The article below was written by Jesse Stamm, Barrister, Solicitor and Notary Public, BSc, Bsc, JD, Junior Partner, for a local organization known as 'Hempology 101' published by Ted Smith of Victoria, BC, Canada. At the time of writing this series of articles, Jesse was still a student-at-law, these days Jesse is the 'Stamm' of Batchelor Stamm Law Corporation. Enjoy!
Hello
Hempology Students! I am an articled student (graduated from law
school, will be writing the bar exam in September) at Roger Batchelor
Law Corporation in the Western Communities. I moved to Victoria in 1994
to attend the University of Victoria, and have spent 10 of the years
since completing two Bachelor's Degrees in Biology and Psychology (with
distinction) and my Juris Doctor (aka law degree).
Having
spent so much time at UVic, I have seen Ted Smith on numerous occasions
and have followed his involvement with the legal system throughout the
years. I recently met with Ted and we discussed the possibility of
running a legal advice column in the Compassion Club newspaper. While
there are many aspects of the legal system that would be relevant to the
other issues in the paper, we believe that the most valuable advice
will relate to the criminal justice system. I will set out some of the
most useful general principles in this introductory article, and will
address more specific issues in later issues. Please feel free to
suggest potential future topics to either myself or Ted, who will select
from your messages and incorporate the answers into future articles.
While
some of the obvious marijuana related issues relate to specific
criminal charges such as possession, trafficking, or production, there
are a number of basic and fundamental principles of criminal law that
relate to any involvement with the police, and which any person in
Canada should be aware of.
The first and most important principle is the right to remain silent while interacting with the police.
This is an inalienable right, and there are absolutely no circumstances
under which a person can be forced to speak to the police. However,
there is nothing to prevent a peace officer from continuing to speak to a
person under arrest, especially about unrelated topics such as hockey,
football, and so on. This is a very commonly used technique, and has
successfully worn down a countless number of persons to the point where
they begin to engage in conversation with the police. This is always a
poor decision, and should be carefully guarded against. Of course, you
are obligated to identify yourself if you are driving a motor vehicle or
if you have been placed under arrest; failure to do so or providing a
false name is grounds for being charged with obstruction of justice,
which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment; however,
identifying yourself can be done without speaking a single word.
Remember, if you have been detained by the police, the only thing that
you should say is “I would like to talk to a lawyer!”
This leads to the second most important principle of criminal justice: the right to legal counsel.
If a person is detained or arrested by the police, they have the right
to speak to a lawyer “without delay.” This right is found in Section
10(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. However, while police
almost always use the word “arrest” when arresting someone, it is less
common for someone to hear the word “detention.” If you are being asked
questions by a police officer and you have any question about whether or
not you have been “detained,” ask if you are free to go. If the answer
is yes, simply walk away. If the answer is no, you are under detention
and your right to talk to a lawyer springs into existence. At that
point, remember the first principle!
Thanks
for reading this introductory article, and I hope that there will be
many questions that I can address in the next issue. Please send
possible topics to info@batchelorstammlaw.com or directly to Ted.
No comments:
Post a Comment