, I guess I have two comments about that. First of all, the witness, I'm only taking him to something he referred to which was the information they got with respect to traffic. But of course, these documents, it was only became apparent that there were documents that Mr. Dichter had posted yesterday. So that database didn’t exist. So unless one is checking the database continuously, that database did not exist. But in any event, I'm only taking him to something that he himself referred to, which was the information they got with respect to parking when they came.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 131 16-131-09

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Thanks. If you could -- you were referring to some conversations about the police telling you where to stage vehicles, correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 131 16-131-23

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. And so that’s an example of something. "Good morning, Jason. I'm still waiting to get the traffic management maps from the City, but do have some info I can relay. I've been told I should have the map by noon today. We have some staging areas set up for trucks and passenger vehicles, but those areas are on roads whose infrastructure cannot accommodate trucks with trailers. We're working on a staging area for trucks with trailers, and I'll pass that along when I get it." Correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 131 16-131-27

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so you understood that was information the police were giving to the convoy participants as to where they could stage their vehicles, correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 132 16-132-16

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. And just the final one in that one is JBA00000068. And again, so that is giving some of the information for truckers as to where they can and cannot go, correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 132 16-132-26

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So that was the information you're referring to? So they were told to leave space for vehicles, they were told where there would no -- not be convoy access, and you understood, coming into the city -- you came in on what day?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 133 16-133-04

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Sure. Just to finish that up. What day did you come in?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 133 16-133-13

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So that would be the Friday?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 133 16-133-16

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And on Saturday, you saw that a number of entrances to downtown were closed off; is that correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 133 16-133-19

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Thank you very much. Thank you for your indulgence.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 134 16-134-01

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Sorry to interrupt, Commissioner. It's Christine Johnson for the Ottawa Residents and Businesses. I'm just not sure if we were perhaps missed there in the lineup? I believe we have 15 minutes with Mr. Dichter, and I know it goes from most time to least time.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 134 16-134-05

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And so with the Ottawa Residents and Businesses.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 134 16-134-13

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Just checking. I'm not sure if we were perhaps missed in the lineup. I believe we have 15 minutes with Mr. Dichter, and I know that it normally goes from most time to least time.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 134 16-134-16

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Sure. And I'm in your hands, of course, knowing that we normally take the lunch break at one o'clock, if you would prefer to have a start, or perhaps to carry with less time to get the lunch break. I'm in your hands.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 134 16-134-23

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

All right. Good afternoon, Mr. Dichter.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 135 16-135-03

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

As you would have just heard, my name is Christine Johnson.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 135 16-135-06

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

I'm one of the co-counsel representing the Ottawa Residents and Businesses Coalition. I just have a couple of areas of questioning for you today.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 135 16-135-09

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

It might come as no surprise that my first area of questioning for you, sir, is going to be about the honking that residents and businesses observed during the convoy protest.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 135 16-135-13

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So you told us this morning, Mr. Dichter, that on the evening that you fell and slipped on the ice and broke your leg that you didn't hear any honking at all. It was silent; is that ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 135 16-135-18

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But you would agree that there was loud, prolonged, frequent honking day and night throughout much of the convoy protest in Ottawa?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 135 16-135-24

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

You witnessed no loud, prolonged honking?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 136 16-136-05

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So there was honking throughout the day continuing beyond the first few days?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 136 16-136-14

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And we heard that after your fall on the ice and break of your leg ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 136 16-136-21

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

--- you were confined to the hotel most of the time; is that right?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 136 16-136-24

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So you wouldn't have heard the honking directly on the street because you weren't on the street for a good period of time.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 137 16-137-03

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But you're aware that many residents were expressing concern that they were hearing frequent, loud honking and they were disturbed by that honking?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 137 16-137-13

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But you are aware that Ottawa residents ultimately brought an application for an injunction against the honking and the court in fact granted that motion?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 137 16-137-28

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And I may have caught you wrong, but I believe that you just told one of my friends that you weren't a participant in that proceeding at all, in that motion to obtain an injunction proceeding?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 138 16-138-06

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And so you don't recall the fact that you swore an affidavit that was submitted into evidence on use -- for use on that motion on February 7th?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 138 16-138-12

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

It -- I believe it attested to the fact that you were in Ottawa as part of the protest, and you do not own a truck.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 138 16-138-17

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So you were aware ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 138 16-138-21

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But you affirmed that affidavit for use in the motion injunction?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 138 16-138-24

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Sir, you told us earlier that you were not involved whatsoever ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 138 16-138-28

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

--- in the motion for an injunction on February 7th against the horn honking when ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 139 16-139-03

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. You didn't attend the proceeding, but you did ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 139 16-139-07

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

--- in fact supply an affidavit for use in that proceeding?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 139 16-139-10

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Thank you. And again, you're aware that that motion was successful and that the court was convinced on the evidence that there was honking, and it would cause irreparable harm if the honking were to continue?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 139 16-139-14

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Were you ever provided a copy of the court's decision?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 139 16-139-20

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So the lawyers for the JCCF never provided you with a copy of that court order at the time it was obtained?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 140 16-140-01

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And were you aware that pursuant to that court order you were required to communicate the terms of the order on your personal social media?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 140 16-140-07

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. And in fact, you never did communicate the terms of the order on your social media?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 140 16-140-11

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 140 16-140-16

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. So you've told us that you didn't hear a lot of honking, you didn't think it was a key feature of this protest at all; is that fair?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 140 16-140-21

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So I want to ask you about your personality on social media. You have a Twitter account, Mr. Dichter, that has honk in your name on Twitter; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 140 16-140-25

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And what is the significance of that? Why did you include honk in your Twitter name?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 141 16-141-02

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So some drivers, some truckers did communicate to you that they felt as though the honking was a way to get their message across, get their voices heard?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 141 16-141-16

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. So that was going to be my next question was when did you insert honk into your name?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 141 16-141-24

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And one of my friends has already asked you about a forthcoming book that you'll be publishing ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 142 16-142-02

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

--- about your experience in the convoy, and I understand that the title of that book is "Honking for Freedom".

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 142 16-142-06

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And again, if honking was not essential feature of this protest, why would your book be named Honking for Freedom?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 142 16-142-10

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. Mr. Clerk, I'm going to just have this witness look at a couple of documents. The first is HRF00000042. And while this is coming up on the screen, Mr. Dichter, you've already been asked about those daily event and safety reports that were put out for convoy participants?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 142 16-142-19

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

I believe you told us that you didn't have direct involvement in these. They were put out by Tom Quiggin?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 142 16-142-26

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 143 16-143-03

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And Tom Quiggin was the host of the Quiggin Report hosted on your podcast; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 143 16-143-06

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. Do you recall seeing some of these daily event bulletins?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 143 16-143-11

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 143 16-143-16

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So this looks to be the report from February 12th. We'll see that at the top of the report.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 143 16-143-20

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And Mr. Clerk, I'll just have you scroll down to the very bottom. So we have Daily Humour and Meme Warfare section. From looking through a few of these reports, it seems like it was common to have a daily humour or a joke section at the bottom of them.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 143 16-143-24

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 144 16-144-03

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And so this meme or humour section has a caricature of someone labelled "The Hoonker", and it has a variety of descriptors around this caricature. It says: "Doesn't vandalize, just hoonks; uses meme warfare in real life; creates a schedule of the hoonk for maximum freedom enhancing effects; disrupts the status quo by not letting people sleep in tyranny; withholds the soy [from reaching] the soy jack until freedom improves; uses the power of vibrating air to chase the Prime Minister out of the country; just straight says to the crying soy jack 'The hoonking will continue until freedom improves'; train horn not enough, we need a ship horn." And there are a variety of caricatures at the bottom, looking to have tears pouring out of their eyes, their hands on their face.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 144 16-144-06

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And can you explain to that, sir?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 144 16-144-28

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And we see the reference to the term "soy jack". Do you -- can you illuminate us on what ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 145 16-145-04

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

--- soy jack refers to?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 145 16-145-08

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But you would agree with me that this type of humour, whether it's in jest or not, is perhaps not getting the message across to convoy participants to lay off the horns in light of the injunction?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 145 16-145-19

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And in the interest of time, I won't take you to the second daily report of this nature, but ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 146 16-146-15

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

--- for the record, HRF00000043 is a February 13th daily report ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 146 16-146-19

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

--- that has a humour section along these lines as well. And I don't know if you recall it off the top of your head, but there was a daily humour section at the bottom that said, "The supreme art of war is to tire the enemy with honking." So that's something that you find equally funny along these lines, I take it?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 146 16-146-22

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And lastly, sir, I'll just ask you a couple of other questions of impact ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 147 16-147-04

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

--- just very briefly on Ottawa residents and businesses. We heard you say this morning that you -- it was your understanding the Rideau Centre was open initially?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 147 16-147-07

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And -- but you were aware it was only that first weekend that it was opened. It closed very soon on that first weekend of protests, and actually remained closed for the duration?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 147 16-147-13

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Yeah. So sir, I'll would tell you that your information on that sounds to be inaccurate from our discussions with our BIA clients.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 147 16-147-23

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So who was it who told you that businesses were forced to close because of the City?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 147 16-147-27

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Well, are you aware, sir, that businesses, many businesses were forced to close because of maskless protesters and their concern about the fines that they as businesses might face if they were to stay open and have maskless patrons ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 148 16-148-14

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

--- in their stores?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 148 16-148-20

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Notwithstanding any concerns that, you know, young employees might face harassment or anything like that. You wouldn't have had concerns when you were running your business of those sorts of things?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 148 16-148-28

Christine Johnson, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Thank you.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 149 16-149-07

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Yes, good afternoon, Commissioner. I have no questions. Thank you.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 149 16-149-10

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Yes, I will, Commissioner.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 149 16-149-17

Eric Brousseau, Counsel (POEC)

We'll have five minutes.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 149 16-149-24

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

We'll have five minutes.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 149 16-149-25

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Not at this time.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 149 16-149-28

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

I'm Nikolas De Stefano for former Chief Sloly. Hi, Mr. Dichter.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 150 16-150-05

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

So we heard a lot about how you were part of a group, corporation that represented sort of certain protesters; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 150 16-150-08

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

But there were also other groups that were present in Ottawa protesting; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 150 16-150-12

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Yeah. And you stated earlier that there were more protesters than you expected there would be?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 150 16-150-16

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Right. The events were just on a scale that you, yourself, and sort of members of your group just did not expect; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 150 16-150-21

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And within your group, you testified that you sort of had people at the Sheraton that were responsible for messaging, some of you were at the Arc Hotel responsible for logistics, and others were at the Swiss Hotel sort of speaking with the police and dealing with the police; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 150 16-150-25

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Did you, yourself, interact with any of the PLT members from the OPS?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 151 16-151-04

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Can you remind me who from your group was responsible for that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 151 16-151-07

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

So we heard some evidence that Mr. Marazzo had been in contact with the PLT at -- -

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 151 16-151-28

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

You didn’t know about that at the time?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 152 16-152-04

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And you would have had no input into any of those discussions?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 152 16-152-07

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Right. And we also heard from you that when Marazzo or -- sorry, we heard from you that when members of your group did indeed reach an agreement, or purport to reach and agreement about the movement of trucks, that you did not agree with the outcome of that agreement; correct?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 152 16-152-11

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Right. And I’m not going to put the text message back up on the screen but ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 152 16-152-24

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

--- we saw a text message earlier where you referred to thousands -- thousands of protesters scolding you about the purported agreement.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 152 16-152-27

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And on February 6th, you gave a press conference and you’ve mentioned -- there’s a transcription of this. I’m not going to put it up on the screen but ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 153 16-153-12

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

But you mentioned that in Ottawa there were certain rabblerousers who were trying to make this about them and they were sort of outside of your group and outside of your entourage; do you remember that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 153 16-153-17

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And you’ve stated that you couldn’t police those people; and you agree with that still?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 153 16-153-26

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

But you agree that members of the protest that weren’t part of your entourage were sort of independent operators, they were sort of free thinkers and you couldn’t force them to do something that they wouldn’t do, right? Like, for example, your aware that Pat King was asked not to come to Ottawa at a certain point and then he did indeed come, right? You couldn’t force them to do something they didn’t want to do?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 154 16-154-10

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Just one last question, Mr. Commissioner. And so you would agree with me, then, that even if your group was able to make some sort of agreement with the police, and that there was some sort buy-in to that agreement, and that it was mobilized, whether it be to stop honking or to move trucks somewhere, some of those rabblerousers could have moved in an parked their trucks in the exact same spot that they were moved out of or just simply not abided by it because you had no control over them?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 154 16-154-26

Nikolas De Stefano, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

That’s it, thanks.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 155 16-155-19

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Mr. Dichter, what can you tell the Commission about Twitter passwords?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 155 16-155-25

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Who were the first seven members of the Freedom Corporation, if I can call it that? You gave the name earlier. Do you remember the names of the first seven directors of the corporation?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 156 16-156-02

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

What’s your relationship with Sean Tiessen?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 156 16-156-09

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

When was the last time you spoke to Sean Tiessen.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 156 16-156-16

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Can you share with the Commission your conversation with Sean Tiessen at that time?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 156 16-156-21

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Earlier, my friend from the Convoy Organizers asked you -- asked you about your membership or your position in the Convoy Organization. Are you still a member of the Convoy Organization?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 157 16-157-08

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

There’s been some dispute in the questions as to who was retained by the corporation so I’m not going to get into the details of whether JCCF was retained or Mr. Wilson, but can you just tell me, in your experience dealing with lawyers -- I think you testified that your mom was a paralegal -- what do lawyers get retained to do?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 157 16-157-13

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Sure. He was -- my friend from the Convoy Organizers was asking Mr. Dichter about the relationship with counsel and I don’t think that evidence has been provided accurately. Mr. Dichter has his -- an opportunity here to answer the question, what his perspective, as a member of -- Director of the Convoy Organization, what they hired lawyers to do, what the job of those lawyers was to do, and what they were doing on behalf of the board. That’s what I’m trying to get at.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 157 16-157-23

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Yes, sir. First, my friend is getting into something that may in fact be privileged, and the board has not waived that privilege as a whole. Second, I don’t understand what the relevance and materiality of any of this is as to whether or not the Emergencies Act should have been invoked.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 158 16-158-05

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Okay. I’ll ask a couple of other questions and I’ll see if ---

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 158 16-158-15

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

--- I can reframe it. You’re a defendant in the class action that came up earlier. After the injunction on the horn honking took place, are you aware of anyone in Ottawa that faced any charges or any other legal ramifications after the injunction to stop honking was put in place by the court?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 158 16-158-18

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

You’re aware, in that same proceeding, there was a series of Mareva injunctions and escrow orders?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 158 16-158-26

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Can you tell the Commission your experience with -- as a defendant in that proceeding your experience with those Mareva injunctions and escrow orders?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 159 16-159-02

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

And what were you asked to do as part of those court orders?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 159 16-159-09

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

And what did you do with that seed phrase and the code?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 159 16-159-15

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

You testified earlier with my friends from the Ottawa Neighbourhood Association -- apologies if I'm not identifying the party correctly -- that the term “honking” became popular as a tag. What was the incident during the protests that led to “honking” becoming something that would get traction on social media online?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 159 16-159-21

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Was the “#honking” or “honk” more popular after the horn injunction or less popular?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 160 16-160-06

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Are you suggesting that the “#honk” replaced actual honking on the street?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 160 16-160-11

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

If I can ask the clerk to bring up HRF1291, page 55. It’s a long PDF. I apologize. There’s a series of text message between Dean French and Mr. Wilson.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 160 16-160-14

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Page 55 of the PDF.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 160 16-160-19

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Mr. Dichter, do you see that?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 160 16-160-21

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Can you read it?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 160 16-160-25

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Who is Katie Telford?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 161 16-161-04

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Is there -- can you tell us about the significance of this text message from Mr. French to Mr. Wilson?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 161 16-161-07

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

And in your time providing messaging on behalf of the protests or the corporation, did anyone from the Premier’s office or the Prime Minister’s office approach you for a discussion to get to a peaceful resolution?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 161 16-161-14

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Just one second, Mr. Commissioner. HRF1325, please, Mr. Clerk. Mr. Dichter, you identified the members, the directors of the corporation. You see this document seems to be meeting notes from a meeting at City Hall?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 161 16-161-19

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

What directors from the corporation were at this meeting?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 161 16-161-26

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

Can you say that again, please?

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 162 16-162-02

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

I think we’re close to wrapping it up, if you can just give me 15 seconds, Mr. Commissioner.

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 162 16-162-09

Jim Karahalios, Counsel (Benjamin Dichter)

There is an email in evidence-- and I'm running out of time so I'm not going to look for the number. And at the -- it’s an email form Mr. Wilson to you. And the third line of the email says, “Trudeau will be pissed.” Can you tell us your opinion on that line from Mr. Wilson to you? “Trudeau will be pissed.”

Volume 16 (November 3, 2022), page 162 16-162-13