Article content continued

Hearn took nearly 90 minutes to read his decision recapping four days of testimony in June. He concluded that Sona was actively involved, even if he “didn’t pull the trigger” that launched the calls.

In his ruling, Hearn rejected evidence implicating Sona from the Crown’s star witness, campaign worker Andrew Prescott, but said he accepted as truthful the testimony of a group of young Conservative staffers on Parliament Hill who described how Sona bragged of making automated calls to Liberal voters in conversations after the election.

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or

The most significant evidence “comes, ironically, from Mr. Sona himself,” Hearn said.

Sona, he said, should have heeded the advice of one of these witnesses, who testified that he told Sona to “shut the f— up.”

Instead, Hearn said, “His apparent arrogance and self-importance prevailed.”

These witnesses testified Sona had described an automated call scheme launched from a disposable mobile phone and using pre-paid credit cards.

Sona “was not fabricating details of the plan,” Hearn concluded from their testimony. “”Mr. Sona seemed to be very proud of his actions.”

Hearn said the defence made a “valiant effort” to suggest that these staff members were influenced by media reports on the high-profile election fraud case but he felt their testimony, while not always exactly consistent, was reliable.

Hearn said he was also persuaded by testimony from Chris Crawford, another Guelph campaign worker, and Matthew McBain, a Conservative party staff member, who testified about conversations with Sona about election trickery.