Judge Acquits Man of Drug and Firearms Charges

[tramsay]

.

[MAPearce]

Well .. A vote for Justin is a vote for .....

Never mind

[the truth]

another useless soft on crime judge,

[GordonH]

Clearly the police completely screwed up on so many areas it’s no wonder why the judge did what he did.

Supposedly the police should know what they can and cannot do, now a person who was clearly guilty of numerous violations is free.

Shame on the Abbotsford police force, stupidity at its fineness.

[voice of reason]

oh we have charter rights again?

[tramsay]

Clearly the police completely screwed up on so many areas it’s no wonder why the judge did what he did.

Supposedly the police should know what they can and cannot do, now a person who was clearly guilty of numerous violations is free. Stupidity at its fineness.

I agree. The one thing that should be the focus of this conversation is that at the end of the day, whether through a miscarriage of justice, or stupidity on the part of the RCMP, APD, and prosecutors, a man who represents a serious public health and safety risk was allowed to walk free of serious criminal charges, and is in our community.

[GordonH]

Clearly the police completely screwed up on so many areas it’s no wonder why the judge did what he did.

Supposedly the police should know what they can and cannot do, now a person who was clearly guilty of numerous violations is free. Stupidity at its fineness.

I agree. The one thing that should be the focus of this conversation is that at the end of the day, whether through a miscarriage of justice, or stupidity on the part of the RCMP, APD, and prosecutors, a man who represents a serious public health and safety risk was allowed to walk free of serious criminal charges, and is in our community.

This story could have totally different outcome if the police had done their due diligence property.

[tramsay]

I agree. The one thing that should be the focus of this conversation is that at the end of the day, whether through a miscarriage of justice, or stupidity on the part of the RCMP, APD, and prosecutors, a man who represents a serious public health and safety risk was allowed to walk free of serious criminal charges, and is in our community.

This story could have totally different outcome if the police had done their due diligence property.

Gordon, you're right, it could have had a completely different outcome. But I also think that if the judge had decided simply to exclude the recording, the testimony of the officer who listened to it, and withdrew the charges pertaining only to the firearms found in his home (He ruled the warrant shouldn't have been issued), then the defendant most likely would have been convicted on the remaining charges for the cocaine, and most importantly, it would have given justice and consideration to the specific charter violations, as well as how each of them pertained to specific evidence. In this manner, the judge would have been able to address the violations, throw out any evidence associated with them, and serve the public interest because there would have been remaining charges not effected by the charter infringements. Ultimately it would have resulted in a criminal being sentenced.

[JayByrd]

Gordon, you're right, it could have had a completely different outcome. But I also think that if the judge had decided simply to exclude the recording, the testimony of the officer who listened to it, and withdrew the charges pertaining only to the firearms found in his home (He ruled the warrant shouldn't have been issued), then the defendant most likely would have been convicted on the remaining charges for the cocaine, and most importantly, it would have given justice and consideration to the specific charter violations, as well as how each of them pertained to specific evidence. In this manner, the judge would have been able to address the violations, throw out any evidence associated with them, and serve the public interest because there would have been remaining charges not effected by the charter infringements. Ultimately it would have resulted in a criminal being sentenced.

Theoretically you're right, but when a judge is aware of Charter violations, they can't just remedy them by disallowing evidence, then continuing as if nothing happened. The messaging from that toward investigators would be "Do what you want, if the Charter is violated, we'll fix it in court". What the message is and needs to be is "These are the rules you have to follow. Break them, and all the work you've done will be for nothing, and the bad guy will walk." That's all overly simplistic but you get what I mean.

Even if the judge had decided to proceed, the whole matter would have been overturned on appeal. We'd be spending more time and resources to get the same result.

[the truth]

*removed*

[Bigbacardi]

Some days you're the pigeon. Some days you're the statue.

[mexi cali]

another useless soft on crime judge,

*removed* The law is not perfect but it still must be adhered to or there is no law.

This judge is probably as frustrated as any reasonable person would be once he realized that he had no choice but to dismiss the charges.

Can you imagine having to do what he did? Letting a criminal walk away unscathed because the police of all people didn't handle the arrest and the process properly.

This happens a lot and it sucks when it does but the law is the law and our rights are protected, even the rights of criminals.

[mexi cali]

Gordon, you're right, it could have had a completely different outcome. But I also think that if the judge had decided simply to exclude the recording, the testimony of the officer who listened to it, and withdrew the charges pertaining only to the firearms found in his home (He ruled the warrant shouldn't have been issued), then the defendant most likely would have been convicted on the remaining charges for the cocaine, and most importantly, it would have given justice and consideration to the specific charter violations, as well as how each of them pertained to specific evidence. In this manner, the judge would have been able to address the violations, throw out any evidence associated with them, and serve the public interest because there would have been remaining charges not effected by the charter infringements. Ultimately it would have resulted in a criminal being sentenced.

Theoretically you're right, but when a judge is aware of Charter violations, they can't just remedy them by disallowing evidence, then continuing as if nothing happened. The messaging from that toward investigators would be "Do what you want, if the Charter is violated, we'll fix it in court". What the message is and needs to be is "These are the rules you have to follow. Break them, and all the work you've done will be for nothing, and the bad guy will walk." That's all overly simplistic but you get what I mean.

Even if the judge had decided to proceed, the whole matter would have been overturned on appeal. We'd be spending more time and resources to get the same result.

Thanks for pointing that out. You can't simply start to manipulate the charter to suit your needs. Once the violations come to light it casts the whole process in bad light.

Again, the judge did what he is sworn to do, like it or not.

[the truth]

another useless soft on crime judge,

*removed* The law is not perfect but it still must be adhered to or there is no law.

This judge is probably as frustrated as any reasonable person would be once he realized that he had no choice but to dismiss the charges.

Can you imagine having to do what he did? Letting a criminal walk away unscathed because the police of all people didn't handle the arrest and the process properly.

This happens a lot and it sucks when it does but the law is the law and our rights are protected, even the rights of criminals.

ya criminal"s have more rights than the average person in this country, how up is that

[mexi cali]

Nope, they have the same rights and sometimes that can be problematic as in this case.