Pat King to be re-sentenced for intimidation after losing appeal

Article content

Crown prosecutors had argued at his trial that King had “both participated in and encouraged the blocking or obstruction of highways, and that he did so wrongfully and without lawful authority.”

Article content

Hackland rejected the Crown’s argument and found that the elements of intimidation had not been proven.

Article content

The trial judge found that King did not act wrongly by participating in the convoy “since a lawful protest is a Charter-protected activity.”

Article content

Hackland had also concluded that when King obstructed a highway “in the course of an otherwise lawful demonstration intended to protest government policy and not to intimidate individuals, in the absence of threats and acts of violence… he should not be convicted of the offence of intimidation.”

Article content

The Court of Appeal said it was persuaded that those conclusions were incorrect.

Article content

“These errors appear to have arisen from the trial judge’s well-intentioned effort to interpret the law to accommodate political protest, but the outcome he achieved cannot be sustained as a matter of law,” the panel concluded.

Article content

The appeals panel said that since it had substituted a conviction on the count of intimidation, the matter would be sent back to the Superior Court of Justice in Ottawa for a new judge to determine a “fit and appropriate” sentence.

Article content

Article content

Hackland, who has since retired from the bench, had imposed a lenient sentence and “expressed a concern that too harsh a sentence could chill legitimate political expression,” the panel wrote.

Article content

“We agree that caution is warranted when sentencing individuals for conduct that could potentially fall within a constitutional zone of protection,” the panel wrote. “However, the conduct in this case far exceeded the bounds of legitimate expression. This was not a peaceful protest that ‘unfortunately grew out of control and was allowed to go on and on and morphed into criminal activity,’ as the trial judge suggested in his sentencing reasons.

Article content

“Rather, this was, from the outset, a coordinated, targeted attack on Ottawa residents aimed at coercing change through highly disruptive criminal conduct.”

Article content

Before the convoy had even arrived in Ottawa in late January 2022, the panel wrote, there was evidence that King “planned to effect an occupation, gridlock the area and cause acute distress to residents, merchants and workers through the continuous honking of truck horns and other disruptive activities.”

Article content

King “not only incited these activities, he instructed his followers to resist police and ignore court-ordered injunctions,” the panel concluded.

Article content

King read the decision to his followers live on his YouTube channel after it was published Friday and said he now has 60 days to take his appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Article content

“I do not have the money to fight this in the Supreme Court,” he said. “I do not have the funds, period. I may just take my licks and go to (jail).”

Article content