Trucks block the highway outside Coutts, Alta. blocking the U.S. border during protests on Feb. 2, 2022.Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press
The Crown argued Friday that two men found guilty of mischief and weapons charges during the 2022 border blockade in southern Alberta should serve nine years behind bars, while defence lawyers said their clients should be released with time served.
A jury found Anthony Olienick and Chris Carbert guilty of mischief over $5,000 and possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose earlier this month after a two-month trial in Lethbridge. Mr. Olienick was also found guilty of possession of an explosive substance, described as two pipe bombs during the trial.
Both men were found not guilty of the more serious charge of conspiracy to murder police during the two-week long blockade in Coutts, Alta. Mr. Olienick, 42, and Mr. Carbert, 47, have been in custody since being arrested in February, 2022, after police found a cache of weapons, ammunition and body armour in trailers near the protest.
Alberta Court of King’s Bench Justice David Labrenz is expected to hand down sentences on Sept. 9.
Crown Prosecutor Steven Johnson on Thursday acknowledged nine years is a “high sentence,” just shy of the 10-year maximum but said it is warranted because it is “close to the worst case imaginable, short the guns actually being used.” He said a harsh sentence is necessary to deter people from committing similar offences.
“If you make these decisions to have a war, to have a revolution and to arm yourself, the sentence that you receive is going to be a high one,” said Mr. Johnson in a courtroom filled with supporters of Mr. Olienick and Mr. Carbert. He said passion for a certain cause does not excuse committing a crime.
Marilyn Burns, counsel for Mr. Olienick, asked the judge to consider a six-month sentence for possession of dangerous weapon, which would be fulfilled with time served, in addition to community service for the mischief conviction and an absolute discharge for possession of explosives.
She said it would be a “lesson learned” for her client, who she said had no intention of hurting police. Ms. Burns said the weapons charge is more bothersome to urban people, whereas “people who are rural wouldn’t be bothered as much because they have them, they carry them around to the grocery store.”
Katherin Beyak, who represents Mr. Carbert, also argued for time served. She said her client has already been in custody for nearly four years when considering the enhanced remand credit of 1.5 times the time served. Ms. Beyak said this is a significant penalty for someone who had never been in custody, had lost his landscaping business, “damaged his relationship with his son and will never be able to pursue things like hunting again.”
“The sentence that the Crown is seeking is in excess of what should be imposed,” said Ms. Beyak. “I would suggest further incarceration serves nothing.”
She argued that her client is motivated to “not be in this situation again” because of personal losses and that it was never his intent to carry out violence. She also argued there is a “significant distinction” between her client and Mr. Olienick and that Mr. Carbert’s moral culpability was at the “lower end.”
Both defence lawyers argued against the collection of their client’s DNA as proposed by the Crown. Additionally, Ms. Beyak and Ms. Burns opposed weapons prohibitions for both men who use them recreationally. The Crown is seeking a 10-year prohibition for Mr. Olienick and a lifetime ban for Mr. Carbert because of a prior firearms offence.
Two other men, Jerry Morin and Chris Lysak, were also charged in the murder-conspiracy, but pled guilty to lesser charges in February. Both sentences, 3.25 years for Mr. Morin for conspiring to traffic firearms and three years for Mr. Lysak for possession of a firearm in an unauthorized place, were satisfied with time served in remand.