Injustice: Prince of Pot Denied Transfer to Cdn Jail
- Thread starter dumpthemonarchy
- Start date
So then media created the Marc Emery that sits in Seattle doing time just as much as Marc Emery created Marc Emery.
Too bad others are afraid to take the opportunity and stand up for what they believe in.
Too bad others are afraid to take the opportunity and stand up for what they believe in.
That's like saying there is justice in how easily we can take jabs at Harpo. There's no justice if people still vote for him.
Do you think he left home every morning with 6 joints for personal use, the size of the one in the OP. That looks to be almost an ounce by itself. (legal limit) If he weighed the pot before he rolled it he was aware of legal issues.
You can try and divy up the blame all you want. At the end of the day, the media didn't force him to break US laws.
Discretion, is always the better part of valour.
I don't think so, but you're free to think that.
Far more than six. Six before breakfast.
I wonder if they have him working in a state tourism call centre doing slave labour to buy ichiban and KD to eat?
Extradition laws are for people who broke the law in one country and then fled to another country. Emery was not in the US when he broke US law. He was in Canada conducting what is in Canada, a legal business.
Since its legal to sell seeds in Canada, Canada had no obligation to cooperate with the US extradition request, even if Emery had been selling seeds in the US and fled to Canada. But lets be clear. Emery's activities did not violate Canadian law.
Since its legal to sell seeds in Canada, Canada had no obligation to cooperate with the US extradition request, even if Emery had been selling seeds in the US and fled to Canada. But lets be clear. Emery's activities did not violate Canadian law.
No they aren't.
Telemarketing fraud.
Mail fraud.
Sale of restricted prescription meds online.
And so on.
You do not have to commit the crime in the country, whose laws you break.
Extradition, is a principle.
The Judge that heard the case, obviously doesn't agree with your uneducated opinions.
There are generally four requirements for a crime to qualify for extradition.
- The requesting country must have jurisdiction over the offense charged. The criteria used is a "real and substantial" link between the criminal conduct and requesting country. Where the crime is committed on the territory of the requesting country, this requirement poses no great difficulty. But where the application of this criteria involves jurisdiction over nationals for crimes committed outside the territory of the requesting state, things become more complicated. A full discussion of these issues exceeds the scope of this article.
- The offence must constitute a crime in the requesting country.
- The offence must constitute a crime if it had of been committed in Canada. The text of the Canadian criminal law does not have to be identical to the statute in the requesting country. The requesting country only needs to provide evidence that the conduct would constitute a crime if committed in Canada.
- The crime must be listed in the list in the extradition treaty between Canada and the requesting country. The Act allows Canada to extradite persons charged with serious crimes. But the list in the Act appears to be for reference purposes only as in one case, it was decided that it is the list in the extradition treaty that prevails and that even if a crime is listed in the Act, it will still not be extraditable if it is not referred to in the treaty. These offences, which the Act calls "extradition crimes", include murder, or attempt or conspiracy to murder; manslaughter; counterfeiting or altering money, and uttering counterfeit or altered money; larceny or theft; embezzlement; obtaining money or goods by false pretenses; crimes against bankruptcy or insolvency law; fraud committed by a bailee, banker, agent, factor, trustee, or by a director or member or officer of any company, which fraud is made criminal by any Act for the time being in force; sexual assault, sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm or aggravated sexual assault; abduction; child stealing; kidnapping; false imprisonment; burglary, housebreaking or shop-breaking; arson; robbery; threats, by letter or otherwise, with intent to extort; and perjury. The complete list of offences is covered in Schedule A to the Extradition Act. The Act adds that no fugitive is liable to surrender if it appears that the offence in respect of which proceedings are taken is one of a political character; or the proceedings are being taken with a view to prosecute or punish the fugitive for an offence of a political character.
A legal opinion regarding Emery's case:
Professor Alan Young on the Mark Emery Case
Basically its a judgment call.
Canada is not obligated to respect the US extradition request if the action is legal in Canada. Possession of marijuana seeds is illegal in Canada, but not commonly enforced.
Canada is not obligated to respect the US extradition request if the US penalty is unduly harsh compared to Canadian law. "Is 10 years to life" unduly harsh relative to a not commonly enforced law, which when enforced results in a small fine?
Read Emery's link at Cannabis Culture. He declared all income and paid all his taxes.
Professor Alan Young on the Mark Emery Case
Basically its a judgment call.
Canada is not obligated to respect the US extradition request if the action is legal in Canada. Possession of marijuana seeds is illegal in Canada, but not commonly enforced.
Canada is not obligated to respect the US extradition request if the US penalty is unduly harsh compared to Canadian law. "Is 10 years to life" unduly harsh relative to a not commonly enforced law, which when enforced results in a small fine?
Read Emery's link at Cannabis Culture. He declared all income and paid all his taxes.
Last edited:
Gladly...
Emery agrees to 5 years in Canadian prison
Do you read your own links?
An inconvenient fact, or two...
1, This is a piss poor brief from an Osgoode Law School Professor. Since he totally fails to address the extradition request for money laundering. After he acknowledged its existence.
2, "But marijuana seeds are most definitely banned under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and to think otherwise would be a "misreading" of the law, said Young. " Nuff said...
Last edited:
What were the circumstances of the money laundering? If he is doing time for that, it is more than anyone from Wichovia got and they did billions of dollar of real drug money laundering.
Don't know, but obviously it met the standard. Then again, he also plead guilty to it, too.
Doesn't set precedent in a Canadian Court.
The whole injustice thing is starting to fall apart,