 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Economy Forum » TURMEL: Court Nixes Marcel Mercier's 1-day-late appeal |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| John Turmel |
 Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 3:22 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
JCT: On November 3 2005 2pm, Marcel Mercier appeared live in
the Quebec Court of Appeal before Justices Brossard, Delisle,
and Rochette. Rochette was on the Ray Turmel appeal! The
Crown is Jean Charles Leblanc.
Of course, it's up to Marcel to make his presentation.
Marcel filed his Notice of Appeal one day late because of
lengthy hold-ups by the Gatineau jail services! They made
him late so he had to now have an extension of time to argue
he was at least as worth as Krieger to be exempt. And of
course, you have to show you intended to appeal which he
can, being 1 day late after held up for days. And that there
is something to argue about. Krieger being reserved in
Cochrane and coming up in Alberta and Ontario and BC could
have had some bearing.
I'd prepared him with the Exhibit 10b from the Supreme Court
of Canada Bulletin of December 23 2003 starting with Acton
J. declaring s.7(1) inconsistent with the Charter, Alberta
Court of Appeal Costigan, Wittman, LoVecchio dismissing
Crown's appeal against repeal of s.7(1). Finally, the
Supreme Court of Canada dismissing the Crown's last hope.
Then point out that he's sicker than Krieger and if Krieger
has the right to cultivate for life, he does too.
Justice Delisle started off by asking him when he'd been
convicted and what was the charge? Though that info was in
the Application they profess to have read, it knocked Marcel
off his stride as he strove to remember what and when.
Justice Rochette noted that since he had already served his
sentence, he must be seeking protection for the future. And
his stuff back and no criminal record Marcel wanted.
Then Justice Brossard inquired into his medical state.
Marcel had been knocked off-stride by the rapid quizzing and
so when they finally asked him what else he had to say, he
did point exhibit 10B from the Supreme Court of Canada said
sick guys like Krieger had the right to cultivate.
Delisle inquired if Marcel had a prescription for marihuana
from his doctor. Yes he did, for 300 grams a month. Health
Canada are slow with exemptions, he told them.
Delisle inquired into how big a grow-op. 490 plants, mainly
little ones. Where? In a small house.
Anything else? Guess not.
The Crown pointed out it was the fourth time Marcel had
engaged the attention of the courts for the same reasons.
Hitzig made everything legal again. The Ray Turmel case says
s.7(1) is still alive (so what? for a care-giver challenger
who lost while the sick person challenger won!
Judge Delisle pointed out there was no legal supply when the
Krieger invalidation took place. Now there is. Guess he's
another believer in the On/Off theory of invalidity too.
The Crown pointed out how the Malmo-Levine case says
prohibition is legal. Marcel didn't know that it actually
says that prohibition can be made legal. We don't argue with
ML that they can prohibit, we argue that they have not used
that power since s.7(1) was struck down.
The Crown pointed out that Marcel had no evidence of illness
though there was his affidavit where he attested that he had
AIDS.
Anyway, as to his request for an extension of time to cover
his 1-day lateness, the court ruled they saw no reason to
prolong the period of his appeal and dismissed his appeal
with $18,000 in costs.
Just kidding. They broke him and it cost him nothing to get
the signatures of three of Quebec's highest judges on the
validation of his conviction under s.7(1) of the Criminal
Code.
I told him that his being a pauper lets me trigger his
application to the Supreme Court of Canada anytime I ever
wanted to. He's got his ticket to ride, a signed Appeal
Court order, and he's made enough about what they did to him
to take the final shot whenever I need him.
As for Rod Barclay who I thought was having his application
for release heard too, since he wasn't there, I expected a
telephone conference call. But I heard that he hadn't wanted
to come to Montreal so they let him stay in Gatineau without
the conference call. Weird.
I spoke to him later that evening and told him why his
application for release wasn't heard. Since he had indicated
that he didn't want to come to Montreal, they adjourned it
until you felt like coming. He grew upset saying that though
he preferred by phone, it didn't mean he didn't want to have
his hearing.
So I told him his only out was to call Mr. Osadchuk at the
Court of Appeal and ask to have his appeal added to the
docket (as easily as Marcel Mercier's was) though getting
him transported to the court would still take some work that
Mr. Osadchuk would have to do. But that's how Rod can try to
get his release.
--
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 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Mon Dec 14, 2009 3:19 pm
|
|