Defence lawyer accuses RCMP of 'trickery' in terrorism interview

Seth Bertrand seen outside the Windsor Superior Court of Justice in Windsor, Ont. on Oct. 1, 2024. (Chris Campbell/CTV News Windsor)

The defence lawyer in the ongoing Bertrand trial has accused the RCMP of “trickery” during an interview.

Bobby Russon believes his client, Seth Bertrand, 21, had his rights breached in six ways during an interview with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in May 2022.

Bertrand has pleaded not guilty to single charge of participating in a terrorist entity and his trial continues in Windsor Superior Court.

Bertrand was arrested on May 5 by the OPP and taken to Windsor Police headquarters for an interview with RCMP Sergeant Shelley Shedewitz.

“(Sgt Shedewitz) fostered an environment where he was tricked into speaking with her,” Russon said in court Tuesday.

Russon is arguing his client’s rights were breached in six ways:

1. Bertrand wasn’t told he didn’t have to speak with Shedewitz
2. He didn’t know he was being asked questions about the National Socialist Order (NSO), which is affiliated with the Atomwaffen Division (AWD)
3. He wasn’t told the arrest and charge was for participating in or facilitating the activities of a terrorist organization
4. He didn’t know it stemmed from an alleged offence in February 2021
5. He didn’t know it was limited to one email he allegedly sent
6. He didn’t know he had the right to wait a “reasonable” amount of time to speak with Russon (who was on vacation on May 5, 2022)

Russon argued Shedewitz didn’t do enough to make sure Bertrand knew his rights before proceeding with the interview.

“He (Bertrand) knows its about terrorism. He doesn’t know its about sending an email,” Russon said.

He was also critical of Shedewitz for using the term “chat”.

She repeatedly told Bertrand they were just having a chat or a conversation and only used the word “interview” in her dealings with other law enforcement personnel.

“The trickery is subtle and its clever,” Russon argued.

The crown disputes Bertrand’s rights were violated.

“The police are allowed to trick a person to make a statement,” federal prosecutor Xenia Proestos argued.

Proestos noted, however, police cannot intimidate an accused and they cannot threaten harm; neither of which happened in Shedewitz’s interview.

She reminded the court Shedewitz ensured Bertrand spoke with the lawyer on call before starting the interview even though Bertrand said he didn’t want one.

The investigator also made sure Bertrand wasn’t uncomfortable, hungry or cold.

“It was a conversation,” Proestos told the judge, noting the video shows Bertrand was alert, speaking clearly and answering the questions posed to him.

“He was answering with a fully informed and operating mind,” she argued.

Finally, she noted Bertrand knew what the subject of the interview was because he kept referring to his interest in groups like the AWD as being in his past and something he no longer participated in.

The trial continues Wednesday.