The ReeveLaw Blog

The “victim surcharge,” is a sum levied against persons for each offence they are sentenced for to raise money for victim services. It is mandatory. It is either $100, $200 or 30% of any fine imposed. Our lower court has once again found it unconstitutional because it “has an adverse impact on the mentally disabled because of the class characteristic that mentally disabled persons are disproportionately poor. It discriminates against the mentally disabled. It leaves many of them under ongoing, if not perpetual, undischarged criminal sanction.”

Source: CanLII – 2016 ONCJ 108 (CanLII)

We grow better quality weed than Mexico anyway. “The economics of the cannabis industry show us that with healthy competition in the market, prices drop, quality rises, violence diminishes, and peaceful transactions increase.” Note an emphasis on HEALTHY COMPETITION. “The Colorado model has proven that legalization reduces crime rates, cuts prices, pushes unfavorable competition out of the market, provides cleaner products with heightened transparency, and increases the standard of living for society as a whole.”

A massive problem created by the drug war is now being solved by legalizing weed.

Source: Legalizing Weed Has Done What 1 Trillion Dollars and a 40 Year War Couldn’t

While our ex-chief of police is taking so long trying to figure out how to do this “right”, in the hiatus between declaration and implementation of legality it is being sorted out in fact. Municipalities are quite capable of licensing, regulating and taxing the distribution of marijuana.  All we need the federal government to do is remove the marijuana schedule from the CDSA.

A new medical marijuana dispensary has cropped up in Lower Lonsdale, causing concern for some parents whose kids attend martial arts classes a few doors down.

Source: Lower Lonsdale pot shops raise parents’ concerns

Now that we have a government that is actually interested in making informed evidence based decisions it’s time to reinstate a Law Reform Commission in Canada, like we used to have, to guide us as a society in having laws that reflect our values. If you don’t know or don’t remember what the LRCC was, this article will inform you.

Source: The perfect time for a law commission revival

Not only must one question the ability of a court to order someone to build something for a government agency one must also question the advisability of forcing them to build something as dangerous as a digital nuclear weapon. Here is Apple’s position: “The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers — including tens of millions of American citizens — from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals.”

A Message to Our Customers

Source: Customer Letter – Apple

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IixU2yzuato

Interesting …. In order to usurp the existing black market, “the government would have to promise three things: A competitive price, superior quality and wide availability.” They’re going to have to become a better pusher than your “friend”.

Drug dealers may soon have to compete with the government for business

Source: Will marijuana legalization push the pusher out of business? – The Globe and Mail

The right to be presumed innocent, the right to a fair trial, the right to a public hearing, the right to be tried by an independent and impartial tribunal, the right to make full answer and defence, the right to cross examine accusers and the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt do NOT abridge Canadian values and Charter freedoms….they ARE Canadian values and Charter freedoms.

The harsh cross-examination of Jian Ghomeshi’s accusers has sparked a war of words over how courts treat sexual assault victims. There are some worthy elements to this debate, Neil Macdonald writes, but they needn’t come at the expense of due process.

Source: Jian Ghomeshi trial: When #BelieveTheVictims meets #DueProcess – Canada – CBC News

We’ve heard a lot about the traditional myths of sexual assault but new myths have replaced those. “The police role is to conduct thorough investigations” but “with sexual assault allegations, that tried and true formula has been turned inside-out. They were absolutely believed in the absence of any evidence other than their word. That word was never tested. Inspector Joanna Beaven-Desjardins announced “We believe them right from the outset. When they come in, 100 per cent we are behind them. It’s all about the victims and moving them forward.” Another myth is that you can hide unfavourable evidence and lie about it under oath. “Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. Latin for “false in one, false in everything,” We don’t need new rules to prosecute sexual assault allegations, we need balanced common sense. Also see Christie Blatchford’s video: http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/whats-next-for-jian-ghomeshi-whatever-the-verdict-his-once-bright-future-is-now-unclear

The trial unfolded the way it did because the complainants were swaddled in fuzzy investigative treatment.

Source: For what it’s worth, I believe Jian Ghomeshi’s accusers: DiManno | Toronto Star