Please Visit Our Paid Sponsors
POLCOA - The legal defence to end prohibition
Posted 04 December 2009 - 10:10 PM
If you have been arrested in Canada on Cannabis charges, and have a week or two before your court date, you will find here and here the resources to get your charges withdrawn.
If you have yet to get arrested, you need to know the following:
1 - Stand mute.
2 - Contact me, John, Ken at the Canadian Cannabis Legal Defence Resource; Derek Francisco will also help, particularly if you have skype. There are forms, and they are golden. Derek and his wife, and Ken, separately got all charges withdrawn using John's defence. Professor Doug Hutchinson, I should add, has played a significant role, as well.
3 - Make victory.
They've been through it. I'm getting on board. We really want people to use this defence. It requires no lawyer, just determination. Derek won without a lawyer. Ken won without a lawyer. A friend of mine is getting the paperwork in order. His date is the 15th.
Nothing in my 6 years online in forums has got me focused like this has.
peace and pot
- SmokeToLive likes this
Please Visit Our Paid Sponsors
Posted 04 December 2009 - 11:10 PM
- SmokeToLive, QuentinQuark and like this
Posted 20 January 2010 - 09:31 PM
This is an introduction. The team making this happen has learned from experience. I'm learning by osmosis since I haven't been through the courts. What I'm passing on hopefully makes sense. I'll do my best to answer questions directly, or get answer from John Turmel, who has been working on this for over a decade. John is an electrical engineer by training. Several other people, including Prof. Doug Hutchinson, have help craft the document.
The understanding that the laws are not simply bad – which they have always been – but dead, exposes a fraud that can never be the focus. One Canadian, one legal victory at a time, we will prove this. Sixteen people who got busted on bogus charges and represented themselves in court have gotten their charges withdrawn. Three early cases resulted in pleas to reduced charges. Four more cases are before the courts.
We're looking for people who want to learn about their rights, step into the legal system on the offence by challenging the validity of the laws in Superior Court negating even entering a plea in the Lower Court. The legal argument is contained in the Applicant's Factum. It available here: http://health.groups...les/prscom.docx.
The medicinal effect of Cannabis on epileptics is at the root of this. Terry Parker is an epileptic who was first busted for pot in 1987 and again in 1997. The ruling in the latter case struck down the pot possession law (section 4.1 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act). Since August 1, 2001, the post laws for simple possession have remained of no force and effect.
The Canadian government was ordered by the courts to remedy the flaw in the law. They came up with the Marijuana Medical Access Regulations. The MMAR has been found unconstitutional several times, each one creating a period of retroactive invalidity back to the day the courts gave the government to fix the problem.
The problem is that the very inclusion of the word marijuana (or marihuana) in the CDSA creates it's constitutional invalidity absent a valid exemption scheme. It does not matter that Cannabis is the best medicine on Earth. It only matters that access be available in a prohibition system.
Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the right to life argument. If you feel fear because of a punitive law against your choice of medicine (and not your medicine of choice) you have the Charter right to oppose any action against you.
The key ruling to focus on is R.v J.P. In the decision on the appeal by the Crown, the Ontario Court of Appeal Justices Doherty, Goudge and Simmons overstepped their jurisdiction and negated the Interpretation Act, Section 2.2.
Section 2.2 states that when a law is struck down it is to be deemed repealed. Only an act of parliament (in this case a re-enactment of the CDSA) can bring back a dead law minus the constitutional flaw that invalidated the law in the first place. The very inclusion of the word marijuana in the CDSA absent a constitutionally valid exemption scheme is the fatal flaw.
Since we have Charter rights under Section 7 – the right to life clause – the government's prohibition on Cannabis could hardly be more injurious to society or individuals caught up in this genocide.
I'll be adding material as I go.
We can be contacted by several means.
- I8ntLucky_UR and SmokeToLive like this
Reply to this topic
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users