St. Patrick's celebrations

[Pheidippides]

This event fails the following parts parts:

a)  Common intent.
b)  Disturbing the peace.

As for A, if there was no common intent then you are trying to tell me that 22,000 people just happened to show up at the same place, at the same time, to do the same thing? There was no pre-planning? No one premeditatively purchased alcohol or booked a bus or coordinated travel plans? How is that not common intent?

As for B, how did the group not disturb the peace? Disturbing the peace is defined as:
Causing disturbance, indecent exhibition, loitering, etc.
175 (1) Every one who
(a) not being in a dwelling-house, causes a disturbance in or near a public place,
(i) by fighting, screaming, shouting, swearing, singing or using insulting or obscene language,
(ii) by being drunk, or
(iii) by impeding or molesting other persons,
(b) openly exposes or exhibits an indecent exhibition in a public place,
© loiters in a public place and in any way obstructs persons who are in that place, or
is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Even the police chief says it was illegal, "How do we have a lawful celebration?"

The charter guarantees freedom to peaceful assembly, not freedom of assembly. The right to peaceful assembly does not protect gatherings that seriously disturb the peace and does not include the right to physically impede or blockade lawful activities. On top of that, extra legal measures the provinces and municipalities (reasonable regulation (by-laws) of public space and associated public health and safety matters) are allowed and do not infringe of the freedom to peacefully assemble.

You are free to peacefully assemble in this community, but some cases you need to get the permit/exemption (noise, road blockage, alcohol, etc.): "A special event permit is required by any person or organization wanting to hold an event that involves the use of the municipal right of way (roadways and sidewalks). This includes but is not limited to, parades/processions, street dance/party, festival/carnival, race/walk-a-thon, demonstration or any similar event that requires a lane/road closure or may interfere with the normal flow of traffic." That was not done in this case, therefore it was against the law.

Just because the police are afraid of inciting the mob further and didn’t use the riot squad and arrest everyone doesn’t mean it wasn’t a riot. A riot doesn’t have to be violent like in Vancouver or Toronto in recent years. Just like when by-law doesn't enforce the no parking by-law it doesn't mean the drivers aren’t breaking the law.

I guess this is what happens when by-law selective starts enforcing by-laws (e.g. parking in bike lanes), everyone just starts selectively choosing which laws are going to apply to them in a given situation.