• This Issue
• About US
• Subscribe
• Search

Shawn Brant's Next Test: September 29th

Shawn Brant, native protester, faces multiple charges arising from two blockades, one in April 2007, and the other as part of the Aboriginal National Day of Action on June 29, 2007.

There was a lot of publicity recently regarding the release of OPP wiretaps including some threats made by OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino, who told Shawn Brant, "your whole world's going to come crashing down" and threatening to "do everything I can within your community and everywhere to destroy your reputation" Fantino was also quoted having said to Brant, "I'm now telling you `Pull the plug or you will suffer grave consequences.'"

Brant's lawyer, Peter Rosenthal, recently spoke to The Toronto Tribune about the current status of the case against Shawn Brant.

Rosenthal explained, "We are back in court on September 29 [2008]. We begin arguing pretrial motions; these are our motions. The main thing we are asking for is that the charges be stayed against Shawn Brant, because of various violations of his charter rights by OPP officers."

"At the beginning we are asking the judge to clarify what restrictions there are on the press reporting of what happened in the pre-trial hearings."

Asked what would be the best case scenario on September 29th, Peter Rosenthal replied, "What I'd like to see happen is that the charges against Shawn Brant be stayed based on violation of his charter; that would be the best possible account. It means they will never be proceed to trial."

Should the judge rule against staying the charges then Rosenthal explains the next step in the legal process for Shawn Brant. "There is a trial set to begin on January 29th, 2009. It will be a trial before judge and jury." The lawyer is optimistic going in to September 29th. He will argue the motions and then a judge will decide that could take two weeks or longer.

About the earlier release of the OPP wiretaps, Rosenthal pointed out, "we supported CBC's effort. Shawn Brant and the CBC were for openness for everything about the preliminary inquiry and the crown was not." Adding, "the crown said that the evidence at the preliminary inquiry had to be banned from publication prior to trial to protect Shawn's right to a fair trial." Neither Shawn Brant nor his lawyer agreed with that position. "I didn't agree with that; in fact I think it became clearer and clearer as we argued that what they were trying to do was to protect Mr. Fantino from criticism for his actions. It was, in my opinion, it was absurd to say they were protecting Shawn Brant's trial rights for a couple of reasons. Almost all the evidence against Shawn Brant at the preliminary inquiry was evidence from media video tapes. They were provided by media to the police. That evidence wasn't subject to any publication ban because the media had it already and had shown it all over the tube already before the prelim and were free to show it afterwards. The main evidence that was new, that was not all over the media, was evidence about what Fantino and other OPP officers and others had done to Shawn Brant. I felt the Crown representations were completely disingenuous saying they were acting to protect Shawn Brant."

Does Rosenthal want more action taken in response to Fantino's actions. "I would hope that people would still pursue it and pursue the question whether it is appropriate to have someone like Fantino as Commissioner of the OPP."

Peter Rosenthal is a professor of mathematics and also of law at the University of Toronto. Called to the bar in 1992, Rosenthal interests are in police matters, the homeless and anti-war issues.