London Ontario: 2 speeches, 1 charge each
on or about the 22nd of November in the year 2020 at the City of London in the County of Middlesex did commit the offence of fail to comply with a continued order originally made under subsection 7.0.2 of the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act during the COVID-19 Emergency, specifically, O.Reg 364/20, contrary to Section 10, subsection 1, clause a of the Reopening Ontario (A Flexible Response to COVID-19) Act.
Issued December 31, 2020.
Original court date was Feb 22, 2021
January 27 2022:
Carnegie (Prosecution) said that these charges need to be streamlined and narrowed down. He is looking to prosecute organizers and had no evidence that I was an organizer on this matter so it’s not in the public’s interest to proceed. My charge for speaking in November 2020 in London Ontario is marked as withdrawn at the request of the prosecution.
As far as it goes for organizers: our lawyer Mr. Abrie Kilian (who is working with the Constitutional Rights Centre) outlined that it is very clear from the witness documents that the police gave permission for the rally. The police said that “not limiting your Charter Rights to have a protest” they advised them to keep it in the park. They approved the peaceful protest and then fined them afterwards. It’s ridiculous. It’s like giving permission for a child to have a candy and then punishing them when they eat it.
It appears that the matter is not trial ready or that the prosecution doesn’t actually have a case. Mr. Kilian and Carnegie will have further discussion together outside of court.
Carnegie reiterates that they are looking to streamline things.
Court will resume in March concerning this rally, without me.
November 25 2021:
Adjourned last time to ensure all disclosure was provided. It has. Council has reviewed it. Matters moving to trial. Main challenge will be the constitutionality of the sections of the reopening Ontario act that led to these charges.
Agreed statement of facts to be done in future. Setting these facts and constitutionality means it’s going to be a longer trial.
Judge not prepared to move this to trial when there is ability to narrow down issues.
Crown to draft statement of facts.
Judge understands the importance of constitutionality.
Adjourned until January 27 2022, 1PM
This is a date ‘to be spoken to’. Which means, to see progress – has there been an agreed statement of facts and if ready to set a trial date and then to decide how many days are needed for trial.
Oct. 28 2021:
Judicial Pre-Trial meeting number 3 scheduled with the crown for Nov 25, 2021 at 12PM.
Sept. 16 2021:
Judicial Pre-Trial meeting number 2 scheduled with the crown for Oct 28 2021, 12:30PM.
Pleading: not guilty.
There are some evidential hurdles… and of course there are Constitutional issues in which we take the position that public gatherings do not include Constitutionally protected gatherings such as freedom of expression, and assembly, and protest. Rocco Galati will be having discussions with Carnegie, Crown Attorney.
July 6 2021:
Date set for Judicial Pre-Trial meeting with the crown where we may be able to come to a mutual resolution, and discuss what the terms of that would look like without you having to go through a full trial. September 16, 10AM. Had junior lawyer call in for me. I’m very thankful for all of her help!
Rocco Galati’s office called and it was adjourned to July 6th 10AM. They are going to reach out to the prosecuting crown to get a pre-trial.
Fail to comply with continued section 7.0.2 Order. To Wit: Participate in a public event or other gathering at residential premises or other prescribed premises in excess of 100 participants within the stage of O. Reg 364/20 contrary to Re-Opening Ontario Act section 10 (1).
Issued March 30, 2021.
Original court date was June 7, 2021.
April 13, 2022: Found out the charge is lost. Completely disappeared. So this one is gone.
MOVED TO TRIAL.
>> It’s January 27, 2022 and I still haven’t heard from them since.
August 16, 2021 at 9am:
July 19, 2021: second appearance
Junior lawyer has spoken to the prosecutor about a possible resolution without extending it to trial.The matter is returnable on August 16th at 9am, and between now and then there will be discussions with the prosecutor.
If they find a resolution I am agreeable to then we can go for that, and if not, then we can go for trial. She wants to be sure I know all of the possible resolutions available and will update me when she hears back from the prosecutor on those options.
I am willing of course to try and set precedent so that we can start to end these unlawful and unnecessary covid restrictions. If you would like to support me, please donate to the Constitutional Rights Centre.
If it looks good to have a mom in jail for trying to provide a vibrant and rich environment for her children to live in, then so be it.
I hope the judge has listened to my speeches.
June 7 2021: first appearance
For some reason this is municipal court. Disclosure should be sent within a few days. It was adjourned and the second appearance will be July 19 at 9AM.