Thread by @_llebrun

Sentencing hearing happening now at the Ottawa Court House for former PPC candidate / No More Lockdowns owner Chelsea Hillier.

Chelsea was found in contempt of court last month:

ottawacitizen.com/news/local-new… #ottnews #cdnpoli

Justice Narissa Somji is currently summarizing the facts of the case / reasons why Hillier was found in contempt.

More details here:

canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc…

Somji says Hillier failed to respect the spirit of Justice Gomery’s earlier decision, which Somji sums up “in three words”:

“Stop the defamation.”

Somji says Chelsea Hillier’s conduct has been “nasty and unjustifiable.”

Hillier’s lawyer has requested to the court that rather than a prison sentence, Hillier face a fine and agree to stay off Twitter.

(Reminder that Hillier was found in contempt of court for ignoring court orders, which is a separate issue from her defamatory statements made on Twitter)

Somji notes that criminal contempt is distinct from civil contempt, noting sentencing for criminal contempt focused on punishment whereas civil is focused on compliance.

Says in some circumstances where conduct is “wilful” “flagrant” and “ongoing,” prison sentence is warranted.

Somji is reading out precedents where people found in contempt in a civil case were sentenced to prison terms.

Somji notes Hillier posted 10 defamatory statements after Gomery’s decision, failed to retract her statements and failed to remove her defamatory tweets.

Somji “does not accept” Hillier’s explanation that she was not aware of Gomery’s order when she continued tweeting defamatory statements following the earlier decision.

Somji says Hillier “cared little” for the court order.

Says Hillier seems to believe the only sanctions the court could impose on her were “monetary,” notes Hillier mocking the court’s power to enforce the decision.

Somji says Hillier did not “exhaust” all options for deleting defamatory statements on her fake “Marissa Wiegler” Twitter account.

Somji says Hillier’s breach of the court order has caused further financial and emotional toll on the plaintiff, @post_esther.

Costs for Post are “now greater than her annual income.”

Somji does not accept Hillier’s claim that she had no control over a GiveSendGo fundraising campaign launched after Somji’s earlier contempt of court decision.

The GiveSendGo campaign disputed the legitimacy of the decision, called Somji “biased,” said it was an “unfair trial.”

Somji finds Hillier’s claim that she never read the GiveSendGo “hard to believe.”

Notes that Hillier was tagged in tweets about the GiveSendGo link and interacted with her friend who created it.

Somji notes Hillier has a tendency of claiming she hasn’t read things even when there is evidence she did read those things.

This was Hillier’s original explanation for why she violated Justice Gomery’s order.

Somji says the principle of deterrence is one of the biggest factors that will influence her sentencing decision.

Somji notes Hillier’s limited financial resources is a mitigating factor.

Somji says Hillier provided no evidence to her claims about the deterioration of her mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Somji says despite her lack of credibility / demonstrably making false statements to the court / inability to produce medical evidence, she will consider her mental health as a mitigating factor.

Somji notes Hillier made “rude and threatening comments to counsel.”

Somji says a fine would be “meaningless” in this situation, noting she has no ability to pay and the priority should be to pay damages to @post_esther.

Chelsea Hillier will be given a conditional sentence and be placed under “house arrest” for 75 days, followed by 9 months probation.

Hillier is not allowed to make defamatory statements about @post_esther or any of the legal proceedings online or in person when speaking to others.

Also required to do community service.

Chelsea Hillier will also be ordered to pay @post_esther an additional $16,000.