Volume 17 (November 4, 2022)

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Thank you very much. David Migicovsky for the Ottawa Police Service. I have a preliminary matter to raise, and I’m seeking your direction. It concerns the testimony of the panel of witnesses who are going to be appearing later today. So I’m happy -- I just wanted to alert you of it. I’ve advised my friends, Commission Counsel, and I’m in your hands as well; you want me to raise it now or wait till the witness has finished her cross-examination?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 8 17-008-08

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I advised Commission Counsel yesterday, and I heard back, and we’ve had some discussions. So certainly Commission Counsel is aware of our position. I have not had -- I heard back from Commission Counsel this morning, and so I have not yet advised my colleagues of the issue.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 8 17-008-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Sure.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 9 17-009-04

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Thank you very much.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 9 17-009-06

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

I just have another matter, Mr. Commissioner, later this morning.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 9 17-009-15

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Good morning, Ms. Lich. My name is Paul Champ; I’m lawyer for the Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses, and I have some questions for you concerning your testimony yesterday. Now, I want to start with something, Ms. Lich, that I think we both agree on; you’re not a national security threat in any way?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 9 17-009-19

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And I also want to make sure that we’re clear on the record; as you know, I’ve able to see a lot of financial information and so forth in other proceedings and so forth, and you did everything you could to keep track of that money and deal with it responsibly, the money that was going to your account?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 9 17-009-27

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And in no way did you ever divert any of that money towards yourself improperly? And I’m saying that, that’s what I’ve seen; you dealt very responsibly in every way you could with the money?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 10 17-010-06

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And you also testified yesterday you wanted to come to Ottawa for the right reasons. And by that I mean you wanted to organize with other people, bring people together over that issue, that was important to you, and send a message to the government and to your fellow Canadians; that’s what you wanted to do in coming to Ottawa?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 10 17-010-11

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And you testified yesterday that you originally thought you just wanted to drive across Canada, stand in front of Parliament with some signs, and you thought that’s what the protest would be, is that right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 10 17-010-18

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

For sure. But then once the enormous amounts of money started flowing in through GoFundMe and, you know, people were energized around that, it opened up other options of what this protest could look like; is that fair?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 10 17-010-24

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But it made other things possible; like, you were able to get the stages and the sound system, and the resources to cover fuel and so forth for a much longer period than you had originally anticipated; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 11 17-011-05

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 11 17-011-12

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Yeah. So -- but once you had a lot more, that opened up options that you could keep getting fuel to the trucks for a while, while they were here; that is part of the idea?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 11 17-011-14

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And we saw some -- or I read a news story about some texts that you had with Mr. Barber.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 11 17-011-19

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

I presume you’re aware of the news story and those texts?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 11 17-011-22

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And in those texts, it’s my understanding that you had some exchanges with Mr. Barber on or about January 30th about a strategy meeting at the Command Centre about gridlocking Ottawa. Can you tell us about that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 11 17-011-25

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 12 17-012-06

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right. But there was a talk about that, is that this should be the strategy going forward is keeping trucks in the streets, gridlocking downtown; that was part of the strategy at that point.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 12 17-012-11

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right. Unfortunately we heard that he didn't necessarily know about all the streets. He didn't know about Kent Street, for example, which even Mr. Barber acknowledged was shut down the whole time. So -- but you didn't have any visibility into that. That wasn't part of your responsibility I gather.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 12 17-012-21

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Now, I want to ask you some questions about the horns. You testified yesterday that at some point, even for you, the horns became a bit too much; you couldn't even carry on a conversation on the sidewalk when all those trucks were blaring?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 12 17-012-28

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Yeah. And the -- I think I had seen video once when you were talking when all the semi-trucks when they blow their horns it's just crazy.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 13 17-013-06

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

That was the experience, was it not?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 13 17-013-10

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Yes.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 13 17-013-14

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But Ms. Lich, I know you strike me as a very reasonable person. You would agree with me that, you know, having a big rig, a semi-truck idling right in front of your house 24 hours a day, emitting diesel fumes, honking horns prolonged periods during all day, sometimes at night, that's not reasonable to a person that lives there. Would you agree?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 13 17-013-19

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But you wouldn't want a big rig to pull up, for example, in front of your parents' home and park and idle for 24 hours a day for several weeks honking their horn. You wouldn't want that, would you Ms. Lich?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 14 17-014-01

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Yeah, it's not pleasant is it?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 14 17-014-09

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Yeah, but then you get to home. You get to get away from that noise and those diesel fumes; right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 14 17-014-11

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Now, I want to ask you some questions about the injunction. We -- on February 4th to the 5th, you heard about that there was a motion from the residents of Ottawa to get an injunction to stop the horn honking; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 14 17-014-16

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And we heard from Mr. Wilson a bit about that, that there was a meeting of the board or the leadership group about what to do, and there was a decision to oppose the injunction; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 14 17-014-22

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Well, you swore an affidavit to impose the injunction, Ms. Lich, let's be clear on that; right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 14 17-014-28

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Well, no, there was a court hearing on Monday, February the 7th, where Mr. Wilson represented you, and Mr. Barber, and Mr. Dichter, who were named individuals on it, to oppose the injunction. You were -- you weren't aware that that's what the position you were taking?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 15 17-015-04

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And you swore an affidavit in support of that position, which I should say swore an affidavit that the injunction should not be granted?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 15 17-015-11

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Is it fair to say there was a lot going on?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 15 17-015-16

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

It was hard to follow all the different things that were happening?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 15 17-015-19

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And you may not have known exactly what the team was doing on some of those issues?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 15 17-015-22

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. Now, Mr. Wilson told us yesterday that on the board there were some who -- there was a bit of a division on the board. Some felt that, "yeah, the horns are a bit too much, and you know, maybe we shouldn't oppose this injunction", and some were like, "no, we should oppose it." Do you recall that meeting?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 15 17-015-25

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 16 17-016-05

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. And you testified yesterday that once the injunction was issued you worked very hard or worked really hard to see that it was adhered to. Do you recall your testimony on that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 16 17-016-08

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right. But you, yourself, you didn't do anything directly to ensure that the Order was adhered to, did you?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 16 17-016-14

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

No. You didn't post any videos or make any statements on your social media account attempting to discourage the truckers from blowing their horns?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 16 17-016-18

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But you didn't put up anything on it before it was deleted?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 16 17-016-23

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And you also, you never posted a copy of the court's injunction Order or the terms of it in any way on any of your social media; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 16 17-016-26

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And were you aware that that was a term of the court Order that you were supposed to do that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 17 17-017-02

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So Mr. Wilson may not have communicated that to you?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 17 17-017-05

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Now, February 4th, that's Friday, that was the -- well, I'll give the day because I'm sure it was like a ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 17 17-017-09

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Yeah. I'm sure your days were crazier than mine, but I have a bit of a sense of what you were going through. February -- Friday, February the 4th, that's the day that GoFundMe issued the statement saying they're shutting off the -- shutting down the ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 17 17-017-13

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

--- fundraiser and they were going to return all the money to the donors. Do you recall that day?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 17 17-017-20

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And when GoFundMe shut you down, you lost what was potentially access to $10 million; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 17 17-017-24

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And GoFundMe put out a statement that day saying, quote, "This previously peaceful demonstration has become an occupation." Do you recall that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 17 17-017-27

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And by that point, you had also, I gather, had been following some of the news stories, some of the reporting talking about the negative impact that the protest was having on residents, you know, caused by the blocking of streets and the honking. Were you following that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 18 17-018-03

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And on that Friday, February 4th, after GoFundMe took away that $10 million, you learned later that day that you were being sued for $10 million. Is that right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 18 17-018-10

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So that was a bit of a rotten day, losing 10 million, being sued for 10 million?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 18 17-018-16

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Now, did you consider or talk about with anyone else maybe working on an exit strategy at that point?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 18 17-018-20

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And after that one day, when GoFundMe shuts you down, did you -- would that have been a time for you to start thinking about shutting down the protest or coming up and saying, "Hey guys, we sent our message", and going home? Was that ever part of the discussion?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 18 17-018-25

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right. But -- and -- but you told us yesterday also, another factor was that the lawyers from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, they had showed up and they were giving you advice, they were supporting you by that point; is that right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 19 17-019-06

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

They had been there a day or two by that time?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 19 17-019-12

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And is it fair to say that without them you might have considered packing it in?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 19 17-019-15

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So on the Friday, February the 4th, GoFundMe shuts you down, you're sued for $10 million. Then on the Sunday, February the 6th, the City of Ottawa declared a state of emergency. Do you recall that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 19 17-019-19

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And then the next day, on Monday, the 7th, the court issued the horn injunction. So did you start thinking then, or was there any discussions then about maybe the protesters should start packing it in?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 19 17-019-24

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And then on February the 11th, Premier Ford in Ontario, they declared a state of emergency about what was happening in Ottawa. Do you recall that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 20 17-020-03

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Weren't you getting the -- you testified yesterday, Ms. Lich, that while no one told you to leave, the police weren't telling you to leave, all of these things, you know, the Premier, the Mayor, the courts, GoFundMe, that wasn't a message, the City of Ottawa, residents suing, that wasn't a message that maybe it was time to leave?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 20 17-020-08

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Yeah. And so -- and that was more important than what the people of Ottawa ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 20 17-020-15

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Now, you reached the deal with he Mayor around Sunday, the 12th, I believe or ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 20 17-020-20

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

-- the 13th. No, the 13th ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 20 17-020-23

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

--- or something like that, that's right. And the Freedom Convoy put out a statement about the deal. You recall that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 20 17-020-25

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And in the statement you said things like you never wanted to impact the residents of downtown Ottawa?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 21 17-021-01

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And you wanted to agree to the deal to relieve the pressure on the people in downtown Ottawa?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 21 17-021-05

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right. Because there had been pressure on the people of downtown Ottawa by that point?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 21 17-021-08

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Because from January 29 until February the 13th, you recognise it wasn't very respectful to the people of downtown Ottawa?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 21 17-021-13

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Except for those that are suing you, I guess.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 21 17-021-21

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And the mayor, who was elected by the citizens of Ottawa, he apparently wasn't supportive of you staying downtown?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 21 17-021-24

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Yeah, and let's just be clear here, Ms. Lich, no one was asking you to leave completely. It was about moving the trucks and having the trucks stop idling out in front of residences and blowing the horns all night and day. That was the big ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 22 17-022-01

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

--- message; wasn't it?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 22 17-022-07

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Now you testified yesterday that once the Emergencies Act was issued and it looks like there was going to be action, law enforcement moving in, you testified that you encouraged people to leave; is that right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 22 17-022-09

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

But you didn't do that on social media in any way; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 22 17-022-14

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So it was just people who you saw face-to-face you were telling them to leave?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 22 17-022-17

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

You didn't think maybe it would be better you had so much influence on people who were here in Ottawa protesting that you should put it out on social media, that, hey, you guys, maybe it's time for us to leave?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 22 17-022-21

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Well, and obviously, another thing that you didn't, Ms. Lich, is, from my understanding of your testimony yesterday, you suspected you were about to be arrested, and you went out to the street to ask the police officers, or have someone ask the police officers if they were looking for you; right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 22 17-022-26

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And you went out with someone who could record the arrest when it occurred; right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 23 17-023-05

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

For sure. And when you were arrested, I didn't hear Commission counsel ask you this, but as you were being arrested, you were yelling, "Hold the line"; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 23 17-023-09

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right. And by that statement, I take it you weren't encouraging the other protesters to leave Ottawa; were you? You were encouraging them to stay to hold the line; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 23 17-023-16

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right. But you'd agree with me, Ms. Lich, that some people who were protesting, who were following you at that time, when they saw that message, they would have interpreted to hold the line to stay, hold the line, don't leave Ottawa. Some might have interpreted that way; would you agree?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 23 17-023-23

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

You don't think that's -- well, when you speak and you've got that kind of a platform, you recognise that people are listening to you, you have a great deal of influence on those people?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 24 17-024-03

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

So just assist me with this, Ms. Lich, I'm just -- I'm trying to reconcile you telling us that you were encouraging people to leave, but you didn't put anything out on social media, but then you were with only one or two people at the time you were arrested, someone that you -- you knew who recorded that video; don't you?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 24 17-024-09

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Yeah, you know that person personally?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 24 17-024-16

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Yeah, and so they recorded it. You were aware, you saw them recording; right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 24 17-024-19

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And then you yell out hold the line, because you wanted the people to stay in downtown Ottawa; is that right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 24 17-024-22

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Okay. Ms. Lich, just one last point. For reasons that remain utterly unclear to me, Commission counsel asked you yesterday about the impact of your arrest and your charges against you. And I just want to make clear, you weren't charged with an offence under the Emergencies Act; were you? It's my understanding you've been charged under the Criminal Code?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 24 17-024-27

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right. You were charged under the Criminal Code for mischief and charged for interference with lawful use enjoyment both under the Criminal Code; is that right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 25 17-025-08

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Right, but no offence under the Emergencies Act?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 25 17-025-14

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

And the indictment talks about activities from February the 7th up until February I think 19th or the date that you were arrested; is that right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 25 17-025-17

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Or the start of the date is before the invocation of the Emergencies Act; right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 25 17-025-21

Paul Champ, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Thank you, Ms. Lich.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 25 17-025-24

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Thank you, Commissioner.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 25 17-025-28

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Good morning, Ms. Lich.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 26 17-026-02

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

I'm Andrea Gonsalves. I'm one of the lawyers for the Government of Canada. You've told us in your evidence that you were not one of the founders of the Freedom Convoy, but you became involved because you wanted to help.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 26 17-026-04

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And primarily, your role was fundraising, and you were quite successful with that; right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 26 17-026-10

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

You told us you're not a trucker, you don't have a truck?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 26 17-026-13

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And in the time you spent in Ottawa, there were obviously protesters, truckers who were sleeping in their trucks?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 26 17-026-16

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

But you didn't. You were staying in the hotels; right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 26 17-026-20

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Right. And during that time, you've told us it was incredibly busy and surely exhausting for you?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 26 17-026-24

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Lots going on. You said you were in and out of different meetings, briefings, on various calls. You were dealing with crowdfunding platforms, switching campaigns, for instance?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 26 17-026-28

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

You were dealing with the funds being frozen, setting up bank accounts, that all took a lot of your time?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 27 17-027-05

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Setting up the finance committee and the various administrative aspects that went along with that also took portions of your time?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 27 17-027-09

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And you were, through all of this, you've told us constantly meeting new people. There were new people arriving all the time that wanted to meet with you?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 27 17-027-13

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yeah. Lawyers, advisors, accountants?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 27 17-027-18

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Mr. Wilson, the other JCCF people, Mr. Eros were just some of the names you gave us; right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 27 17-027-21

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And you said this was a lot of pressure for you. You felt pulled in different directions.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 27 17-027-24

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And you participated in many of the press conferences. You were getting put in front of cameras?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 28 17-028-01

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

People were putting you forward as the leader. Mr. Wilson, you'll recall, describing you as the spark that lit the fire?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 28 17-028-05

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And you also said people - - you felt at times people didn't see you. They just saw the money?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 28 17-028-09

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And all of these dealings were consuming a vast amount of your time during the days and weeks you spent in Ottawa?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 28 17-028-14

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

You, I gather in all of this, couldn't leave your hotel very often?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 28 17-028-18

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yeah, and occasionally ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 28 17-028-23

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Occasionally you spoke up on Parliament Hill?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 28 17-028-26

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And you understand that the protest occupied quite a large physical geographic area of Ottawa?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 29 17-029-01

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yeah. Wellington right out to SJAM?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 29 17-029-05

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

We've heard Parliament south as far as Sommerset?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 29 17-029-08

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Don't know the streets ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 29 17-029-12

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Sure enough, and the evidence is in the record. You've heard there was trucks parked in the streets by the market in the Rideau and Sussex area?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 29 17-029-14

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yeah. For a period of time in the early days anyway, they were out in Confederation Park? There was an encampment there?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 29 17-029-18

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And the one out in Coventry Road parking lot ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 29 17-029-22

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

--- the stadium? As well as those that were a bit further out of town, 1500 Bronson Road; were you aware of that one?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 29 17-029-25

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And you said yesterday something about 88. That would be exit 88 off of the 417?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 30 17-030-02

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Embrun.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 30 17-030-05

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yeah.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 30 17-030-07

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Out in Arnprior. You heard about Vankleek Hill?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 30 17-030-10

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yeah. And you, with all the demands on your time, were not spending the vast majority of your time in any of those places, right; you just couldn’t.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 30 17-030-13

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yeah. And I think I’ve seen you here throughout the hearing; you’ve been here almost daily?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 30 17-030-18

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And we’ve heard some evidence about some of the things that were going on in the protest crowds. I take it this was evidence you were hearing, information you were learning for the first time; like the threats to the Mayor of Ottawa?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 30 17-030-22

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

You didn’t know that Chief Sloly had received death threats?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 31 17-031-01

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

You didn’t know that Minister -- sorry; Deputy Minister -- Deputy Prime Minister Freeland had received ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 31 17-031-04

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

A couple of days ago. And the Prime Minister was receiving threats?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 31 17-031-09

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Were you also learning for the first time, as you sat through this hearing, about numerous weapons-related arrests in connection with these protests, or did you know that at the time?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 31 17-031-13

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And weapons-related arrests in Ottawa?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 31 17-031-20

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Okay. Well, there’s, there’s been some evidence about that and if that’s the case, that would be the first time you learned about that, too?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 31 17-031-24

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

We’ve heard evidence about protesters surrounding police and bylaw officers who were trying to do their jobs; is that something you knew was going on at the time?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 32 17-032-01

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

No. And this document was introduced into evidence yesterday by my friend, Mr. Diana. But no one spoke to it, so perhaps we’ll pull it up. It’s OPP00001819. It’s a OPP Intelligence Report for February 14th. And if we could please scroll down to page 2. Just -- sorry; the very first paragraph there. And February 14th, of course, that’s a big day. That’s the day that the Emergencies Act invocation was announced by the Prime Minister, right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 32 17-032-06

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And the first bullet point there says: “…Ottawa Police Service identified an online video in which a driver at the blockade had made inflammatory statements referencing violence, such as using a truck as a weapon. The video also showed him displaying a protective vest, which he claimed would stop an armour-piercing round. He claimed that [it brought] that he brought it with him to protect himself, and that he had worn it at the blockade....OPP Field Officers have spoken with this male and his truck has been positioned in front of Chateau Laurier since the beginning of the protest.” And I take it that’s new information for you as well?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 32 17-032-17

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

You’ve -- you’ve testified in this Commission that you had to believe everyone who was getting involved was doing so for the right reasons; that they were joining with the best of intentions, and these are at least some examples of people who maybe didn’t have the best of intentions, right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 33 17-033-11

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Right. And in the various press conferences and press releases that you were involved in and that were being put out in the name of the Freedom Convoy; the message was repeatedly being communicated that the convoy was here to stay in Ottawa until the mandates were lifted, right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 33 17-033-20

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

As long as that took, was the messaging?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 33 17-033-27

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yeah. And you testified, both yesterday in response to questions from Mr. Champ this morning, about the deal that -- the exchange of letters that you engaged in with Mayor Watson. And I understand the broad strokes, he sent a letter to your team, with the assistance of Mr. Wilson you sent a letter back, or a letter was sent back in your name, right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 34 17-034-02

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And let’s pull up that letter. It’s HRF00000045. (SHORT PAUSE)

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 34 17-034-10

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

While we’re waiting -- oh, it’s there, but while we’re waiting for that, why did the letter go in your name; do you know?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 34 17-034-13

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Okay. And the letter that’s written in your name, if we just go down to the -- sorry; a little too far -- third paragraph, starts, “We have made a plan.” And you write, or the letter says: “We have made a plan to consolidate our [best] our protest efforts around Parliament Hill. We will be working hard over the next [40] 24 hours to get buy in from the truckers. We hope to start repositioning our trucks on Monday.” And that’s worded that way because at that point the best that you could offer the Mayor was efforts to get buy- in from the truckers, right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 34 17-034-18

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Right. And after these letters were released publicly, we heard from Mr. Dichter in his testimony, and I believe you testified, that you knew at the time from him, that he had received many, many, many reactions on social media from those who were unhappy with this deal, right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 35 17-035-07

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yeah. You also were aware that Pat King had immediately put out his own messaging undermining this deal, right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 35 17-035-14

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And it was important to you, I take it, to make clear that what had been agreed to was nothing more than moving the trucks out of the residential neighborhoods, right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 35 17-035-18

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yeah.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 35 17-035-23

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

You, at that time, would not have put your name on any letter that agreed to a meeting if it meant you had to force protesters to pack up, end their protest and go home, right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 35 17-035-27

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Yeah. Maybe I’ll do it a little differently. The understanding you had with Mayor Watson was that you’re going to make best efforts to help get the trucks out of the residential neighborhoods.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 36 17-036-04

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And then he would sit down with you for a meeting.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 36 17-036-10

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

You were not going to agree to a meeting if it meant you had to tell all those truckers, “Get out of Ottawa, end your protest; go home”?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 36 17-036-13

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

You did not, and you would not have agreed to a meeting with the Mayor if the condition for that meeting was that you and other leaders would have to tell the protesters, “Get out of Ottawa, go home, end your protest”?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 36 17-036-18

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And when you messaged this deal, you remember Mr. Wilson drafted up the Freedom Manifest that was going to be used to help communicate to the truckers what exactly they were being asked to do ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 36 17-036-24

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

--- and what the deal was with the Mayor? Right. And so let’s pull that up, that’s HRF00001285. This is a document you had reviewed, and you agreed with it.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 37 17-037-01

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Right. And in the fourth paragraph, what you’re communicating here is: “We have to stay in Ottawa for the long-haul to reach our destination. Just like we do every day with our routing logistics, we have to plan for the road ahead.”

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 37 17-037-07

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

And that’s what you and Freedom Corp. were saying to explain the deal to the protesters; that going along with what was being asked, moving those trucks out of the residential core to other areas in Ottawa, was a step necessary to make sure you could continue your protest for the long haul; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 37 17-037-16

Andrea Gonsalves, Counsel (GC)

Thank you. Those are my questions.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 37 17-037-25

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Good morning, Commissioner. Good morning, Ms. Lich. My name is David Migicovsky. I’m a lawyer for the Ottawa Police.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 38 17-038-02

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You’ve been very clear in your evidence that it was your intent to plan a peaceful protest; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 38 17-038-07

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And that was very important to you as one of the organizers?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 38 17-038-11

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you did not plan to disrupt the lives of Ottawa residents or businesses?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 38 17-038-14

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you obviously, consistent with that, obviously, didn’t plan to break bylaws, honk your horns continuously, defecate on people’s lawns, harass people, or block emergency lanes? That wasn’t the plan; was it?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 38 17-038-17

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And it wasn’t the plan; was it? As one of the organizers, you wouldn’t have been in favour of condoning that kind of activity; would you?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 38 17-038-22

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And because it wasn’t your plan, and you in fact had a code of conduct, you wouldn’t have expected the police to turn the convoy away when they came to Ottawa; would you?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 38 17-038-26

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And if that had happened and none of the trucks were allowed in, we’ve heard from OPP witnesses that that likely, at that point, would not have deterred the convoy, because some had driven from very far away. Is that fair?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 39 17-039-04

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I’m saying that if, when you got here on the 28th and the 29th, the city was barricaded and you couldn’t go anywhere, the OPP witness indicated that that wouldn’t have turned the truckers away, because they’d come pretty far for this.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 39 17-039-12

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And no one from the Convoy organizers, to your knowledge, was on social media before the Convoy encouraging anti-social behaviour?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 39 17-039-20

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. And you’ve seen the Lawton book about the Freedom Convoy?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 39 17-039-24

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And in his book, he says that the convoy organizers did not intend to be on residential streets?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 39 17-039-27

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you would agree with that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 40 17-040-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

But in fact, that is what happened?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 40 17-040-06

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

There were staging areas, but they were too far away from Parliament and people wanted to be closer; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 40 17-040-10

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you’ve been very clear in the affidavit you filed in court that there were truckers who came from all over?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 40 17-040-16

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you indicated, specifically, in that affidavit, which is -- we don’t need to call it up, but for the record, it’s JCEP0012 [sic], and paragraph 2 and three, that you did not control the truckers? Those are your words?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 40 17-040-20

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You’re agreeing with me?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 40 17-040-28

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I’m sorry?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 41 17-041-02

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You didn’t control the truckers?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 41 17-041-04

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And Supt. Drummond attended a meeting he’s heard with some of your representatives on the 13th of February. That was after the date of your letter with the Mayor. Those were on the 12th; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 41 17-041-07

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. And so the agreement with the Mayor was reached on the 12th of February?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 41 17-041-14

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And then we saw that there was a meeting on the 13th that I believe Mr. Wilson may have attended with the Mayor’s ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 41 17-041-17

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

--- office? And Supt. Drummond records in his notes, and again, I’ll give you the reference, but I -- in the interest of time, I won’t call it up, but it’s OPS14455 at page 47. The Convoy organizers, the representatives at that meeting, explained that they did not control Rideau/Sussex?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 41 17-041-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

But you’re aware that that was said ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 41 17-041-28

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

--- by ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 42 17-042-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. And that your representatives also said they didn’t control Coventry Road?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 42 17-042-05

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so -- and they also said they could not be certain if the truckers there would move?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 42 17-042-08

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And even for those groups whom you did have some control or influence on, I guess influence, we’ve heard that truckers are pretty independent minded people?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 42 17-042-11

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

They can’t be made to do what they don’t want to do?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 42 17-042-16

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And in addition to not controlling the truckers, you also did not have control, obviously, of the protestors on the street and whether they could block trucks moving, for instance?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 42 17-042-19

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And in fact, we heard about a previous effort by Mr. Wilson and Ms. Chipiuk on February 10th at Rideau and Sussex where police were going to move the barriers so trucks could move, but the crowd dynamics got in the way, and the crowd stopped the trucks from moving because they didn’t trust the police; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 42 17-042-27

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You were there as well. And so you saw that. And you agreed that that would be dangerous then?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 43 17-043-06

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you agreed it would be dangerous to move the trucks in that scenario? Because the crowd swelled?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 43 17-043-14

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And we have heard that notice was given to the demonstrators in advance that they would have to leave. You heard that evidence?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 43 17-043-19

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

We’ve heard quite a bit of that evidence, that demonstrators were told to leave?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 43 17-043-24

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You didn’t know that? Okay. You’re familiar with the PLTs; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 43 17-043-27

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I’m going to show you some PLT logs. And you understand that the PLTs were a liaison with the protestors?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 44 17-044-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And would communicate with them?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 44 17-044-07

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. I’m going to call it up. I’m not going to start by taking you directly to it, but I will take you to a particular passage. The document is OPS00014053. And so while that’s being called up, Ms. Lich, those are PLT logs as of February 25th. And I can take you through them in detail and show you, but in order to save some time, I’m going to attempt to summarize what they say on the issue of notice that was given to the truckers and protestors before the Public Order Unit moved in to clear the intersection. And so what I see in those is on February -- there were various zones in the city. And I see on February 16th, the PLTs attended SJAM and gave those present the letter, and were told by protestors that the letter wasn’t legal because it doesn’t have a signature.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 44 17-044-10

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

That’s sort of similar to what you said; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 44 17-044-26

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

If my friend could actually take the witness to the part in the document that states that so that we can see it? I don’t know if that’s what it says or not. I apologize.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 45 17-045-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I will take her to it where it’s necessary. If she doesn’t agree, she doesn’t agree. That’s fine. I don’t wish to use my 15 minutes by going through the document in detail. If she can’t agree -- I will take her to portions of it.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 45 17-045-07

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So PLT say they attended SJAM and they were told by the truckers that it wasn’t legal, that notice, and it wasn’t significant. Do you know about that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 45 17-045-14

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. Do you have any reason to deny that occurred as noted in the PLT logs?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 45 17-045-18

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. And I understand from those logs that the next day, on February 17th, they attended again and delivered the message again? And they attended again on the 19th and delivered it again to those who remained? Any reason to deny that that occurred?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 45 17-045-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. And so you weren’t being -- you weren’t on the 17th, were you?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 45 17-045-28

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. And I'm pretty confident, because you were one of the organisers, that the truckers were communicating with you and telling you what was happening.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 46 17-046-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

All over the city.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 46 17-046-08

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And then in Zone 2, and this is on page 7 of the same document, Mr. Marazzo met the PLT on the 16th and the message was delivered to him, and then it was delivered on Wellington Street and the PLTs describe hostile and screaming at the police, and the police then had to withdraw due to the hostility. Any reason to disagree with that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 46 17-046-10

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Any reason to disagree with it?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 46 17-046-17

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Sir, with respect, my friend's asking a witness who has no knowledge of something whether or not she disagrees with the document of which she didn't draft, of which was drafted by the police, and then asking if there's any reason to disagree with something she has no knowledge of. That's not a question, sir, that's permissible, it's not relevant. This witness, while this was all going on, was in jail without any form of ability to access phones and texts, et cetera. It's not an appropriate line of questioning.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 46 17-046-19

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

The witness can answer if she was aware of it or not. She wasn't -- I don't -- I think it's quite proper cross-examination.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 47 17-047-01

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 47 17-047-07

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Well ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 47 17-047-12

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

In my submission, it is highly relevant because the witness said that no notice was given. And I'm going to suggest to you, Ms. Lich, that the PLTs went to every single site and gave notice to everyone, and you're saying you didn't know that. Is that right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 47 17-047-15

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. I'm going to ask that we turn up OPS12205, page 60. Yeah, just at the top where it says Swiss Hotel. I'm going to tell you something, and maybe you'll remember this, Ms. Lich: "PLT Peace, Jim and OPS PLT Meg attended Swiss Hotel and met with Lich and Bulford and O'Connor. Message was delivered and explained. All parties were upset and Lich was crying in regards to how unfair she felt this action was. PLT advised them to depart and message this out to others. All parties were upset when it was explained that people who are helping (logistics) can also be charged and held accountable. All understood messaging. They do feel that this message will harden participants' resolve as they feel it is a tactic of dictatorial government. Suggestion was made to have children leave the red zone." Seems pretty clear to me that you were given the message; right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 47 17-047-22

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So the PLTs, that's fabricated; right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 48 17-048-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 49 17-049-01

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You were upset and you were crying because it was over and they told you to leave.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 49 17-049-04

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And they told you to depart and they told you to message that to others; right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 49 17-049-08

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I'm sorry, you don't remember?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 49 17-049-13

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

It seems to me your memory is selective. When I take you to something that implicates you, you have no memory of it.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 49 17-049-16

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Sir, that's inflammatory, and I -- if my friend wants to take the stand and become a witness and give opinions about credibility that's fine, but that's not a proper question, sir.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 49 17-049-19

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I'll move on. You would agree, you've talked about the fact that you didn't know the truckers or control them, and you didn't police them?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 49 17-049-23

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You weren't surveilling them?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 49 17-049-28

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You didn't know their past, you didn't have intelligence information about all of them?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 50 17-050-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. And you would agree with me that there may be other individuals or organisations that would have more intelligence information about some of the protesters than you did?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 50 17-050-08

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Would you agree with that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 50 17-050-13

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Yeah. I said you would agree with me that there may be other individuals or organisations that would have more intelligence about some of the protesters than you did.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 50 17-050-16

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you would agree with me as well that you have no background or formal training in crowd dynamics and what can incite a crowd to take action?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 50 17-050-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Or how to prevent a crowd from escalating or preventing violence?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 50 17-050-25

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so just two more areas if I may just have two more minutes, Commissioner.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 50 17-050-28

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

HRF00001510, if I may have that document, Mr. Clerk, please. Is an email from Eva Chipuik. Eva Chipuik was one of the convoy lawyers?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 51 17-051-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so this is on February 15th. She indicates, and for some reason we have not been given the attachment, although we've been told that solicitor/client privilege was waived, but in the email it says: "I've drafted something on the right to protest and have taken a very cautious approach, because I don't exactly know what the emergency orders are, but it's my understanding that they can limit the right to protest, and while that can be challenged in court, at the moment people who do not comply may be arrested. I think if we're advising people it's important to let them know all the risks they are facing and let them make their own [decision]." You've seen that from one of your lawyers?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 51 17-051-08

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So two possibilities: either your lawyers didn't give that advice to you, or they did give you that advice to you.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 51 17-051-28

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Sir, there is individuals cc'd or that email is to. She is not in it, and then the next day, or just in two days she's not -- like you should first ask her if she got the email. God. Sorry.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 52 17-052-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I'm sorry, my friend have a chance to examine. This is quite proper cross-examination.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 52 17-052-07

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay, I will get to that, but I -- there's a reason why I'm asking it in the way I have.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 52 17-052-12

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So two possibilities: either your lawyer didn't give you that advice, or you did get that advice from someone.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 52 17-052-15

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay, so you don't recall whether your lawyer gave you that email or not.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 52 17-052-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. And I understand that you've been charged with several Criminal Code offences, correct? Mischief, obstructing justice, counselling others to commit mischief, intimidation; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 52 17-052-25

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And I understand you understand that the purpose of this Inquiry is not to determine your guilt or innocence; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 53 17-053-02

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you've received disclosure of documents from the Crown or partial disclosure I believe you said?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 53 17-053-06

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you understand because the criminal process is ongoing there's a principle -- a case called Wagg. And so as a result of that, you understand that I am not allowed to rely on documents that are part of the criminal brief -- the Crown brief in this proceeding. You understand that; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 53 17-053-10

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so you understand that if that's the case I may not be able to challenge some of the statements you have said; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 53 17-053-18

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Sir, my friend is arguing -- -

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 53 17-053-21

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

--- a principle of law.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 53 17-053-24

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. If I may just ask just one final question, then. You talked about concerns for safety; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 53 17-053-27

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And that would include concerns for officer safety?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 54 17-054-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so we have heard evidence of police officers being swarmed by protesters, and I assume that you would be concerned about that.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 54 17-054-06

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. But you don’t have sufficient control over the truckers or the protesters to prevent that, that’s occurred; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 54 17-054-11

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Thank you very much ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 54 17-054-15

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

--- for answering my questions.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 54 17-054-17

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Good morning, Ms. Lich. Tom Curry for former Chief Sloly.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 54 17-054-23

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

I just have a few questions.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 54 17-054-26

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Can I just show you the -- one thing that my friend for the Ottawa Police Service was speaking to you about, just so that you have the full picture.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 54 17-054-28

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Could I ask, please, Mr. Registrar, for the witness to be shown HRF00001520? I think this is the attachment that was referred to. Just in case this helps your recollection, what is being projected now is a document with the title, “The Right to Protest.” Have you seen it? I appreciate you’re going to take a second to look at it, but just let us know, please, if you have seen that memorandum before.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 55 17-055-04

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Okay. And it -- I gather from the record, that it is the attachment to which Ms. Chipiuk’s email, or that was along with Ms. Chipiuk’s email, and refers to the limits of the right to protest that were expressed in that cover. But that doesn’t -- that’s not something that you saw or heard?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 55 17-055-14

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Thank you. Just a couple of things, then, if I could. The Commissioner -- one of the things that the Commissioner has to consider is recommendations about dealing with the Emergencies Act, and presumably perhaps even the right to protest and some of the limits that we’ve heard about. Could I just have a couple of additional facts from you? You and Mr. Barber met, I think you told us, on the 24th of January to begin the trip ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 55 17-055-22

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

--- here.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 56 17-056-04

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And you left from Redcliff.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 56 17-056-06

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And arriving in Arnprior the 29th.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 56 17-056-08

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Okay.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 56 17-056-11

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Twenty-eighth (28th); Ottawa the 29th.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 56 17-056-13

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And what I’m interested in knowing is -- of course, first of all the numbers of protesters exceeded your expectations; is that fair?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 56 17-056-16

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Wildly exceeded?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 56 17-056-20

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And you -- I think you told us that you imagined that you might be able to raise $20,000 for this convoy.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 56 17-056-22

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And of course the financial commitments that you garnered were far in excess of that. But the -- in terms of the numbers of protesters who you considered, and I presume Mr. Barber considered in his conversations with you, were not in the numbers that filled up the streets of Ottawa in the way that you found them on the 29th; is that fair?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 56 17-056-26

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Sure. Your expectation -- when you got to Ottawa, you saw far more people than you believed would be in attendance.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 57 17-057-06

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And am I right that you were not the person primarily, or even at all, communicating with police about how many people were going to attend?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 57 17-057-10

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Got it. And insofar as you know, the road captains would have had some information about the numbers of members of their individual convoys that they had but they would not have had a picture of the entirety of it because people were coming from far and wide; is that fair?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 57 17-057-16

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

So much so that when you got here, as much as you tried to understand how many would be there, you missed the mark.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 57 17-057-27

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Now, then, just a couple of other things. In terms of the company, the not-for-profit, it was incorporated January 30th, I understand?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 58 17-058-03

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And then I think in the record, the bylaws organized it, were prepared by February 3rd. So that, the company and the governance model that you had imposed was evolving only once you got here.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 58 17-058-08

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Then, finally, in terms of the description, you called -- you and Mr. Wilson have both called the scene, “Chaotic”. Can you tell the Commissioner; when did you first appreciate the sense of chaos that you have described? Was it when you arrived on the 29th?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 58 17-058-13

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Right.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 58 17-058-22

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

And so by the time you got here and saw the situation in Ottawa, was it chaotic at that time as well?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 58 17-058-24

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Understood. Just one last thing. I think one of the questions that you were asked about, what would have happened as you approached Ottawa, if the City had been -- I think the language was blocked or barricaded. Having regard to the numbers of people coming far and wide, and your inability to control them, is the likelihood that those convoy protesters would have just made their protest where the blockades were?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 59 17-059-05

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Okay, fair enough. Thank you, Commissioner.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 59 17-059-15

Tom Curry, Counsel (Peter Sloly)

Thank you so much.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 59 17-059-18

Alyssa Tomkins, Counsel (Ott)

Alyssa Tomkins for the City. The City has no questions for this witness.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 59 17-059-21

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Good morning, Commissioner. The OPP have no questions. Thank you.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 59 17-059-25

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Good morning, Mr. Commissioner.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 60 17-060-02

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Ms. Lich.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 60 17-060-05

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

My name is Antoine D’Ailly, counsel for Citizens for Freedom, representing peaceful protesters in Windsor. Ms. Lich, in yesterday’s testimony you indicated that at the beginning you were tasked with some of the fundraising and that you thought that a fundraising goal of $200,000 was way too much and that you expected maybe $20,000 in donations; is that correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 60 17-060-07

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

And that you certainly did not expect the level of financial support that the convoy did receive over that period of time; is that correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 60 17-060-16

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Perfect. Do you agree that many Canadians who were unable or otherwise unwilling to go out and protest in the streets, instead donated to the convoy as a tangible demonstration of their opposition to the government mandates?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 60 17-060-21

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Right. And so is it also your understanding that contributors to a GoFundMe campaign may leave a message of support when they donate?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 61 17-061-02

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

And did you review some of those statements of support?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 61 17-061-06

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

So then based on your experience, would it be fair, then, to characterize the act of donating to the convoy’s fundraising efforts as a form of political expression?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 61 17-061-10

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Understood. And is it true that the GoFundMe campaign for the convoy was active for less than a month?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 61 17-061-19

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

And were you ever made aware that the convoy’s fundraising campaign, in that limited amount of time, enjoyed more donations from more Canadians than the Liberal Party of Canada did in either 2020 or 2021?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 61 17-061-23

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

So we’re talking about large amounts ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 62 17-062-01

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

--- of money here, right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 62 17-062-04

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

And are you aware of any other grassroots fundraising campaign which has raised comparable amounts of money since March of 2022?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 62 17-062-06

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Fair enough.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 62 17-062-11

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

And lastly, we heard about some of the conditions and restrictions that you are now subject to while you wait for you your trial next year. In addition to those conditions, how many days have you spent in jail since you started fundraising for the convoy?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 62 17-062-13

Antoine D’Ailly, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Those are my questions. Thank you.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 62 17-062-19

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Sir, I’m wondering if we can take the morning break a little early. I have to talk to three separate lawyers behind me about certain areas of examination. If we could take the morning break, I’d be very much appreciative.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 62 17-062-24

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Absolutely, sir.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 63 17-063-04

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Good morning. For the record, Brendan Miller appearing as counsel for Freedom Corp, and I think you know who I am, as I’m your lawyer.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 63 17-063-17

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

So I just want to start out with some just general questions. At any time during the protest, had you been given a Court order injunction to move the trucks or leave or what have you, what would you have done and how would you have acted?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 63 17-063-21

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. And you heard yesterday the evidence from Mr. Dichter, did you not?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 64 17-064-05

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And he testified about not knowing about the deal that the convoy corp or Freedom Corp and the Board were going to enter into with the City. Do you have any comment about that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 64 17-064-08

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And so at that meeting, what was discussed?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 64 17-064-16

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. And what, if any, Board members objected to the dealings with the Mayor?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 64 17-064-20

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Yeah. And you heard him give evidence that the Board members were scared of the lawyers and what they were dealing with. Do you have any comment in that respect?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 64 17-064-24

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. Have any of the other Board members expressed such a fear to you?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 65 17-065-01

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. Thank you. My friend, Mr. Champ, discussed with you at length the injunction, when you should have known you should leave. And though I haven’t given notice of this, I’d like to bring up document HRF00000073, which is the injunction order from February 7th. And if we could just scroll down to the terms. Right. And so if I can just direct you to paragraph 7 of the injunction, can you read that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 65 17-065-04

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And what’s your understanding of the injunction and this order at the time when it was obtained?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 65 17-065-14

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And then there was a subsequent order and I understand that term, which states that “Provided the terms of the Order are complied with, the defendants or other persons remain at liberty to engage in peaceful, lawful and safety protest”, I take it that that term was in that order, too. Is that correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 65 17-065-20

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

I apologize. I’ll speak up. The term at term 7 there where it says that it’s -- “Provided the terms of the Order are complied with, the defendants and other persons remain at liberty to engage in peaceful, lawful and safety protest”, I take it that was in the following injunction order as well. Is that right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 65 17-065-28

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Thank you. And so my friend with the Government of Canada discussed with you what your knowledge was of violent offences, et cetera, that was going on in Ottawa at the time. If Mr. Registrar could bring up the document we just discussed, POE.HRF a whole bunch of 0s 2. And if we could just rotate that? And so the colouring on this is gone, but -- and this is already in evidence, but between the date of the beginning of the protest and the invocation of the Emergencies Act, there was a total of four violent offences individuals were charged with in that time period. Did you know any of those individuals?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 66 17-066-08

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. Did you hear about individuals being charged with violent offences?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 66 17-066-21

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. And my friend had asked you questions about some of the statements that have been given in this proceeding as well as in the media about all these awful things that happened to people. And you've been here for this entire time. Have you heard from any witness that they, in fact, were the victim of an assault, or witnessed an assault, or anything violent?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 66 17-066-25

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Could you agree that if there were victims of actual violence, given that they know who's charged, it would have been relatively easy for those witness to be procured to testify before this Commission?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 67 17-067-07

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

David Migicovsky ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 67 17-067-11

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

I withdraw.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 67 17-067-12

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

--- for the Ottawa Police.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 67 17-067-13

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Withdraw. I withdraw. Now I just want to talk with you about the letter and some of the reactions that you got from some of the protesters. Of course, we know that Mr. Dichter didn't appear to like the letter and Mr. King didn't appear to like the letter. What was your general responses that you were getting at the time with respect to the letter and the deal that was going to be done through the City?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 67 17-067-14

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. And again, what was the sort of responses though that you were getting on the street from some of the truckers after that deal was announced?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 67 17-067-28

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Was -- can you remember if it was -- was there some negative responses? Was there some positive responses that you personally witnessed?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 68 17-068-04

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. And I understand that Mr. Marazzo, as you sat through his testimony, he stated that a purpose of the meeting and the goal of Freedom Corp. and its Board was not really to get a deal with the mayor. It was to -- or a meeting with the mayor, but it was to get this deal to make things work peacefully. Can you elaborate on that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 68 17-068-09

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

So the actual goal with respect to Freedom Corp. as well as the protesters that you were representing, their actual goal was not to achieve a meeting with the mayor, but it was to deal with this in a peaceful manner. Can you elaborate on that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 68 17-068-16

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. And just on my last point here, part of this Commission is about coming up with recommendations and things like that. I take it when you came into Ottawa, and we've heard evidence that a lot of the truckers were directed where to park and that's where they kind of stayed throughout the proceeding -- or throughout the protest?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 69 17-069-02

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And so there is this issue, and what we -- what I refer to and what's referred to in some of the jurisprudence is a speaker's corner. Have you ever heard of that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 69 17-069-09

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. It's a place, a location in a government area, particularly out in front of Parliament or where have you, where protesters are permitted to go and is a designated area for protests.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 69 17-069-14

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

I take it when you were trying to get the protest moving, most of the protesters were wanting to get onto Wellington because it's in front of Parliament and they were protesting the federal government; fair?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 69 17-069-19

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

All right. And what is your understanding of the current state of Wellington today?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 69 17-069-25

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And if that area that's blocked off became a speaker's corner where individuals at any time could go and protest the federal government, what are your thoughts on that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 70 17-070-01

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And my friends from the Government of Canada put to you a whole bunch of evidence that you weren't familiar with until you got here with respect to threats. Can you elaborate on any of the threats you've received, ones that you know members of the protesters received as well as your -- the legal counsel, and even any of the legal counsel in this room since this proceeding started?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 70 17-070-09

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Right. And so it's fair to say then that there has been a lot of threats on both sides?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 70 17-070-25

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. But do you know anybody who's made death threats to any of these individuals?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 70 17-070-28

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And when you walk in here every day for the past few days, there's a protester outside, and I'm sure you've heard everything she's been saying, and she's a counter protester and is against your cause. What are the sort of things that that protester has said to you while you've been coming in and out of this hearing?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 71 17-071-03

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Did she mention anything about terrorism?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 71 17-071-14

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

And what's it say?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 71 17-071-18

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Okay. Thank you.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 71 17-071-20

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

No, Mr. Commissioner.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 71 17-071-22

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 72 17-072-19

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Sure, thanks very much.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 72 17-072-22

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So I'll remain seated here, Commissioner.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 72 17-072-24

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Sure. It's David Migicosvky, Counsel for the Ottawa Police Service. We have a very real concern with respect to the witness panel of Chris Deering and Maggie Dingman. I believe there is now a different name, and I apologize. It’s Braun -- Hope Braun, I believe. Those two individuals -- and our concern is essentially one of procedural fairness. Those two individuals were not on the list of witnesses provided by the Commission, and so last Friday, ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 73 17-073-02

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Correct. And what we found out was on last Friday, October 28th at 12:37 p.m., we received an email from the Commission saying that these two individuals would be called as witnesses, and attaching two statements from these individuals. No information had been previously provided about these individuals, or about the issues that they were going to testify about, which are the -- how their arrest was handled, nor were there any documents provided by the parties, including the Ottawa Police Service, about the manner of arrest. It appears that both of these individuals, from their statements, are going to give evidence about the circumstances of their arrest by unknown officers. I’ve been able to determine in one case that it was not an OPS officer, one of them, but we are trying to find out information. These are arrests that took place on February 18th, after the invocation of the Emergencies Act. These individuals were not arrested pursuant to the Emergencies Act. They were arrested based on common-law powers and the Criminal Code. And my concerns really are two-fold. Firstly, the information we say is not relevant to your mandate under the Act, and the second question is one of procedural fairness. There were over 275 arrests made by the police in that period of February 18th to the 20th. None of the police witnesses were asked specifically about those arrests, no documents were requested. The last police witness who testified in this proceeding was on Wednesday, October 26th. Had those witness statements been provided prior to the completion of the police witnesses, then at the very least, we could have asked our witnesses to provide evidence with respect to the arrest plan, with respect to the circumstances of the arrest of those two individuals, and the other 275 people who were arrested. I am not faulting Commission Counsel. I understand that the statements were provided to them and they provided them to us immediately after. But it was two days after the last witness testified. Those statements were in the -- those were witnesses who are here represented by counsel, they had an obligation to produce documents. They chose, deliberately or otherwise, to not present that evidence and not allow me, then to respond to it. And it’s obvious that some of that information, they had beforehand. And in fact, to add to the procedural unfairness, last night, we received an email from counsel for the Convoy organizers attaching seven more videos that also would have existed that were not disclosed. There’s no explanation for why the Convoy organizers have not had to follow the same rules as everyone else. Those statements, even if they were relevant, and I don’t concede that they are, should have been provided prior to police witnesses testifying. It creates a serious and irreparable breach of procedural fairness to have you left with two arrests out of 275, which I am unable to provide evidence in response to, both those specific arrests, as well as the arrest plan in general. And there are, I say, two possible solutions. The first is to not allow that evidence to be heard. It’s not relevant to your mandate. And even if it was, it would be very difficult to draw any conclusion from the evidence of two individuals out of 275 arrests when you’ve heard no evidence about any of the arrests of anyone else, or the arrest plans, or any explanation of those two particular arrests. Alternatively, if you are inclined to allow that panel to testify, including adding new documents that were not on the database and were provided last night, then the OPS must, we say, as a matter of procedural fairness, be allowed the opportunity to call another witness to provide evidence about the arrest plans and the exercise of use of force options in connection with the exercise of police powers generally and specifically with respect to the scene that the officers encountered on February 18. You have not heard about what is involved when a Public Order Unit has to exercise tactical options. The Commission didn’t lead this evidence, nor did we. Similarly, we didn’t provide any documents surrounding those arrests. So while my first submission is that you should not allow this evidence, as an alternative, if you are inclined to do so, then I would ask for the opportunity to call evidence so that in fairness, the police witnesses can address what should have bene put to them by the Convoy organizers and which, for some reason, was not. Those are my only submissions. Thank you very much.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 73 17-073-13

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

In response, sir.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 76 17-076-16

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Yes. Perhaps I can speak to this, sir.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 76 17-076-19

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Commissioner?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 76 17-076-21

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Should I go ahead? Emilie Taman for the ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 76 17-076-23

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

That’s right. Yes. We agree, just on behalf of the Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses. We share the view conveyed by the Ottawa Police. We understand that the Commission is working under difficult constraints and there have been limitations in counsel’s ability to get documents and other evidence to the parties in a timely manner, but in this case, we would agree that there is prejudice and that the evidence, at least as it pertains to the arrests, should not be admitted.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 76 17-076-28

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Yes, Commissioner. Commissioner, it’s Chris Diana for the OPP. Can you hear me?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 77 17-077-11

Christopher Diana, Counsel (ON-OPP)

Yes, the OPP agrees with the position of our friend, Mr. Migicovsky, both the main position or the alternative position. At this point, we don’t know if the OPP was involved or not in these incidents, and based on procedural fairness, we either -- that evidence either should not be permitted, or we should have a chance to respond to it. I won’t add anything further to the comments by my friend, but the OPP supports that position.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 77 17-077-15

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

We’re of course in support of the witnesses testifying and all of the evidence being put before the Commission. I’ll deal first with the point of law my friend raises about relevance and materiality. With respect to the terms of reference under the Order in Council in this Commission, this Commission is to look at the efforts of police and other responders prior to and after the declaration. So with respect to whether or not there was police brutality or misconduct, et cetera, it’s relevant and material within the terms of reference. Second, with respect to my friend’s allegations of prejudice and it not being fair, with respect, they have not called a single victim or a single eye-witness to any of these reported violent crimes that they’re trying to lay at the hands of the protestors as a collective. I don’t see how our clients being able to find some witnesses of which they had no control over and which approached them, trying to be able to call actual evidence of actual violence that isn’t just an assertation. And in my respectful view, it’s relevant material. If you find that there is some form of prejudice suffered, what my friend is essentially alleging is a violation of the rule of Browne and Dunn. If this was a court, that leaves the court with various remedies, and one is to permit the recalling of a witness in rebuttal. With respect to the rule of Browne and Dunn, I did put issues with respect to arrest, et cetera, directly to Chief Bell, who was in charge of the operation at the time, and acting and asking questions about what was actually done. We’ve now provided the videos of those actual arrests. I understand that all the police agencies don’t want that to be in the public eye and, with respect, I would submit that the public has a right to see these videos. It is in the public interest and any prejudice is easily repairable by permitting my friends to call a rebuttal witness if they so choose. Subject to any questions, sir, those are my submissions.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 78 17-078-01

Hatim Kheir, Counsel (DF / CfF / JCCF)

Hatim Kheir for the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms. We support the Freedom Convoy Organizers position, and if I could just make a few points. So first, the terms of reference in the Emergencies Act do require investigating and looking into the appropriateness of the measures that were used. Interim Chief Bell testified that using emergency powers were used to create an exclusion zone and that they relied on that authority, and so I would expect that these witnesses as arrestees would have evidence that would be relevant to the implementation of that authority. Also, to the extent that my friend made the point that these are but two arrestees of many, we did hear from two Ottawa residents who provided their experiences as examples, and that would then represent a broader class of individuals, so this would also be two arrestees providing their experiences which would then be emblematic of others in a similar position. And I would just like to add on, my friend, Mr. Honner, from The Democracy Fund provided submissions through email. He’s not here. I would just briefly read it in just to provide his perspective as well: “The Democracy Fund submitted that the evidence of these witnesses is relevant to the Commission’s mandate. Specifically, the Commissioner has been directed to examine issues to the extent relating to the efforts of police and other responders prior to and after the declaration. Superintendent Robert Bernier and others testified about the mission statement contained in the OPS Operational Plan of February 13th which speaks to enforcing legislation with the ‘utmost respect to the individual’s Charter of Rights’. There was evidence before the Commission that this plan evolved after the declaration of the Emergencies Act and there was also evidence that the OPS found the powers available to them under the Emergencies Act to be useful. The Commission should hear evidence from these witnesses, as it will speak to how police enforcement was carried out during the state of emergency from a protestor perspective. If there are objections as to relevance as the evidence unfolds, those objections can be dealt with orally. If other witnesses need to be recalled, that decision can be made after the hearing of evidence from the witnesses in question.” (As read) So that was Mr. Honner’s submission, which the Justice Centre also supports.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 79 17-079-16

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Mr. Commissioner, at some point Commission counsel would like to provide some points of context, but if you’re still canvassing, we can wait until that’s done.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 81 17-081-20

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

If I may, Commissioner, Emilie Taman, again, for the record. I just wanted to respond to one point made by my friends regarding the absence of evidence with respect to residents of Ottawa who experienced violence in the convoy and, for the record, would just like to note again that the Ottawa Coalition was very limited in the time that was allocated to tell the story of residents of Ottawa. I would also note that there are many residents who continue to fear for their safety in being identified publicly as opposing the convoy, and with that said, I don’t think it’s appropriate to infer from the lack of evidence on that point that there -- that it didn’t happen. And I would also note in ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 81 17-081-26

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

Well, it ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 82 17-082-14

Emilie Taman, Counsel (Ottawa Coalition of Residents and Businesses)

That’s right. But one of the bases upon which it’s being asserted that it is relevant is that there’s been no evidence in relation to violence experienced by residents. And that’s something that my friend put to Ms. Lich this morning, and also Mr. Miller noted it in his submission to you just now.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 82 17-082-17

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

David Migicovsky for the Ottawa Police. The one point I want to respond to that has not, with respect, been addressed by my friends and which is highly problematic, I suggest, is the convoy lawyer has indicated that he put an issue with respect to an arrest to Chief Bell. And that is correct. However, he provided no information, no details, no indication of who it was, when it was. It came out of the air. And what makes that more problematic is that, obviously, that information was in his possession and there was no documentation provided beforehand. This was sprung after the police witnesses had already testified when we then get these statements. Had the rules been followed, that witness would have seen those statements, would have seen documents. We would have had the opportunity to put in documents and call evidence or asked to call evidence in response. The final point I note is that my -- one of my friends indicated that two of -- that several of the convoy witness -- several of the Coalition’s witnesses testified and that is true. The difference is, the rules were followed and everybody knew before they testified what they were going to say. So the Convoy Organizers had procedural fairness, as did everybody else. In this case, procedural -- there is a serious denial of procedural fairness and that’s what we say must be addressed. Thank you.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 82 17-082-26

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Sorry. I didn’t mean to cut off my friend. This is not a witness. That one was also unfair, but we were at least able to get instructions and able to deal with it in cross-examination.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 84 17-084-06

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

No, I have no objection, by the way, for you reviewing those statements so that you can understand the nature of the evidence.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 84 17-084-15

John Mather, Counsel (POEC)

Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. John Mather, Commission counsel. Just two points of context. Again, we haven’t heard the evidence yet, but Commission counsel expect that while there may be some evidence given about the arrests, that’s not the focus of the -- I don’t expect it to be the focus of the evidence. The two individuals who are being called, Commission counsel understands, participated in the protest both before and after the invocation of the Emergencies Act. They are not individuals, again, as we anticipate, who identify themselves as organizers. To date, the Commission has called individuals who have identified themselves as organizers, and this is a different perspective and one that we anticipate exploring. And then the second point, Mr. Commissioner, is that there has been evidence given by police witnesses about the measured responses in terms of ending the protests in the red zone in Ottawa. These are -- some of these matters have been before the Commission and prior to today without objection.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 84 17-084-20

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Just one more, sir, and I just want to emphasize ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 85 17-085-16

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

I’m not. I’m not going to repeat.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 85 17-085-19

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

I’ll take it back. I’m going to point out that, you know, when it’s with the Commission under the Inquiry Act and its provincial equivalents, it is an inquiry and it has different rules and it’s much more liberal when it comes to the permitting of evidence. And though I understand my friend’s argument, there is many more remedies available for a breach of the rule in Browne and Dunn, if you find that it occurred, than not permitting the evidence. And I would submit simply that the least intrusive remedy in the truth-seeking function of this Commission would be to allow the evidence and on whatever teams you see just. Thank you.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 85 17-085-23

Brendan Miller, Counsel (Freedom Corp / Convoy Organizers)

Sir, I don’t believe the witness chair and desk are set up for two witnesses right now. They’d need to get another mic, as well as another chair.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 89 17-089-10

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Good morning, Mr. Deering, and Ms. Hope Braun. My name is Stephen Armstrong and I’m Commission Counsel. Thank you for coming today. I have 45 minutes to ask you some questions, and because you’re a panel, I’m going to ask questions mostly one at a time. But when I have questions for you as a group -- sorry, you have to be sworn. I forgot about that. I got too eager.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 89 17-089-23

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

So good morning again. As I was just explaining, because it's a panel I'm going to ask questions mostly one at a time, but when I have a question for you as a group, I'll try to make that clear; okay? So I understand, and this is for the panel, I understand that you've both provided statements to your counsel?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 90 17-090-21

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And have you had a chance to review those statements before testifying today?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 91 17-091-01

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And did you want to make any corrections to those statements?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 91 17-091-05

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And so in the interest of time, I'm not going to put them on the screen, but for the record, Mr. Deering's statement is produced at HRF00001598, and Ms. Hope-Braun's statement is produced at HRF00001606. So I just want to ask some questions about your background really quickly. So Mr. Deering, I understand that you're a veteran of the Canadian Armed Forces?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 91 17-091-09

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And you served a tour of duty in Afghanistan.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 91 17-091-18

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And I understand that you were wounded on that tour?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 91 17-091-21

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Can you briefly tell the Commissioner about that event?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 91 17-091-24

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

That's okay, thank you. I also saw, sir, and we'll take a moment, I saw that you're wearing medals?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 92 17-092-07

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Can you just explain what the medals are?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 92 17-092-11

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And I understand now that you're retired from the Canadian Armed Forces?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 92 17-092-18

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And you reside in Hanwell, New Brunswick.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 92 17-092-21

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Thank you. Ms. Hope-Braun, I understand that you're from Peterborough, Ontario?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 92 17-092-24

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And you studied environmental studies at Sandford Fleming College?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 92 17-092-28

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Sir Sandford. And you're a mother to two children?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 93 17-093-04

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Thank you. So if I can ask Mr. Deering, I understand that you travelled to Ottawa to protest with the convoy. What made you want to come to Ottawa and protest?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 93 17-093-07

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And so when you travelled to Ottawa, what did you understand that you were there to protest?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 93 17-093-21

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And why was that important to you?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 93 17-093-26

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

That's okay. I'll ask some questions now to Ms. Hope-Braun. I also understand that you travelled to Ottawa to protest. What made you want to come to Ottawa to protest?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 94 17-094-09

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And so when did you come to Ottawa?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 95 17-095-02

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And can you tell the Commissioner what your experience was with those protests?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 95 17-095-07

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And if I could ask, Mr. Deering, building on that, what was your experience with the protests and how did it compare, how was it similar to or different from Ms. Braun's -- Ms. Hope-Braun's?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 95 17-095-25

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

I was just asking for your experience. And sorry, did you have anything more to add or were you done?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 96 17-096-28

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Please do, yeah.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 97 17-097-08

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And so for the panel, I understand that you both -- you were coming to Ottawa and then going home and coming back. Once the Emergencies Act was invoked, why did you either want to come to Ottawa or remain in Ottawa?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 97 17-097-25

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Ms. Hope-Braun?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 98 17-098-11

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

So after the Emergencies Act was invoked, why did you want to come back to Ottawa or remain in Ottawa if you were already there?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 98 17-098-14

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And so building on that, Ms. Hope-Braun, once the Emergencies Act was invoked, what was your understanding of your ability to lawfully protest in the downtown area?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 99 17-099-08

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Well, that’s okay. We can come back to it. I’ll just ask Mr. Deering, what was your understanding once the Emergencies Act was invoked, of your ability to lawfully protest in the downtown area?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 99 17-099-17

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And so Mr. Deering, I understand that on February 18th, 2022, you were in Ottawa protesting as well; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 99 17-099-28

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Where were you staying in Ottawa that day at that time?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 100 17-100-04

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Do you recall where on Bank Street you parked?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 100 17-100-20

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Was it in the downtown area?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 100 17-100-23

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And so you -- when you drove in, did you pass any police checkpoints or anything like that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 100 17-100-26

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Ms. Hope-Braun, I understand that you were in Ottawa protesting on February 19th. That’s correct.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 101 17-101-02

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Where were you staying at the time or how did you -- how did you find yourself in Ottawa?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 101 17-101-06

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And when did you begin staying in that hotel?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 101 17-101-11

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And Mr. Deering, on the 18th -- and I’m going to stick with you for a few questions. On the 18th, where was the protest that I understand you participated in? Do you recall where in the downtown it was?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 101 17-101-16

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And why did you want to do that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 102 17-102-03

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Were you told at any time or informed at any time that you couldn’t be there or it was unlawful for you to be there?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 102 17-102-10

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And I understand that you were arrested on the 18th. Is that correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 102 17-102-14

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Can you -- can you tell us briefly how you came to be arrested?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 102 17-102-17

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Just asking about how you came to be arrested.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 103 17-103-03

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Take your time.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 104 17-104-23

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

It's okay, Mr. Deering. Your statement is in the record, so if I could actually move you back in time. What were you and your group doing just before you were arrested? What activity were you taking part in?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 104 17-104-25

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And at any time, either before you were arrested or after, were you given the option to go to another place in Ottawa to protest?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 105 17-105-08

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. Ms. Hope-Braun, I think as we said earlier, I understand you were protesting on February 19th ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 105 17-105-12

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

--- in Ottawa? Where was that protest that you participated in?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 105 17-105-16

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And were you told before, or any point that day, or before or after your arrest that you were not allowed to be where you were?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 105 17-105-26

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

What gave you the sense that you weren't welcome there?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 106 17-106-06

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And either before or after your arrest, were you given the opportunity or were you told about any kind of place you could go in Ottawa to peacefully protest?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 106 17-106-15

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And how did you come to be arrested? Can you tell us about that?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 106 17-106-28

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And just coming back to Mr. Deering, you had mentioned just before your arrest, you'd said something about an unlawful order. I just wanted you to clarify what you -- what were you referring to? What was the unlawful order? Take your time.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 107 17-107-22

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Sorry?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 107 17-107-28

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

You had mentioned an unlawful order, and I just wanted you to clarify what you were referring to.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 108 17-108-03

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

So I think the context was I had asked you why you were there and you said that you were there -- well, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I understood it to be sort of in defiance of an unlawful order, or you weren’t leaving because of an unlawful order?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 108 17-108-08

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And what is the mandate?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 108 17-108-17

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And for the panel, can you just tell us what was the impact (indiscernible)

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 108 17-108-20

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

We’ll put it that what was the impact of these events?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 108 17-108-24

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

On you personally.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 108 17-108-28

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Sorry; on -- the events in Ottawa.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 109 17-109-02

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 109 17-109-28

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

And Mr. Deering did you, did you want to answer that as well?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 110 17-110-02

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

I’m wondering what the impact of your experience in Ottawa was and how it ended on you as a person?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 110 17-110-06

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Yes, Ms. Hope-Braun?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 110 17-110-19

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Okay. And I’d just like to close out with the panel. I’m going to ask both of you -- let’s start with Ms. Hope-Braun; is there anything that I didn’t ask you about that you wanted to say, that we didn’t get to talk about?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 110 17-110-26

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Mr. Deering?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 111 17-111-05

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

Thank you. Those are all my questions.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 111 17-111-14

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

David Migicovsky; I’m counsel for the Ottawa Police. Good afternoon, Mr. Deering. Good afternoon, Ms. Hope-Braun.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 111 17-111-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Mr. Deering, you were looking at a statement that you had in front of you and that’s the document that’s called, “Canada Freedom Rights Movement Statement - Chris Deering”?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 111 17-111-27

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You have a document in front of you ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 112 17-112-05

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Sure. I just want to see what those notes are. Is it the same as your statement that you were referring to?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 112 17-112-10

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Or is that still -- okay.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 112 17-112-14

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. And so what it is, it’s a document -- we can put it up on the screen, but I think that you have it in front of you. It’s called, “Canada Freedom Rights Movement Statement of Chris Deering,” is that right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 112 17-112-16

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Sure. Have a look at it, and tell me what it says, or if you want to show it to me?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 112 17-112-22

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Sure. It’s called, “Canada Freedom Rights Movement Statement of Chris Deering.” Perhaps we can put it up on the screen so you can ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 112 17-112-26

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Sure, we’ll do that. I can’t recall the number, but I believe ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 113 17-113-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Thank you. If you could just put that up so that Mr. Deering could see it? (SHORT PAUSE)

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 113 17-113-07

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Is that what you had in front of you?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 113 17-113-10

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So sorry; did you have something else with you?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 113 17-113-14

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

These are notes that you made; when?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 113 17-113-18

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. Perhaps those notes can be filed at some point as well. Those are not notes you made at the time of these incidents, right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 113 17-113-22

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. I didn’t realize, I thought you had your statement in front of you when you were testifying, but you had some other notes?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 113 17-113-28

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. Ms. Hope-Braun, I believe your statement also says at the top of it, “Canada Freedom Rights Movement Statement”; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 114 17-114-04

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Perhaps we could call up Ms. Braun’s statement ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 114 17-114-10

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

That’s your statement as well; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 114 17-114-18

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so those statements say at the top, “Canada Freedom Rights Movement Statements”; who put that on them?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 114 17-114-21

Stephen Armstrong, Counsel (POEC)

I, if I can answer ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 114 17-114-26

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You don’t know?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 115 17-115-02

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Those would be the convoy organizer lawyer?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 115 17-115-05

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Okay. It wasn’t any of the people at this table, was it?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 115 17-115-08

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 115 17-115-13

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Who gave you the statement?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 115 17-115-15

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Who prepared this statement, ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 115 17-115-18

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

--- typed it up and gave it to you?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 115 17-115-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. And so one of the Justice Centre’s lawyers prepared this statement and sent it to you; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 115 17-115-25

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And then they gave it to you, and they typed on it, “Canada Freedom Rights Movement Statement of Chris Deering and of Maggie Dingman,” the original ones that -- correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 116 17-116-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. And that's the same heading that we see on the statements of Tom Marazzo, Canada Freedom Rights Movements. But you don't know what that means.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 116 17-116-11

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

See, what I'm trying to figure out is every -- most of the other witnesses here were interviewed by the Commission and then we have statements that are on Public Order Emergency Commission letterhead.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 116 17-116-20

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You were not interviewed by the Commission's lawyers to prepare those statements; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 116 17-116-25

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

These -- you don't remember. And how about you, Mr. Deering?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 117 17-117-03

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And neither one of you have criminal charges against you; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 117 17-117-10

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so you told your story to a -- one of the convoy organiser lawyers; is that right?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 117 17-117-14

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

The Justice Centre, I apologise.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 117 17-117-18

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And neither one of you, as I understand it, has filed a complaint with the Ottawa Police Service about your arrest.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 117 17-117-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And neither one of you has contacted the Crown to say, "Hey, excessive force was used with me"?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 117 17-117-26

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And complaints against the police can be filed with an office, a government office called the Office of the Independent Police Review Directorate, or IPRD. Neither one of you filed a complaint with them; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 118 17-118-09

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And the SIU, that's the Special Investigations Unit, you can investigate situations in someone -- in which someone says they have been seriously injured by the actions of the police. And so I just want to be clear, there haven't been any complaints or investigations by the SIU have there?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 118 17-118-16

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And I understand, Mr. Deering, that you have some notes, and you're going to share those notes with me; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 118 17-118-25

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Sure. And I understand, Ms. Hope-Braun, you do not have any notes?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 119 17-119-01

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you haven't filed any notes with your lawyers or the Justice Centre, lawyers?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 119 17-119-04

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And I didn't see that trauma specialist note ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 119 17-119-11

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

--- in the database, but perhaps I missed ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 119 17-119-14

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

It wasn't.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 119 17-119-18

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So you did not give any documentation.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 119 17-119-20

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Mr. Deering, I understand from your evidence that you were in Ottawa on February 11th and then returned on the evening of the 17th and 18th?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 119 17-119-23

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And at that point the Emergencies Act had been passed; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 119 17-119-27

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And there was an exclusion zone. You knew that; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 120 17-120-02

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You did?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 120 17-120-05

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you knew what the newspapers were telling people, not to go there unless you have an exemption ---

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 120 17-120-07

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I'm sorry?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 120 17-120-12

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And none of the sources on which you get information were telling you don't go into that zone.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 120 17-120-16

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I'm sorry?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 120 17-120-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Yeah. None of the sources from which you get information were telling you don't go in that zone?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 120 17-120-24

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

That's okay. Ms. Hope-Braun, you presumably knew that you were told not to go into that area unless you had specific reasons to be there?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 121 17-121-01

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

It wasn't -- you didn't turn on the radio, you didn't read any social media, you didn't go on Facebook?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 121 17-121-07

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 121 17-121-12

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you knew that the Emergencies Act had been passed?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 121 17-121-15

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

What day were you arrested?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 121 17-121-20

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Yeah. The Emergencies Act had passed.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 121 17-121-23

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so both of you, you were in the area, you did not live in the area, you were not on your way to an appointment; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 121 17-121-27

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you both, I believe, fell to your knees and refused to move while the police operation was being carried out; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 122 17-122-05

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I'm sorry, I didn't hear you. I apologise.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 122 17-122-10

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. You were on your knees and you refused to move.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 122 17-122-15

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And Mr. Deering, you indicated that one of the police officers even told you to hide.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 122 17-122-19

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So he gave you some advice, and in spite of that you stayed there.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 122 17-122-22

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And in fact, you wanted -- you believed as a veteran you should put yourself in the way of other protesters because veterans are better able to withstand what was about to come you said?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 122 17-122-25

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

I'm sorry.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 123 17-123-06

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And you were on the road, Mr. Deering; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 123 17-123-08

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Yes.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 123 17-123-11

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

You were on the road when you were arrested?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 123 17-123-14

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Yes.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 123 17-123-17

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

And so were you, Ms. Hope- Braun, weren't you?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 123 17-123-21

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right. And so you understand you're obstructing a roadway; correct? (LAUGHTER/RIRES)

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 123 17-123-25

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

So everyone, all of the protesters who were arrested were obstructing a roadway; correct?

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 124 17-124-07

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Yeah.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 124 17-124-12

David Migicovsky, Counsel (Ott-OPS)

Right.

Volume 17 (November 4, 2022), page 124 17-124-15