‘Jumping from hate to terrorism is speculative’: Defence lawyer wants terrorism charge dismissed

Seth Bertrand’s lawyer is arguing there hasn’t been enough evidence in his case, asking the judge to throw it out.

The defence lawyer for a Windsor man wants a terrorism charge dismissed in his case.

Lawyer Bobby Russon argued for what’s called a ‘directed verdict’ Friday in the case of Seth Bertrand, now 22, charged with participating in a terrorist organization.

Warning: contains graphic content.

Russon argued the “essential elements” of the offence were not proven by the prosecutor during the trial last fall.

The defence is conceding Bertrand sent a recruitment email to the Atomwaffen Division (AWD) and that it is now a known terrorist organization.

He disputes however, that his client knew AWD was a terrorist group at the time of the email and that Bertrand had any intention of carrying out a terrorist act in their name.

“Activism is a wide range of activities the overwhelming majority of which are not terroristic, “ Russon told Justice Maria Carroccia.

He describes Bertrand’s white supremacist views as “ideologically aligned” with the AWD.

“Everyone has ideologies. And even ones like this that I consider deplorable don’t lead to an automatic inference, or even an inference, that he’s going to do something about it or that he expects they’re going to do something about it,” Russon argued.

The court has learned Bertrand sent a recruitment email in February 2021, three weeks after the organization was added to Canada’s list of terrorist entities.

Later that month, and again in May, Bertrand has admitted to vandalism and mischief against a same sex couple living in Windsor and damaging a local transgender support office.

In a videotaped statement to the RCMP after his arrest, Bertrand indicates he wasn’t certain at the time of the email AWD was a known terrorist group.

Yet in an undercover meeting with the RCMP, he refers to the group as a terrorist organization.

“Did he commit a terrorist act? Did he tell people to commit terrorist acts? Did he promote terrorist acts? No, he committed hate crimes and vandalism,” Russon said.

Anti-terrorism laws about prevention

“Prevention is the be all and end all of the anti-terrorism legislation,” federal prosecutor David Schermbrucker argued to Justice Carroccia saying it is intended to “prevent acts rather than try to bring the offenders to justice after the acts’ been committed.”

He argued the Criminal Code of Canada has been written with a “low threshold’ to allow for arrests if law enforcement believes a terrorism offence may be committed.

An accused, according to Schermbrucker, can be found guilty of participating in a terrorist group whether they take action or not because of how the law has been written to address “the grave risk” of terrorism.

“Parliament is prepared to criminalize things that don’t even amount to ordinary offences,” Schermbrucker argued. “Parliament is prepared to criminalize offering a skill whether or not it actually does enhance the groups’ ability.”

Court learned at the time he applied to join AWD, Bertrand cited his acts of vandalism and mischief as examples of his beliefs and measures he’s taken to support them.

And while he never offered to do any acts on behalf of AWD, the prosecution is arguing it doesn’t matter.

“Why else do you this? Why else fill out an application to join the AWD/NSO (National Socialist Order), unless you want to enhance it,” Schermbrucker argued which Justice Carroccia interrupted.

“Mr. Russon says its because the theology is aligned. Because you believe in the same things. Doesn’t necessarily mean you want to participate in the actions, but you believe in the same things,” she noted.

“True but all he (Bertrand) has to do to cross the line is offer to enhance its ability,” Schermbrucker argued.

Justice Carroccia will rule on the directed verdict application on Feb. 27.

If she agrees with the defence, the case will be dismissed.

If the judge rules in favour of the prosecution, the case will go to the defence.

Russon has indicated he likely won’t call any evidence, and the case will proceed to closing arguments.