Crown withdraws charges against Montreal bank protesters
14 demonstrators pleaded guilty to noise bylaw violation and paid fines to end legal action.
AI-assisted coverage comparison, editor-supervised · How this was made
Barbara Bedont, a lawyer representing individuals charged for conducting a pro-Palestine sit-in, speaks to media ahead of a court appearance alongside other pro-Palestine activists in Montreal on Monday. (Christopher Katsarov/The Canadian Press)
Photograph: CBC News (embedded from source)
What this story says
- Criminal mischief charges were withdrawn against 14 protesters arrested at a Montreal Scotiabank sit-in.
- The protesters pleaded guilty to violating a municipal noise bylaw and paid $300 fines.
- The sit-in occurred in April 2024, with protesters demanding the bank divest from Elbit Systems.
- Scotiabank's subsidiary sold its remaining shares in Elbit Systems in February, a move protesters called a victory.
Who covered it
Percentages are shares of the 12 outlets carrying a published leaning rating. 3 of the 15 outlets we know ran this story carry no rating and are not counted in them. Coverage measured .
Trust
68/100
Craft
95/100
Hype
15/100
15 sources · methodology
Thin on the right so far
None of the 12 outlets with a published leaning rating that ran this story are rated right.
This story is still being watched, so it is a count and not yet a finding. Coverage keeps arriving for hours after an event, and a side that has published nothing this morning may publish by tonight. If it is still true when we stop checking, we will say so plainly.
The Crown withdrew criminal mischief charges against 14 pro-Palestinian protesters on Monday. The resolution came after the defendants agreed to plead guilty to violating a municipal noise bylaw and pay $300 fines each. These 14 individuals were among 44 people arrested in April 2024 during a sit-in at a Scotiabank branch. Their protest aimed to pressure the bank to divest from Elbit Systems, an Israeli weapons manufacturer.
During April hearings, a manager at the Scotiabank branch testified that the protesters did not threaten anyone or damage property. Defence lawyer Barbara Bedont stated that most other protesters had resolved their cases through community service. Bedont argued that the remaining defendants had a strong constitutional case and that criminalising peaceful sit-ins threatened freedom of expression.
The case concluded months after Scotiabank's investment management subsidiary, 1832 Asset Management, disclosed in February that it had sold its remaining shares in Elbit Systems. Protesters viewed this sale as a victory for their campaign. Protester Mara Farrokh alleged that security camera footage shown in court depicted officers in riot gear stepping on a protester, but this footage has not been independently verified.
Disagreement on footage verification
Protester Mara Farrokh alleged that security camera footage showed officers in riot gear stepping on a protester, a claim that has not been independently verified. The Canadian Press has not viewed the footage described by Farrokh. CBC News reported that the allegations have not been independently verified.
What the coverage left out
No centre- or right-rated outlets covered this story, according to the provided material. The left-rated report did not include details on the total number of people arrested beyond the 44 mentioned, nor did it specify the exact date of the sit-in beyond April 2024.
Still developing. We have re-checked which outlets are covering this 3 times, most recently on 27 Oct 2026, 00:30, and will add the sides that appear.
How each side covered it
Our own reading of the reporting listed below, written from the outlets’ articles rather than quoted from them. The reasoning is set out on our methodology page.
Left
9 rated outlets
- The left-rated report from CBC News led with the withdrawal of criminal charges against the protesters. It highlighted the protesters' demand for Scotiabank to divest from Elbit Systems and framed the resolution as an end to a legal battle raising questions about the right to demonstrate. The report quoted protester Eli Tareq stating, “We want to make sure people can continue to fight things like this.” It also quoted Harar Hall saying, “We set out to pressure a Canadian bank to stop profiting from genocide, and in that case we won.” The report detailed protester Mara Farrokh's allegations of excessive police force, stating she claimed security camera footage showed officers in riot gear stepping on a protester, though this was not independently verified. CBC News also noted that protesters filed a complaint against the judge, alleging bias and unacceptable behaviour.
Centre
3 rated outlets
- All three centre outlets reported that the Crown withdrew every criminal charge linked to a pro‑Palestinian sit‑in at a downtown Montreal bank. They note that 44 people were arrested, fourteen of whom pleaded guilty to a municipal noise bylaw and will each pay a $300 fine. Defence lawyer Barbara Bedont said most had already resolved their cases through community service.
- CTV News added that the demonstrators demanded Scotiabank divest from Israeli weapons maker Elbit Systems, and that the bank later sold its remaining Elbit shares, a result the protesters welcomed. The report also said the protesters filed a complaint against the presiding judge alleging bias, and that they had challenged the charges under the Charter. Bedont warned that criminalising peaceful sit‑ins threatens protest rights.
- The Narcity and Winnipeg Free Press digests do not mention the Scotiabank divestment, the filed complaint against the judge, the Charter challenge, or Bedont’s warning about criminalising peaceful sit‑ins. Their summaries focus solely on the charge withdrawal, the number arrested, the fourteen noise‑bylaw pleas and the $300 fines, and the lawyer’s comment on prior community‑service resolutions.
Right
0 rated outlets
No outlet rated right has run this story so far. We are still checking, and will say plainly if that does not change.
Questions about this coverage
- How did the left and right cover Crown withdraws charges against Montreal bank protesters?
- Of the 12 outlets on this story carrying a published leaning rating, 75% are rated left, 25% are rated centre, 0% are rated right. Those percentages are shares of the rated outlets, not of every outlet that ran it, which was 15. The sections above set out what each side emphasised, in its own terms.
- Is Crown withdraws charges against Montreal bank protesters left or right?
- The story itself is neither. What can be counted is who has covered it, and 75% of the 12 rated outlets on it are rated left — so far this is a story carried mostly by the left. Coverage is still arriving and that can change, which is why the figure is dated rather than fixed.
- Is the coverage of Crown withdraws charges against Montreal bank protesters biased?
- Crown withdraws charges against Montreal bank protesters is one event reported by 15 outlets, and this page does not rate the story as biased or unbiased. What it publishes is the spread: which outlets ran it, where named rating organisations place each of them on the spectrum, and what each side chose to lead with. A leaning rating describes an outlet's record over time, not this article, and the two should not be run together.
- Which side is not reporting Crown withdraws charges against Montreal bank protesters?
- When we first saw this story, outlets rated right had barely covered it. Coverage accretes for hours after an event, so that is where to look rather than a verdict — the split above is the current count, and it is the one to read.
- Which outlets covered Crown withdraws charges against Montreal bank protesters?
- 15 that we know of, every one of them listed further up this page with a link to its own report and to what we hold on the publisher. Nothing here is a summary of somebody else's summary: the outlets are named so the original reporting can be read.
- Why were criminal charges withdrawn against the protesters?
- The Crown withdrew criminal mischief charges against 14 protesters after they agreed to plead guilty to violating a municipal noise bylaw and pay $300 fines. This resolution ended the legal proceedings against them.
- What was the reason for the protest at Scotiabank?
- The protesters staged a sit-in at the Scotiabank branch to demand that the bank divest from Elbit Systems, an Israeli weapons manufacturer. They accused the bank of profiting from military operations.
- Did Scotiabank sell its shares in Elbit Systems?
- Yes, Scotiabank's subsidiary, 1832 Asset Management, disclosed in February that it had sold its remaining shares in Elbit Systems. Protesters considered this a victory for their campaign.
Read it at the source
15 outlets, grouped by the leaning a published rating gives them. Every headline links to the original; an underlined outlet name opens our profile of that publisher.
Left
9- Crown withdraws criminal charges against Montreal protesters arrested at bank sit (opens CBC News in a new tab)
- Crown withdraws criminal charges against Montreal protesters arrested at bank sit-in (opens thealbertan.com in a new tab)
thealbertan.com — is thealbertan.com biased? Our profile of this outlet
- Crown withdraws criminal charges against Montreal protesters arrested at bank sit-in (opens Bowen Island Undercurrent in a new tab)
Bowen Island Undercurrent — is Bowen Island Undercurrent biased? Our profile of this outlet
- “Sit in” at a Scotiabank (opens La Presse in a new tab)
- Crown withdraws criminal charges against Montreal protesters arrested at bank sit-in (opens The Toronto Star in a new tab)
The Toronto Star — is The Toronto Star biased? Our profile of this outlet
- Crown withdraws criminal charges against Montreal protesters arrested at bank sit-in (opens The Record in a new tab)
The Record — is The Record biased? Our profile of this outlet
- Crown withdraws criminal charges against Montreal protesters arrested at bank sit-in (opens The Hamilton Spectator in a new tab)
The Hamilton Spectator — is The Hamilton Spectator biased? Our profile of this outlet
- Crown withdraws criminal charges against Montreal protesters arrested at bank sit-in (opens St Catharines Standard in a new tab)
St Catharines Standard — is St Catharines Standard biased? Our profile of this outlet
Centre
3- No criminal charges for Montreal protesters arrested at bank sit-in (opens CTV News in a new tab)
- Crown withdraws criminal charges against Montreal protesters arrested at bank sit-in (opens Narcity in a new tab)
- Crown withdraws criminal charges against Montreal protesters arrested at bank sit-in (opens Winnipeg Free Press in a new tab)
Winnipeg Free Press — is Winnipeg Free Press biased? Our profile of this outlet
Right
0No outlet in this group ran the story.
Not rated
3- Crown withdraws criminal charges against Montreal protesters arrested at bank sit-in (opens Western Investor in a new tab)
Western Investor — is Western Investor biased? Our profile of this outlet
- Crown withdraws criminal charges against Montreal protesters arrested at bank sit-in (opens mtlblog.com in a new tab)
mtlblog.com — is mtlblog.com biased? Our profile of this outlet
- Crown withdraws criminal charges against Montreal protesters arrested at bank sit-in (opens Loonie Politics in a new tab)
Loonie Politics — is Loonie Politics biased? Our profile of this outlet
How did this read?
About the coverage, not about the story. We do not ask whether you agree with what happened — we have no honest use for that answer.
