From: johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   JCT: On July 29, Rene Ouellet's Quash Motion was the to be   
   heard.   
      
   In previous hearings, the Crown had argued that the Quash   
   Motion had constitutional issues that needed to be heard by   
   the Trial Judge.   
      
   Despite the Notice of Motion including Judge Rogin explaining   
   how Parker and Hitzig had done the constitutional issues and   
   J.P. only wanted the benefits, the judges hadn't read the   
   motion, just got it dropped on their desks and bought the   
   Crown's jive.   
      
   So when Rene refused to elect, he was automatically sent to   
   Superior Court for jury trial for cultivation of 89 plants.   
   When he presented his Quash Motion at Superior Court, the   
   judge told him that was something they should have handled   
   below and sent it back. Of course, it could be handled in   
   Superior Court by the Trial Judge. Neron's Superior Court   
   judge heard the Quash Motion. But this guy wasn't the trial   
   judge and knew it had to be heard before it got to the Trial   
   Judge. So he sent it back below. And now his file lands on the   
   desk Judge Alain Morand.   
      
   Despite the fact the motion was in English, the hearing was   
   spoken in French. So I'm going to translate the important   
   quotes. mainly by the judge:   
      
      
   R. v. Rene Ouellet   
   200-01-180625-141   
      
   Audience of July 29 2016   
      
   Honorable Judge Alain Morand, J.C.Q.   
      
   JCT: The first 9 pages establish which motion was being heard.   
   Each time he'd been thrown out, he'd filed the latest Quash   
   kit.   
      
   Page 10:   
   Court: So, you are asking the court to rule on your motion. If   
   unsuccessful, that will orient your plea you will make. For   
   you, the base of your case is the motion.   
   You've put together your jurisprudence upon which you will   
   rely for your motion.   
      
   Page 14:   
   Court: OK, neither you nor Mr. Ouellet have any witnesses to   
   hear. It's argument on law, strictly.   
      
   Page 17:   
   Court: Your argument is: Consider, Mr. Judge, the state of the   
   law as I propose, already decided and which should apply to my   
   case. Have I recapped what you'll submit? It's that, isn't it?   
   So the contestation deals strictly with a question of judicial   
   argument.   
   RENE: Yes. We have to settle this,then after I'll decide on   
   the future.   
   Court: Yes, I understand.   
      
   Page 20:   
   No, I'm preoccupied that you are here, your procedure is   
   ready, etc.. I'll check with the Registry if it can be dealt   
   with this morning.   
      
   Page 21:   
   Court: I am, I have well-informed myself of the situation in   
   your file. It seems pretty clear to me. I know where it is   
   going. I know what it represents, so it permits to have clear   
   facts to tell you what you should expect.   
      
   Page 27:   
   Court: In the spirit of the Charter, I have to offer the best   
   chance to have a reasonable, speedy, procedure.   
      
   Page 35:   
   Court: In fact, I will communicate personally with the next   
   judge too.   
   Crown: Okay.   
   Court: In the sense that when I find out who is the judge, me,   
   I will communicate with that person, tell of the exchanges   
   we've had, what you've told me... I will prepare a personal   
   copy for the judge sitting on your case, as well as the   
   jurisprudence.   
   Rene: Super.   
   Court: Which means the judge will be apprised in advance of   
   your situation.   
      
   Page 37:   
   Court: After the hearing, a copy of the motion will be made   
   and make a copy of the file for the next judge, then I'll have   
   it followed... So, that's settled, the judge will be   
   presented.. will know of your request, will have been made   
   aware., I hope, and in any case, we'll have the jurisprudence   
   of the Applicant.   
      
   JCT: So Sep 2 was set for the hearing of the Quash Motion in   
   Quebec City. This one I'm going to attend. Should be quite the   
   show. And it's our soonest event.   
      
   Sep 12 Nicholas Fontana Superior Court of Quebec   
   Sep 23 Nice Marie in Gatineau.   
      
   JCT: This time around, the Crown did not try to argue it   
   needed a Constitutional Notice. It is going ahead without. And   
   it can't be the Trial Judge because that's at Superior! So   
   after all these judges not seeing it isn't constitutional, we   
   finally got one who saw he's relying on the constitutional   
   precedents for their benefits. Not doing them again.   
      
   It does prove the point that if you ignore the judges who   
   cannot see and keep asking, you may eventually hit one   
   who does! Like ignoring the popes who couldn't see Galileo was   
   right until one did see.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)