TURMEL: Oshawa Kid's quash motion delayed
From: John Turmel (bc726_at_FreeNet.Carleton.CA)
Date: 06/18/04
- Next message: John Turmel: "TURMEL: Sandy K. fifth marijuana charged withdrawn!"
- Previous message: Eric Atkinson: "Re: Defeating The Top 1%; Request For Criticism"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 18 Jun 2004 02:39:58 GMT
JCT: This was a most important case because it involved a
charge after the date the judges said they brought the law
back to life. The Toronto Sun points out how, due to Alan
Young's Hitzig case: "Those flaws were remedied in a
judgment issued on Oct. 7, 2003, by the Ontario Court of
Appeal, which wrote new rules to make possession of pot for
social or recreational use illegal.
So far, we've been beating charges laid within the July 31
2001 - Oct 7 2003 window with ease. This would have been a
simple possession charge testing the "after-rebirth" law.
But it seems the winning aces got bogged down:
>Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 20:27:11 +0000
>From: quazy_420@yahoo.ca (quazy_420)
>Subject: Re: TURMEL: Oshawa Kid should tape record historic
>To: MedPot-discuss@yahoogroups.com
It was quite the interesting day at court today. Initially
it was supposed to be open court to the public, which is why
Buzzz, Bruce Ryan & his friend and Oshawa_grower showed up,
but we were told different when we were there.
JCT: I don't understand why the public were excluded from
such a simple motion?
They had to unfortunately wait outside for us (I guess I'm
glad that people cancelled coming at the last minute.) They
handed out some NDP flyers while we were in there.
JCT: Try to find out why the public was barred. I'd like to
know.
The crown actually tried to have the charges proceeded by
indictment as opposed to summary conviction - the crown
actually got into a verbal argument with Ed Pearson (my
agent) about changing the procedure of the charges. The
crown came back after a break to confirm how they were
proceeding and said that they will be proceeding by summary
conviction. A 2 hour trial was set for November 1st.
JCT: What happened to today's motion to quash? You don't
even need a trial if you win? How'd the Crown escape?
The crown purposed having a restriction placed on me - not
to have any drug un-prescribed in my possession for 12
months, I guess this is all they're asking for. Other than
that the crown seemed quite scrambled and out of joint (no
pun intended). He seemed very angered by the fact that the
law is being challenged.
JCT: It was supposed to be challenged today. What happened?
After we got out of the courthouse we enjoyed a few together
in the parking lot, but since we only had 6 of us there,
nobody wanted to go in front of the courthouse to smoke.
Since I had the itch to see how the police would react I
rolled up some tobacco, put my hat on and walked to the
front doors and handed out some NDP flyers, to which there
was no police reaction. They actually had no problem with us
handing them out inside of the courthouse either.
That was about it!
I guess we'll see what happens on November 1st. Marko
BTW - On my way in I asked about recording and they said it
was not allowed. I can request transcripts if I wanted to...
JCT: BTW, I was just in Ottawa Provincial court this morning
and Judge Nadelle responded yes when I asked for permission
to tape the proceedings for my personal notes pursuant to
the Rules of Practice? So I can transcribe the actual facts
of my hearing and you can't. There is a rule which permits
taping with judge's permission and I'd bet you didn't ask
the judge. It helps to have the section, may be in the Act
rather than the Rules, but I've almost always gotten it.
So now we don't know why didn't the Crown got out of having
to explain how the law came back to life in order to charge
you? I thought you had him pinned like Bruce/Pierre/James,
Ed and Sandy had their Crown pinned?
-- Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6 to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics
- Next message: John Turmel: "TURMEL: Sandy K. fifth marijuana charged withdrawn!"
- Previous message: Eric Atkinson: "Re: Defeating The Top 1%; Request For Criticism"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
