One of the men who meets a sentence for his actions during the blockade and protest of the era of the Coutts Pandemia has refused probation despite a large extent of his time in prison.
Chris Carbert and Anthony Olienick were sentenced by mischief of more than $ 5,000 and possession of a dangerous weapon for the public. They were acquitted of the most serious conspiracy position to kill RCMP officers during the 2022 border protest.
In September, both men received sentences of 6 and a half years, but with credit for the time it had served as a pending trial, Carbert had two years, seven months were left behind.
Seven months after his remaining sentence of 31 months, Carbert requested probation. An audience took place before two members of the Canada Probation Board.
“You have dedicated yourself to personal growth through various educational and spiritual activities,” says the report of the Board of Probation.
‘Quiet and respectful’
The 10 -page decision of the recently launched Board sheds light on the progress of Carbert in prison and the reasons why the Board denied the release of both the day and in complete probation.
The decision indicates that Carbert completed his high school diploma, worked three jobs in prison, attended the Bible University and completed vocational tickets.
Carbert is described in the document as “quiet and respectful”, he has not demonstrated any evidence of an attitude of disrespect for authority. “
During his hearing, the Board said that Carbert described the protest of Coutts as “the worst decision he has made.”
‘Your thoughts were disoriented’
In the months before the convoy, Carbert began storing food and supplies in preparation to live outside the network.
“The global pandemic seems to have contributed to its self-reliance through online information through non-reliable sources,” says the report.
“His thoughts were disoriented and did not consider alternatives,” says the report.
The blockade of a week involved semis, trucks and agricultural vehicles when protesters criticized public health measures imposed by the government.
Carbert was among a small group identified as acting as security for the convoy.
Two weeks after the protest, Carbert and three others were arrested after the police confiscated a series of weapons, armor, high capacity magazines and thousands of rounds of ammunition.
Many of the seized weapons were found in a trailer that Carbert stayed with two others.
Prepared to participate
The investigators believed that Carbert saw the protest as a war against the police and was fully prepared to involve the officers with mortal force.
None of the four men was convicted of the most serious crime they faced: conspiracy to kill RCMP officers.
Earlier this year, Christopher Lysak and Jerry Morin declared guilty of firearms crimes and received prayers with time.
When sentenced to Carbert and coacuse Anthony Olienick, the judge said there was a credible threat to the police and the public.
“Both were armed with the purpose of using those weapons against the police,” Judge David Labrenz said.
“Fortunately, none of the men decided that the moment was adequate for a surprise attack.”
‘Lack of responsibility’
When asked about the damage he had caused, Carbert pointed out the “inconvenience” he had created for people who were looking to travel through the border.
The Board found that this was an example of the “carbert attempts to minimize” their participation and evidence of “cognitive distortions.”
When asked about the firearms found in his trailer, Carbert told the panel that he had a weapon to hunt coyotes and that the other weapon was to “show off.”
“He demonstrated a lack of responsibility for his actions, particularly in regard to the storage of firearms and ammunition, and his planned purpose,” the Board wrote.
Pending appeal could cause problems
Another problem that the Board found was that Carbert refused to discuss certain aspects of his crimes due to a pending appeal.
When this happens, the probation board returns to the judge’s conclusions, said Amychuk, lawyer and founder of the Prison and Police Law, a firm that specializes in justice in prison and police misconduct.
“It may not be the fact that the appeal is pending, but only that the probation Board considers having a pending appeal as an indication that someone does not assume responsibility … They are so focused on responsibility.”
Matychuk suspects that the Board was looking for Carbert to identify risk factors that led to her crimes.
“They wanted me to say ‘my risk factors were, I was isolated: here are the steps I am taking to make sure I am not isolated … My risk factor was that I was radicalized online: here are the steps I am taking so as not to radicalize online’, and he simply did not seem willing to admit that he had been radicalized, perhaps,” Matychuk said.
“I think they wanted me to give them more details about why I would not make the same decision again.”
