Protest Government Overreach, Get Prosecutor Overreach
The hounding of non-violent Freedom Convoy protesters via the courts.
Yesterday, while attending the trial of Nova Scotia trucker Guy Meister in Ottawa, I witnessed crown attorney Moiz Karimjee in action. In May 2022, he tried to have Tamara Lich thrown in jail. Her crime? Accepting that year’s George Jonas Freedom Award.
This man - who earns gobs of taxpayer cash (in excess of $200k annually since 2015) spent untold hours of his highly-paid time filing an application that argued that receiving an award named after a famous journalist amounted to a grave violation of Tamara’s bail conditions.
In that instance, he failed. But two months later, he successfully had her re-arrested. At his behest, Ottawa police officers went to the trouble and expense of travelling to Medicine Hat, Alberta to drag her back to an Ottawa jail cell. Over an alleged bail violation. Experienced police and parole officers I’ve spoken to say this is highly atypical - even for violent offenders with lengthy criminal records.
During the legal wrangling that followed, Mr Karimjee said Tamara had flagrantly broken the rules by briefly interacting with fellow Freedom Convoy spokesperson Tom Marazzo at the George Jonas award ceremony held in Toronto.
I’ll tell you more about Mr Karimjee’s antics soon. In the meantime, Grok provides additional info. Bold added by me:
Tamara Lich’s lawyer, Lawrence Greenspon, referenced an email during a court hearing on July 5, 2022…indicating that the Crown had initially sought an Ontario-wide warrant for her arrest before expanding it to a Canada-wide warrant. This was in relation to her re-arrest on June 27, 2022, in Medicine Hat, Alberta, for allegedly breaching her bail conditions by interacting with Tom Marazzo at a Toronto gala on June 16, 2022. The email’s existence and contents were raised as part of Greenspon’s argument that the Crown’s response…was disproportionate, suggesting a judicial referral hearing or lesser measure could have sufficed instead of what he called an "unprecedented" escalation.
The specific details of this email, such as its exact wording, sender, recipient, and date, are not fully disclosed in public records because it was cited in courtroom arguments rather than published as an exhibit. However, its mention is documented in media coverage of the hearing. For instance, a Global News article from July 5, 2022, titled "Tamara Lich breached conditions by appearing with fellow convoy leader: Crown," notes Greenspon’s assertion: "The matter should have been brought to a judicial referral hearing or some other recourse rather than the Canada-wide warrant that has led to Lich being detained for nine days, he said, noting an email showing the Crown sought the expansion from an initial Ontario-wide warrant." Similarly, The Globe and Mail’s July 5, 2022, report confirms Greenspon highlighted this email to argue the Crown’s actions were excessive.
The implication is that the Crown, led by Assistant Crown Attorney Moiz Karimjee, initially considered a warrant limited to Ontario—where the alleged breach occurred—but then pursued a broader Canada-wide warrant, enabling Lich’s arrest in Alberta. This escalation likely required approval from a justice of the peace or judge, as per Section 703 of the Criminal Code of Canada, which governs the issuance of Canada-wide warrants for indictable offenses or breaches of release conditions when the accused is believed to be outside the province. Greenspon’s point was that this expansion amplified the severity of the response, leading to Lich being "shackled, hauled halfway across the country," as he later reiterated outside court in October 2023 when the breach charge was stayed.
While the email itself isn’t publicly available, its role in the narrative underscores a defense critique of prosecutorial overreach. The Crown’s perspective, as argued by Karimjee, was that Lich’s actions at the gala constituted a "flagrant" breach justifying detention, a stance that didn’t directly address the warrant’s scope in reported statements but focused on the breach’s severity. Justice of the Peace Paul Harris upheld the Crown’s position on July 8, 2022, revoking Lich’s bail, though Justice Andrew Goodman later overturned this on July 26, 2022, finding the breach evidence "tenuous."
In summary, the email Greenspon cited suggests the Crown deliberately widened the warrant’s geographic scope from Ontario to Canada-wide, a tactical shift that facilitated Lich’s arrest in Medicine Hat and her transport back to Ottawa by Ottawa Police Service officers. This detail bolsters the defense’s contention that the process was punitive, though without the email’s text, its full context remains inferred from courtroom reporting and legal outcomes.
Here’s Grok’s summary of the judge’s ruling that freed Tamara:
Tamara Lich was released from jail on July 26, 2022, following a bail review by Ontario Superior Court Justice Andrew Goodman. This release came after she was detained for allegedly breaching her bail conditions by interacting with Tom Marazzo at a gala in Toronto on June 16, 2022. Justice Goodman's reasoning for releasing her centered on several key points:
Tenuous Nature of the Breach: Goodman found the evidence of the alleged breach—Lich posing for a photo and having a brief exchange with Marazzo—to be "tenuous." He noted that the interaction was minimal and did not clearly violate the intent of her bail conditions, which allowed communication with co-organizers in the presence of counsel. He suggested that this matter was better suited for exploration at trial rather than justifying detention at the bail stage.
Errors in the Lower Court Decision: Goodman identified "errors of law" in the earlier ruling by Justice of the Peace Paul Harris, who had revoked Lich’s bail on July 8, 2022. Harris had called Lich’s interpretation of her non-contact order "absolutely ridiculous" and deemed the breach significant, but Goodman disagreed, finding Harris’s conclusions overstated and improperly focused on trial-level determinations rather than bail considerations.
Low Risk to the Community: Goodman emphasized that Lich posed a low risk of reoffending or endangering the community. He pointed out her lack of a criminal record and the non-violent nature of the charges (mischief-related offenses tied to the Freedom Convoy protests). He stated, “The likelihood to re-offend and the risk to the community remains low,” and noted that she had largely complied with her conditions apart from the disputed incident.
Disproportionate Detention: The judge highlighted that Lich had already spent 49 days in jail across her detentions, which he considered excessive for the charges she faced. He remarked that even for more serious offenses, accused individuals are often granted bail, and he found it "highly unlikely" that Lich would face significant imprisonment if convicted, given the nature of the charges.
Judicial Caution Against Overreach: Goodman stressed that bail hearings should not preempt trial outcomes. He criticized Harris for stepping into the role of a trial judge by making definitive judgments about the breach, stating, “The Justice must be careful not to play the role of trial judge or jury (during the bail phase).”
In releasing her, Goodman maintained most of her existing bail conditions but clarified the non-communication order to explicitly allow exceptions "in the presence of defence counsel or civil legal counsel," ensuring she could avoid similar disputes moving forward. He also cautioned Lich to strictly adhere to these conditions, noting the Crown’s evident scrutiny of her actions. This reasoning reflects a balance between upholding public confidence in the justice system and recognizing Lich’s rights as an accused person yet to be convicted.
Proving once again, that snakes wear suits.