[Binky]

I spoke to the Rev today,

Please bear with me though, with the background noise going on at the bucket it was hard to hear.

This is what I gathered. On Jan. 14/05 the Rev was in Superior Court, North Bay, the Judge was Valin.

Mike Claims that he was shanghaied and the Judge didn’t get it. All his motions were struck down including the contempt on the crown, according to Valin the Contempt had to be dealt with in a higher court because he did not have the power to deal with it. (More fluffing)

The Judge bought Parker and Krieger the Rev said,

In Judge Valin’s endorsed decision he did say that he agreed, that Possession and Cultivation had been struck but Trafficking and Possession for the Purpose 5.1 & 5.2 were still in because he didn’t have any other authority to go by to allow the striking down.

Now getting back to Mike’s trial on Jan 27th in North Bay, Valin will allow him to call OPP witnesses that he will be able to question at that time, just not as many as the Rev would’ve liked.

The Rev will be making another motion on the 5.1 & 2 validity and to quash this Friday, motions day in North Bay.

All in all, the Rev keeps chipping away at them and at least has the Judges endorsement on the Parker and Krieger in his pocket. Mike seems very focused and has assured everyone that his trial will be quashed come the 27th come hell or high water.

The Rev will be out of the Hazard County Jail house in 13 days after spending over 5 months for a stupid breach they never convicted him for, talk about “Time Served” I was always under the impression that you had to be convicted of the charge before you get to do the time, in this case he did the time before the conviction or a court case. Sheesh!

I mentioned to the Rev about the use of a recording device in the courtroom, and that there was a section that dealt with it, but I didn’t know if it applied to people already in the bucket.

The Rev will be phoning me back the middle of the week, and hopefully I’ll have some more news on his situation. He’s looking forward to his release date and wishes all the best to everyone in their up and coming battles.

Binky

[medpot]

Thanks for your report Binky

I'm sad that the Rev have been inside jail for so long just as an accused and not convicted yet.

This shouldn't be legal in a "free" country such as Canada.

We're suppose to live in a country that your'e not suppose to be treated as guilty until PROVEN guilty, and it's quite the opposite.

Our justice system is VERY flawed indeed, and most time, even if the accused is proven innocent, his or her reputation will affected and degraded..just as if they would have been guilty.

This is surely the case of the Rev that is accused of breaking a law that doesn't exist anymore.

Soon the Frankel gang will have NO WHERE to hide their lies and our rights upon the Charter will prevail!

My regards, honor and respect to this martyr of injustice..Reverend Michel Ethier, Rev Tarzan

Marc

[budEluv]

Quote

In Judge Valin’s endorsed decision he did say that he agreed, that Possession and Cultivation had been struck but Trafficking and Possession for the Purpose 5.1 & 5.2 were still in because he didn’t have any other authority to go by to allow the striking down.

Are you serious Binky!?!?!?

You mean to tell me he (the Rev) has those words written on a peice of paper with his (judge Valin) signature on it!?!?

OR.....

Has he signed a simple order to dismiss with no reason given?

Even if we have access to transcripts where Judge Valin is stating on the record that he agrees with the fact the Possession and Cultivation had been stricken, then he will be guilty of a crime the next time he passes sentence on a marihuana offense.

AND.....

This transcript can be offered as an indication that the Court has accepted the arguement...ie. s. 4 & 7 of CDSA is dead.....then and now.

OR.....

Did the judge say it was stricken, but now is fixed? Both 4 & 7?

Please Binky, could you clarify?

I may just need to go up to North Bay on Friday.

Thanks for the update!

Peace

[Virgil]

That is comforting news to say the least Binky. Let's hope the Rev Tarzan is out this Friday. It is not clear from this report if Tarzan was charged with possession or cultivation and had his charges dropped. It is another time will tell thing that Tarzan himself might clear up on Friday upon his release.

The news is not strong enough to set people to potting plants. The announcement is not orgasmic to the average person, although we are getting there.

[Binky]

According to the yahoo group, someone is using the Rev's decision in Elliot Lake, so I'm hoping there is some substance there.

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/MedPo...ss/message/8767

Others and myself are attempting to clarify the Rev's win, let's keep our fingers crossed. I will follow-up as it comes to me.

Thank you for your concern Virgil,

Binky

[medpot]

Hi Binky ;

It surely sounds like good news.

Is the Rev out of jail yet?

If he won he should be out..right?

Marc

[Binky]

Even with his decision they still held him??? (Hazard County)

His trial is on Jan. 27th and has assured everyone that he will finally be released.

[medpot]

Usually a decision like this should release him on the spot..Hazard county or not

Could it be because this decision is not on paper yet Binky?

Marc

[Binky]

It could be Marc, Once Valin's decision was made they should've released him. What their holding him on is the breach!

[medpot]

Oh..I see ..otherwise he would be out?

Marc

[budEluv]

medpot, on Jan 18 2005, 03:21 PM, said:

Usually a decision like this should release him on the spot..Hazard county or not 

Could it be because this decision is not on paper yet Binky?

Marc

Wow.....

Spoke to Rev today..................and I can't $@$!^%!@ believe what he was telling me.

I will try to make clarity of this while I type....but I'm still astounded at what our good friend was telling me.

When the Rev went to court, he had more than just one motion that was to be addressed. I won't list all of them, but he was there to with a motion to quash, a writ of habeas corpus, etc...

The judge dismissed ALL of them!

When speaking to the matter of quashing on the grounds of NO LAW, he spoke of the fact that yes, possession and cultivation HAD BEEN DEEMED TO BE OF NO FORCE AND EFFECT!!!!

However, he had no case law before him that indicated possession for the purpose had been striken as well and cited that as his reason for dismissal of the motion.

The Rev spoke to a lawyer friend who obtained a copy of the written endorsement and it contained NO ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF WHAT JUDGE VALIN SAID IN COURT!!

The lawyer also informed him that someone in Elliot Lake had already requested the transcripts. I think this is great, but we might be in for a surprise that we will not like. The transcripts won't contain this statement made by Judge Valin. This is something that the Rev has almost guaranteed as he confirmed with his lawyer friend who has seen many transcripts that have been edited by either adding or deleting portions in the transcripts which the stenographer has typed out after listening to the tape.

I have NEVER heard of transcripts being altered before. Can anyone else confirm?

What an absolute sham by the judiciary!

When Judge Valin rendered the decision orally in Court, he wrote what he adjudicated on the back of the motion. Some judges write on the back, some on the inside of the cover (like mine was), sign their name to it and file it.

The motions that the Rev presented were on lined paper with the style of cause on the back. The Rev first saw the endorsed written decision as given by Judge Valin orally when the Rev was before him on the issue of habeas corpus. No problem. It was on the back of his motion which showed the File # 041656, style of cause, etc....

The Rev was shown the written endorsed decision by the judge where he acknowledged possession and cultivation to be of no force and effect.....

The written endorsement was on BLANK paper, did not show the file #, style of cause, etc.... and DID NOT CONTAIN THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT!!!!

Please remember, this was a "statement" made by Judge Valin on two laws, (CDSA Sections 4 & 7) that were not before him to adjudicate upon. It was a statement. An acknowledgement that the Crown and the Judiciary are now trying desperately to hide!!!

I am asking for feedback concerning the following issue....

~~~~How can we get our hands on the tape recording in that court sitting when the Rev was spoken to?~~~~

Rev Mike has no problems with swearing to an affidavit what the condition and appearance of his motions were in, but more importantly, he will swear to an affidavit concerning the oral judgment/acknowledgement that he was given on that day.

The only other manner that we can get this acknowledgement is by requesting the actual taped recording the Court has of that day.

This in my opinion is the Crown on damage control, like they've been for years. It just seems to be getting completely out of hand now.


Any comments and feedback are appreciated.

Peace

[medpot]

Right budEluv..it is very strange and unjust that such important words from a judge be wiped out from the court's transcripts.

I know that in Ontario, the defendants are not allowed to get some copies of court tapes and in Quebec and other provinces they are allowed.

Weird justice system we have in Ontario.

And what pisses me the most is that the Rev is still in jail because he infringed a bail condition from a law that doesn't exist since more than 3 years!

Marc

[Binky]

this is just to let everyone know that the Rev's Jan 27th Provincial courtdate is being held in Sturgeon falls at 201 River St, above the Legion.

If anyone is planning to go, give me a shout!

[medpot]

Thanks Binky ;

I would sure love to be there and support the Rev, but that's a bit far for someone in my condition.

Send our best wishes to the Rev for us Binky!

Marc

[Binky]

Thursday, January 27, 2005

Here’s the latest on the Rev!

I attended Sturgeon falls Provincial Court, Judge Rogers presiding. First off, he wouldn’t let Mike use s.136 (tape recorder) The Judge reserved his decision until March 31/05 in Sturgeon Falls, on all counts. Mike was asking Rogers for an exemption to use his sacrament for the religious purposes argument and to strike 5.2 and 5.1 and the word marijuana to be stricken from the schedule. Also to have the warrants quashed. The Judge did mention that mike should be out on bail and when the question arose, the Crown vehemently denied his release, the Judge agreed and gave the March 31/05 date for a bail review and to render his decision. The Judge was worried about having jurisdiction to release him but Mike reminded him that he did because Judge Lebel released him from a Provincial order before.

I couldn’t return to the afternoon session starting at 1:45pm because of family reasons, but our friend budEluv might be able to fill in the rest, he was also there. The only Press in attendance was Sharon Paquette (reporter) from the Sturgeon Falls, Tribune, she heard Parker, the Krieger no appeal ace, but Mike forgot to mention the Frankelstien memorandum and the 2 Calgary newspaper clippings, and when asked by the judge on what a proper age would be for consumption Mike should have given him a copy of the Senate Report which stated 16yrs. We didn’t have a copy and there was no mention of it, unless mentioned in the afternoon session.

The Rev sends everyone his best,

[medpot]

Thanks for this report Binky

This situation is so upsetting and shocking.

If the Rev ends by winning, he should sue them for all his traumas.

Our heart bleeds for the Rev and we'll pray that someone wins soon so that the Rev regain his life and freedom.

Marc

[budEluv]

Quote

I attended Sturgeon falls Provincial Court, Judge Rogers presiding.  First off, he wouldn’t let Mike use s.136 (tape recorder)  The Judge reserved his decision until March 31/05 in Sturgeon Falls, on all counts. 

The Baliff wouldn't allow me to give the text on Section 136 prior to the request to record the events. Baliff said he would toss me out if I had any communiqué with the accused. If he would have had the specific text, it would have been an option for Judge Rogers to the manner of recording in lieu of granting permission at all. Good thing here though, is that Judge Rogers ordered transcripts for the Rev, so they should be working on that now.

Quote

The Judge did mention that mike should be out on bail and when the question arose, the Crown vehemently denied his release, the Judge agreed and gave the March 31/05 date for a bail review and to render his decision.  The Judge was worried about having jurisdiction to release him but Mike reminded him that he did because Judge Lebel released him from a Provincial order before.

As the last bail review for the Rev was Dec 6th, he can come before the courts anytime to have a new one. The Judge and Crown both acknowledged that he is eligible for Bail Review every 30 days.

Binky, can you confirm with him about that? I hope he can start the process for a bail review right away if he is permitted.

Quote

I couldn’t return to the afternoon session starting at 1:45pm because of family reasons, but our friend budEluv might be able to fill in the rest, he was also there.  The only Press in attendance was Sharon Paquette (reporter) from the Sturgeon Falls, Tribune, she heard Parker, the Krieger no appeal ace, but Mike forgot to mention the Frankelstien memorandum and the 2 Calgary newspaper clippings, and when asked by the judge on what a proper age would be for consumption Mike should have given him a copy of the Senate Report which stated 16yrs. We didn’t have a copy and there was no mention of it, unless mentioned in the afternoon session.

Even though Oral submissions were given, would it be possible to supplement with the material you mentioned Binky? Anyone else know if written submissions are allowed with the Judge having already heard arguements?

Despite the fact that the Rev had told Judge Rogers that it would be "cruel and unusual punishment" to continue his incarceration, he was still sent back to the bucket. Only in "Hazard County", as Binky and the Rev would say.

It is a tragic and outrageous situation. When I left the courthouse, I couldn't help but be completely depressed and upset that Judge Rogers would allow the Rev to serve more "Dead Time". However, when I looked over at the Rev being taken away, he had a smile for me and nodded his head saying it's ok.

On top of that, he wished me good luck in my case and said he would be praying for me.

Wow

I can't help but admire, respect and be impressed by Reverend Ethier's resolve. It shows his spirit is and his faith is indomitable.

Peace

[majere]

All these injustices.....all theses future lawsuits.........perhaps John can come up with a do it yourself wrongfull conviction lawsuit as another frontal attack from those people who have already paid the price but did not know it was legal.

Thankyou Binky and BudEluv for the update!......Number 5 needs input.

cheers majere