Herb Fellow
New Member
A Meaford man and woman will fight drug charges - laid one month before he received licences to possess and grow marijuana for medicinal purposes - by arguing Canada's marijuana possession law is unconstitutional. "The Charter of Rights, that's what this whole thing is about," James Kerr said after a court appearance last week. He believes it has been unconstitutional to be charged with a marijuana crime since an Ontario Court of Appeal decision in 2001.
Kerr, 35, and Celena Negovetich, 30, are each charged with possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking and with production of marijuana on Jan. 4 in their Meaford residence. Neither can afford a lawyer so they're relying partly on help from Edwin Pearson, a pot activist who has written a book called "Never Plead Guilty," and Doug Hutchinson, a philosophy professor who calls himself a pothead.
Kerr and Negovetich turned down what they said was a Crown offer to withdraw all charges in exchange for forfeiture of about $6,800 worth of marijuana and $1,700 worth of grow equipment and his right to sue. Kerr said they can't afford to lose that much "medicine." Kerr said he was diagnosed in September 2005 with multiple sclerosis, a disease of the central nervous system with no cure. It causes attacks of prolonged muscle spasms and headaches which he says are relieved with marijuana.
Kerr was charged after his family doctor signed the medical use of marijuana form, which the physician had for a year. Before signing the form, the doctor suggested Kerr use four grams per day, Kerr said.
Federal Crown attorney Doug Grace conceded in court Thursday that Kerr now has medical production and possession licences and that the charges relate to a "technical breach" of the law, so the Crown won't be "bloodthirsty."
Justice Julia Morneau asked if there would be challenges under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Grace said the legislation governing marijuana possession may be tested. The trial is scheduled to begin Aug. 12 and last one day.
Eugene Oscapella, a criminology professor at the University of Ottawa and co-founder of the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy, said there have been some successful court challenges of charges of simple possession of marijuana across the country. Some have challenged the medical regulations which grant exceptions for medical reasons, some have challenged other provisions.
"Some people have gone on their own and done it and some lawyers are incompetent, so in some cases people can actually mount a very good defence on their own," Oscapella said.
Kerr carried a copy of Pearson's book to court last week. Pearson is not a lawyer or a paralegal but has been a pot activist since the 1960s. Kerr also relies on Hutchinson's website which offers a free "defence kit" to fight simple possession charges.
Both Pearson's and Hutchinson's arguments stem from whether the government's medical marijuana access regulations are a constitutionally acceptable medical exemption, in accordance with a 2001 court of appeal ruling.
Hutchinson's website cites several cases, including one in October 2007 in the Ontario Court of Justice. In that case Pearson succeeded in getting charges against three people charged with simple possession under Sec. 4(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act dismissed because that section was deemed unconstitutional. That decision was based on an earlier court decision, which is under appeal.
Source: The Sun Times
Copyright: 2008, The Sun Times
Contact: Scott Dunn
Website: Grey Bruce - Ontario, CA
Kerr, 35, and Celena Negovetich, 30, are each charged with possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking and with production of marijuana on Jan. 4 in their Meaford residence. Neither can afford a lawyer so they're relying partly on help from Edwin Pearson, a pot activist who has written a book called "Never Plead Guilty," and Doug Hutchinson, a philosophy professor who calls himself a pothead.
Kerr and Negovetich turned down what they said was a Crown offer to withdraw all charges in exchange for forfeiture of about $6,800 worth of marijuana and $1,700 worth of grow equipment and his right to sue. Kerr said they can't afford to lose that much "medicine." Kerr said he was diagnosed in September 2005 with multiple sclerosis, a disease of the central nervous system with no cure. It causes attacks of prolonged muscle spasms and headaches which he says are relieved with marijuana.
Kerr was charged after his family doctor signed the medical use of marijuana form, which the physician had for a year. Before signing the form, the doctor suggested Kerr use four grams per day, Kerr said.
Federal Crown attorney Doug Grace conceded in court Thursday that Kerr now has medical production and possession licences and that the charges relate to a "technical breach" of the law, so the Crown won't be "bloodthirsty."
Justice Julia Morneau asked if there would be challenges under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Grace said the legislation governing marijuana possession may be tested. The trial is scheduled to begin Aug. 12 and last one day.
Eugene Oscapella, a criminology professor at the University of Ottawa and co-founder of the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy, said there have been some successful court challenges of charges of simple possession of marijuana across the country. Some have challenged the medical regulations which grant exceptions for medical reasons, some have challenged other provisions.
"Some people have gone on their own and done it and some lawyers are incompetent, so in some cases people can actually mount a very good defence on their own," Oscapella said.
Kerr carried a copy of Pearson's book to court last week. Pearson is not a lawyer or a paralegal but has been a pot activist since the 1960s. Kerr also relies on Hutchinson's website which offers a free "defence kit" to fight simple possession charges.
Both Pearson's and Hutchinson's arguments stem from whether the government's medical marijuana access regulations are a constitutionally acceptable medical exemption, in accordance with a 2001 court of appeal ruling.
Hutchinson's website cites several cases, including one in October 2007 in the Ontario Court of Justice. In that case Pearson succeeded in getting charges against three people charged with simple possession under Sec. 4(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act dismissed because that section was deemed unconstitutional. That decision was based on an earlier court decision, which is under appeal.
Source: The Sun Times
Copyright: 2008, The Sun Times
Contact: Scott Dunn
Website: Grey Bruce - Ontario, CA
