Steven Lindsay

The Crown Attorney in charge of prosecuting Lindsay, Graeme Cameron, decided to press for C-95 charges against Lindsay as part of a bid to have the Hells Angels declared a criminal organization in Canada.[10] Cameron faced a difficult case as he to prove on behalf of the Crown that Lindsay had committed extortion; that he done so on behalf of the Hells Angels; and finally the Hells Angels were a criminal organization that posed as a motorcycle club instead of a being a genuine motorcycle club that just happened to have some criminal members as the Hells Angels claimed.[10] Sher and Marsden wrote that Cameron had a "shaky" case against Lindsay and most legal experts expected the case to end in an acquittal.[10] The Hells Angels were well aware of the importance of the case and hired the most expensive lawyers in Ontario to defend Lindsay.[10] In effect, the Hells Angels were on trial in the Lindsay case.[10]

During the trial, the defense lawyers attacked the reputation of the victim of the extortion attempt as a shady businessman who made his living selling black market satellites whose word was not to be trusted.[10] The defense lawyers depicted C-95 as a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as the defense claimed to brand the Hells Angels as a criminal organization because of Lindsay's crimes was absurd.[11] One of Lindsay's lawyers told the courtroom: "We would not the nerve to brand the Chinese or Italian communities as criminal because of the actions of a few".[11] Finally, the defense argued that the Hells Angels just a motorcycle club that was being persecuted by the Crown.[11] To counter the defense, Cameron brought in numerous policeman, journalists, and scholars who all testified that the Hells Angels were a criminal organization.[10] Cameron argued to the court that the Hells Angels were "a homogenous, unified organization in Canada" who engaged in selling drugs, loansharking and extortion.[11] The trial lasted six months, which was unusual by Canadian standards where trials typically last a month or two.[11]

In September 2004, Lindsay and Bonner were convicted of extortion along with gangsterism, marking the first time that any Hells Angels had been convicted of the charge.[3] Justice Michelle Fuerst in convicting Lindsay and Bonner wrote that: "Both Mr. Lindsay and Mr. Bonner went to the victim's house wearing jackets bearing the primary symbols of the HAMC [Hells Angels Motorcycle Club], the name 'Hells Angels', and the death head logo. They presented themselves not as individuals, but as members of a group with a reputation for violence and intimidation. They deliberately invoked their membership in the HAMC with the intent to inspire fear in the victim. They committed extortion with the intent to do so in association with a criminal organization, the HAMC to which they belonged".[5] Furest ruled:" "It simply defies common sense that a group so deeply involved with crimes in Quebec would have any interest in establishing benign counterparts in a neighboring province".[11] Fuerest ruled that the Hells Angels were a criminal syndicate not just in Quebec, but in all of Canada.[11]

The ruling was notable as the first convictions under the C-95 law, which created the new offense of gangsterism, which was defined as committing crimes on behalf of a criminal organization and was the first time that the courts had ever declared that the Hells Angels are a criminal organization that merely masquerades as a motorcycle club.[5] Fuerst's ruling meant that an additional penalty of 14 years in prison could be imposed on Hells Angels for crimes committed on behalf of their group was considered to be a major legal blow against the Hells Angels.[12] Lindsay launched an appeal of the verdict as he claimed that the C-95 law was unconstitutional and violated his rights.[5] On 29 September 2005, Lindsay was sentenced to four years in prison.[6] Lindsay was convicted of extortion and was sentenced to four years in prison.[11] Because he engaged in extortion as a Hells Angel, he was sentenced to additional two years in prison, giving him six years in total.[11]

In April 2008, Lindsay was sent to prison after he violated his parole conditions by living outside of Barrie.[13] On 2 July 2009, the Ontario Court of Appeals upheld Justice Fuerst's ruling.[6] The Court of Appeal ruled: "Put bluntly, the trial judge’s reasoning on this issue was impeccable and her conclusion is the antithesis of unreasonableness".[6] The Lindsay case was considered significant because had the case been decided in Lindsay's favor, the C-95 law would have been struck down as unconstitutional.[14]