xMetatronx
Member
http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/co...t-grower-1-for-30-plants-mocks-ridiculous-law
One day last week, the main Gatineau courthouse was buzzing with a judge’s ruling, a loonie sentence that says much about marijuana’s road to respectability.
A man was before Justice Pierre Chevalier charged with cultivating 30 pot plants. The Crown was looking for a sentence of 90 days in jail.
The judge had a different idea. He fined the accused, Mario Larouche, $1, throwing in a victim surcharge of 30 cents.
Justice Chevalier called Canada’s cannabis laws “outdated and ridiculous” and pointed directly at the intentions of the new Liberal government of Justin Trudeau to legalize and regulate the use of marijuana.
And he was just getting warmed up.
Was it not true, he mused, that about half of Canadians had tried marijuana, including a number of lawyers, possibly even judges? Are we to think they have committed criminal acts and should end up with records?
So Larouche, 46, beat the rap with a buck. Aiding his case, perhaps, is the fact he is trying to obtain a medical exemption to grow and use marijuana to cope with injuries suffered in a traffic accident in 2000.
Well, we’re on Planet Justin since Oct. 19, aren’t we, where you smoke ’em if you got ’em. Contrast this with the approach of the Harper government, which changed the federal law so that cultivating more than six marijuana plants for the purpose of trafficking carries a minimum sentence of six months in jail.
Defence lawyer Catherine Barrière Gratton said her client was pleased with the fine, which followed a guilty plea.
“He was happy with the situation. He was ready for jail.”
Seized from her client’s truck in June, she described them as “baby plants” that were maybe three inches tall and had yet to be set up in Larouche’s home. He uses the marijuana to help with chronic pain and to aid sleeping, she said.
One of the fundamental principles you hear judges emphasize at sentencing is “denunciation.”
But a wee problem, which the judge put his finger on: How is the court to denounce a criminal act that legislators themselves have signalled is — not only not a crime — but soon to be a legal, regulated activity; indeed one with accepted health benefits?
In other words, how is a criminal sentence supposed to reflect community standards when those standards are going from black to white overnight?
Eugene Oscapella is a University of Ottawa professor experienced in the area of drug policy. He, too, heard about the judgment.
“It’s unusual for judges to speak out that dramatically,” he said Tuesday. “I suspect the judge is saying out loud what many other judges are muttering under their breath.”
He pointed out how unevenly the law is applied across Canada when it comes to marijuana possession. In many big Canadian cities, simple possession of small amounts will not result in criminal prosecution. In smaller towns, it might.
Statistics Canada reported that Kelowna, B.C., had the highest rate of pot possession charges in 2014, but Gatineau was second. Ottawa, meanwhile, was below the national average and only about a quarter of the Gatineau rate (52 versus 188, per 100,000 people).
“There are huge consequences for an individual,” said Oscapella, referring to the burden of a criminal record.
“If we’re trying to be respectful of Canadians, why are we putting this millstone around their necks that will prevent from travelling or getting certain forms employment? It makes no sense.”
He wondered why the attorney general of Canada doesn’t simply order its prosecutors to stop pursuing possession charges until new legislation or legalization is brought about.
Ottawa defence lawyer Mark Ertel said charges for simple possession of small amounts of pot hardly get to court anymore, unlike the approach 20 or 30 years ago.
“They used to send undercover police officers down to the (ByWard) Market to buy a gram of marijuana and bust him for trafficking. I haven’t personally seen one of those for 10 years.”
Part of the issue is resources, he said — both police and prosecutors.
“For the most part, I don’t think it’s being charged or prosecuted because they just can’t afford it. It costs thousands of dollars to prosecute someone so that, what, they get an absolute discharge in court?”
Things are changing so quickly with regard to legal attitudes around marijuana, he added: “The guy might not even be selling an illegal substance by the time (the case) gets to court, right?”
The federal government has yet to announce a timetable for change. But its election platform promises a task force to review issues around access, taxation and distribution and a pledge to keep the drug away from children, while breaking criminal gang involvement.
One day last week, the main Gatineau courthouse was buzzing with a judge’s ruling, a loonie sentence that says much about marijuana’s road to respectability.
A man was before Justice Pierre Chevalier charged with cultivating 30 pot plants. The Crown was looking for a sentence of 90 days in jail.
The judge had a different idea. He fined the accused, Mario Larouche, $1, throwing in a victim surcharge of 30 cents.
Justice Chevalier called Canada’s cannabis laws “outdated and ridiculous” and pointed directly at the intentions of the new Liberal government of Justin Trudeau to legalize and regulate the use of marijuana.
And he was just getting warmed up.
Was it not true, he mused, that about half of Canadians had tried marijuana, including a number of lawyers, possibly even judges? Are we to think they have committed criminal acts and should end up with records?
So Larouche, 46, beat the rap with a buck. Aiding his case, perhaps, is the fact he is trying to obtain a medical exemption to grow and use marijuana to cope with injuries suffered in a traffic accident in 2000.
Well, we’re on Planet Justin since Oct. 19, aren’t we, where you smoke ’em if you got ’em. Contrast this with the approach of the Harper government, which changed the federal law so that cultivating more than six marijuana plants for the purpose of trafficking carries a minimum sentence of six months in jail.
Defence lawyer Catherine Barrière Gratton said her client was pleased with the fine, which followed a guilty plea.
“He was happy with the situation. He was ready for jail.”
Seized from her client’s truck in June, she described them as “baby plants” that were maybe three inches tall and had yet to be set up in Larouche’s home. He uses the marijuana to help with chronic pain and to aid sleeping, she said.
One of the fundamental principles you hear judges emphasize at sentencing is “denunciation.”
But a wee problem, which the judge put his finger on: How is the court to denounce a criminal act that legislators themselves have signalled is — not only not a crime — but soon to be a legal, regulated activity; indeed one with accepted health benefits?
In other words, how is a criminal sentence supposed to reflect community standards when those standards are going from black to white overnight?
Eugene Oscapella is a University of Ottawa professor experienced in the area of drug policy. He, too, heard about the judgment.
“It’s unusual for judges to speak out that dramatically,” he said Tuesday. “I suspect the judge is saying out loud what many other judges are muttering under their breath.”
He pointed out how unevenly the law is applied across Canada when it comes to marijuana possession. In many big Canadian cities, simple possession of small amounts will not result in criminal prosecution. In smaller towns, it might.
Statistics Canada reported that Kelowna, B.C., had the highest rate of pot possession charges in 2014, but Gatineau was second. Ottawa, meanwhile, was below the national average and only about a quarter of the Gatineau rate (52 versus 188, per 100,000 people).
“There are huge consequences for an individual,” said Oscapella, referring to the burden of a criminal record.
“If we’re trying to be respectful of Canadians, why are we putting this millstone around their necks that will prevent from travelling or getting certain forms employment? It makes no sense.”
He wondered why the attorney general of Canada doesn’t simply order its prosecutors to stop pursuing possession charges until new legislation or legalization is brought about.
Ottawa defence lawyer Mark Ertel said charges for simple possession of small amounts of pot hardly get to court anymore, unlike the approach 20 or 30 years ago.
“They used to send undercover police officers down to the (ByWard) Market to buy a gram of marijuana and bust him for trafficking. I haven’t personally seen one of those for 10 years.”
Part of the issue is resources, he said — both police and prosecutors.
“For the most part, I don’t think it’s being charged or prosecuted because they just can’t afford it. It costs thousands of dollars to prosecute someone so that, what, they get an absolute discharge in court?”
Things are changing so quickly with regard to legal attitudes around marijuana, he added: “The guy might not even be selling an illegal substance by the time (the case) gets to court, right?”
The federal government has yet to announce a timetable for change. But its election platform promises a task force to review issues around access, taxation and distribution and a pledge to keep the drug away from children, while breaking criminal gang involvement.
