(Lethbridge) Chris Carbert’s defence lawyer told a jury Tuesday that her client is a “slightly crazy” man who fell into a conspiracy spiral by driving to the border checkpoint in Coutts, Alta., but that doesn’t make him guilty of conspiring to kill police officers.
In her closing address to the jury on Tuesday, Katherin Beyak said Mr. Carbert was guilty of mischief but not of the other charges of conspiracy to commit murder and possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose.
“He is guilty of mischief. As for the allegations that Chris agreed to murder police officers while he was at Coutts, I urge you to conclude that he is not guilty.”
Me Beyak said his client spent so much time on the Internet that he came to believe that society was broken, that the world was headed for an economic downturn and, eventually, civil war.
“He went down a rabbit hole and ended up saying something stupid,” she argued. “If there was a conspiracy, Chris wasn’t part of it. He was a little crazy, but he had no plan to kill police officers.”
Chris Carbert and Anthony Olienik are charged with conspiracy to murder police officers after a cache of firearms, body armour and ammunition was found in trailers parked in Coutts in early 2022 during a blockade protesting health restrictions imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Jurors have been hearing evidence for seven weeks in the case.
Mr. Olienick never testified at trial, but Mr. Carbert took the stand in his own defense and was questioned about text messages and statements he made to relatives.
A text message to his mother read: “Mom, I’m fine. If they start violence, I’m just telling you there will be war and war victims.”
His message also read: “I don’t think you really understand what this is about. If we lose here, I’ll probably die in the war.”
Mr Carbert also called the police “losers” and “the enemy”.
On the witness stand, he characterized his statements as reactionary and impulsive, and as not reflecting his genuine respect for the police, whom he described as “a kind of hero in Western culture.”
No innocent explanation
In his closing argument, Crown prosecutor Matt Dalidowicz argued there was no innocent explanation for what either man claimed to have done to Coutts.
He argued that those protesting had reached a breaking point with COVID-19 restrictions and saw Coutts as a turning point that could not fail.
“They would be the sheepdogs that would protect the flock and if the police decided to apply the law to break the blockade, they would come up against a stronger force,” Mr.e Dalidowicz.
“They brought weapons, ammunition and bulletproof vests into the heart of the blockade. They planned and prepared it. They wanted to kill police officers if the police enforced the law to end the blockade.”
Deceived by undercover policewomen, according to the lawyer of an accused
Earlier Tuesday, Anthony Olienick’s lawyer said he went to the Coutts, Alta., border crossing to make a peaceful statement but was ultimately cornered by female RCMP officers who flirted with him and lied to him.
In her closing argument, Marilyn Burns said Mr. Olienick was the victim of a “disastrous police operation.”
Three undercover policewomen at the protest testified that Mr. Olienick told them the blockade was the fight of his life.
They reported that the accused viewed the police as docile pawns of “evil” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and that he had vowed to slit the throats of officers if they stormed the barricades.
Me Burns urged jurors to disregard the testimony of the undercover officers, calling it riddled with lies. “The undercover officers freely admit that they are trained to lie,” Ms.e Burns.
“I would say it was painfully evident during the trial,” she added.
Me Burns had previously accused a female officer of flirting with Mr. Olienick to obtain information while she was undercover, a practice that allegedly violated legal and ethical rules.
The lawyer noted that the officer sent Mr. Olienick text messages with heart emojis.e Burns pointed out that the hearts suggested affection, but the officer replied that they were meant to show approval of the message, not the messenger.
Me Burns also disputed the allegation that Anthony Olienick and Chris Carbert conspired together, saying the former was only a casual acquaintance of the latter.
“The two men sitting across from you should not be together,” the lawyer said.
“With whom did Mr. Olienick conspire to murder police officers? The answer is no one.”
Jurors are expected to begin deliberations Wednesday.
Mr. Carbert and Mr. Olienick are also charged with mischief and possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose. Anthony Olienick also faces an additional charge of possession of a pipe bomb.