LIVE UPDATES: Jury expected to receive instructions in trial of three alleged leaders of Coutts border protest
The jury is set to return to the courtoom today in Lethbridge to receive instructions from Justice Yamauchi before deliberating on a verdict.
The trial for Alex Van Herk, Marco Van Huigenbos, and George Janzen continues today in Lethbridge, Alberta. The three men are each being charged with mischief over $5000 and facing up to 10 years in prison for allegedly being "key participants" of the 2022 Coutts border blockade.
Yesterday's proceedings focused on the prosecution and defence teams offering requests and suggestions to Justice Yamauchi regarding the instructions that will be provided to the jury.
The jury is expected to return to the courtroom during today's proceedings to receive their instructions from the judge before convening to deliberate on a verdict.
The 18-day Coutts demonstration saw dozens of protesters unite in opposition to government-imposed COVID-19 restrictions in early 2022 near the border of Coutts, Alberta and Sweet Grass, Montana.
Rebel News reporter Robert Kraychik is on the ground at the Lethbridge courthouse, providing independent reporting on the trial of the Coutts Three.
Follow along below for live updates from the trial:
What's in question, the judge notes, is whether or not the Coutts Three defenants are guilty of having blocked the road with vehicles or anything else. https://t.co/KGVQVAKLQo
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Justice Keith Yamauchi tells the jury that the criminality of the Coutts blockade isn't in dispute; obstructing traffic on a public road without legitimate cause is unlawful. He says it's factual that at times between Jan. 29 and Feb. 15, 2022, Highway 1 to Coutts was blocked.
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Justice Keith Yamauchi, the presiding judge in the Coutts Three trial, has a genuine and good faith passion and commensurate competence for the law and justice system. It's unmistakable. He's a former defense attorney, unlike most other judges. https://t.co/mIhJKvFSf6
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Intentionally or otherwise, the judge's instructions to the jury on this amounts to a rebuke of the Crown's allegation that the Coutts Three committed the crime of counseling others to mischief, as zero evidence of this counseling was provided. https://t.co/LNZIIEj8BC
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Counseling others to mischief requires specific statements/communications to encourage, induce, promote others to commit mischief. https://t.co/uJqns1g0AQ
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Justice Keith Yamauchi tells the jury that saying or doing things that motivate others to commit mischief does NOT, in and of itself, amount to commission of the crime of counseling others to mischief. https://t.co/mIhJKvFSf6
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Yamauchi explains that mischief is the willful obstruction of the lawful use, enjoyment, or operation of property. He's describing the conduct of federal/provincial governments via the COVID-19 Enterprise, blocking our access to private and public property without due process.
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
The federal government did everything Justice Keith Yamauchi explains in the charge of mischief as it applies to the defendants, i.e. unlawful restriction of enjoyment of property around and across the Canada-U.S. Coutts-Sweetgrass border crossing. https://t.co/LNZIIEj8BC
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
...the value of witness testimony, i.e. Does the witness have some vested interest in trial's outcome? Does the witness's memory seem intact/clear? Does the witness seem honest? He jurors to use "common sense" in evaluating witness credibility/reliability. https://t.co/LNZIIEjGra
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
... formula for determining a witness's reliability or credibility. He advises jurors to do what they would do in other situations in their lives in evaluating the reliability or credibility or witnesses. He offers a series of questions they might ask themselves to evaluate...
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Justice Keith Yamauchi begins his instructions for the jury with important general information for all juries; the Crown has the burden of proof to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the presumption of innocence on behalf of the defendants, that there is no perfect...
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
I know Steven Johnston has been subjected to some jeering and verbal harassment from one obnoxious observer in the Chris Carbert and Anthony Olienick trial (a senior white man in his 50s/60s who was subsequently barred from the courtroom. https://t.co/H2kqcMsbsw
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Prosecutor Steven Johnston has a police officer escort with him during breaks from proceedings today. He has expressed concerns for his safety amongst the types of people who tend to attend the Coutts Three and Chris Carbert/Anthony Olienick trials. https://t.co/LNZIIEjGra
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
"There's a certain peace to all of this. A court of law may find us guilty in relation to our actions, but we had an obligation as Albertans, as Canadians, to stand up to government when government goes rogue, and no court of law will change that." @marco_huigenbos pic.twitter.com/q4bVKzLbQR
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Prosecutor Steven Johnston repeatedly told the jury that "three Ds" define the defendants' conduct: "demand, direct, disrupt". Alex Van Herk's lawyer Michael Johnston tells jurors that the true "three Ds" are "discontent, disorganization, and divergence". https://t.co/mIhJKvFSf6
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Michael Johnston plays video or the jury of his client, @alexvanherk, repeatedly calling on Coutts protesters to remain peaceful ("Our God is peaceful"), and that they "will win this war" with "love and peace". https://t.co/LNZIIEj8BC
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Michael Johnston plays video of his client, Alex Van Herk, disagreeing with his own brother over how to proceed with the Coutts protest while they're both using pronouns like "we", describing prosecutor Steven Johnston's argument below as "word games". https://t.co/bZ8TsxCueN
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Johnston reminds the jury that they observed videos in which Alex Van Herk and George Janzen had spirited disagreement over ending vs. continuing with the Coutts demonstration as the two were expecting SWAT-style cops to forcefully put down the protest. https://t.co/UXepsTTy7w
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Michael Johnston, Alex Van Herk's defense lawyer, says prosecutor Steven Johnston "perhaps indelicately" conflated the three defendants as a group while reminding jurors that "painting the case with one brush" is too broad given differences between the defendants' conduct.
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
George Janzen's defense counsel, Alan Honner, reminds the jury that two Crown witnesses, RCMP officers who liased with the Coutts protesters, testified that they did not observe clear evidence of the defendants being leaders of the protesters. https://t.co/mIhJKvGq4E
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Alan Honner, @TDF_Can lawyer representing George Janzen, reminds jurors in his closing remarks that Crown witnesses and RCMP officers Mark Wielgosz and Greg Tulloch both testified to his client's "useful" and "compassionate" acts during the Coutts protest. https://t.co/LNZIIEjGra
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Ryan Durran, Marco Van Huigenbos's lawyer, also reminded jurors that the very governmentally-imposed mandates (ostensibly for "public health") being protested against at the Coutts demonstration have since been ended, urging the jurors to "send Marco home" and acquit his client.
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Offering predictions (or guarantees, even) of what will happen in the event of this or that occurrence isn't even close to the same thing as advising/urging/encouraging others to commit criminal acts. https://t.co/mIhJKvFSf6
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Lack of English-language proficiency is required to accept this argument, as counseling others to commit a crime means the accused directly communicated encouragement to another person towards commission of some criminal act. https://t.co/dBS7RAnqK7 https://t.co/mIhJKvFSf6
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Prosecutor Steven Johnston also argued that the defendants' claims - both to RCMP officers and the broader public - that they would do this or that (i.e. block the highway) - is evidence of "counseling" others towards the commission of criminal mischief. https://t.co/LNZIIEj8BC
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Ryan Durran, Marco Van Huigenbos's defense counsel, began his closing remarks by reminding the jury - and emphasizing - that the burden of proof lies on the Crown to demonstrate guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. He reiterates the presumption of innocence for the accused.
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
"He didn't start it. He didn't control it. He didn't end it," lawyer Ryan Durran says of his client, Marco Van Huigenbos, in closing arguments to the jury. The Crown has alleged the Van Huigenbos, Van Herk, and Janzen did all three of these acts. https://t.co/LNZIIEj8BC
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
If I ever use the pronouns "we", "our", or "us" in reference to Rebel News, is that indicative of my leadership control over the company and my colleagues? It's a really dumb argument. https://t.co/P5jYVWJ1mw https://t.co/mIhJKvFSf6
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
"There's a certain peace of all of this ... A court of law may find us guilty in relation to our actions, but we had an obligation as Albertsons, as Canadians, to stand up to government when government goes rogue, and no court of law will change that." @marco_huigenbos pic.twitter.com/awKiDtdjA9
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
This is a prima facie absurd argument, given that it's standard fare for all kinds of people in all kinds of situations to use these pluralized pronouns in reference to groups over which they do not exert control. https://t.co/P5jYVWJ1mw https://t.co/LNZIIEj8BC
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Prosecutor Steven Johnston, in closing arguments, told the jury that the defendants' repeated use of the pronouns "we", "us", and "our" in regards to the Coutts protesters is indicative of his claim that they held leadership control over the demonstration. https://t.co/LNZIIEj8BC
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
This was said in response to the Crown's allegation that Van Huigenbos held leadership control over the Coutts protesters. Durran says his client was a messenger, not a controller, for the protest (echoing a former RCMP officer's testimony). https://t.co/tliUKsqypu
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
"You might as well blame the newsman for giving you news you dislike", Ryan Durran, defense counsel for Marco Van Huigenbos, tells the jury about his client's delivery of information - liaising - with RCMP officers. https://t.co/LNZIIEj8BC
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
I wish I could take photographs/videos to share, but all recording is prohibited across the entire courthouse (an absurd rule that's also in place in the Ottawa Courthouse). https://t.co/hgspaAdGr6 https://t.co/mIhJKvGq4E
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Courtroom is absolutely PACKED. There's even a few news media people here in the "accredited media" benches alongside me. The Coutts Three defendants have many supporters of high quality and character, which I think is a testament to them as men. https://t.co/LNZIIEjGra
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
Big day ahead in the Coutts Three trial in Lethbridge, AB. The jury is expected to to receive ita instructions from Justice Keith Yamauchi ahead of its retirement for deliberations to render verdicts. https://t.co/LNZIIEjGra pic.twitter.com/5qTCL0FEjH
— Robert Kraychik (@rkraychik) April 16, 2024
McGill Islamic studies prof allegedly seen giving speech at anti-Israel tent city protest
By Roberto Wakerell-Cruz
Don't Get Censored
Big Tech is censoring us. Sign up so we can always stay in touch.