From: johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   TURMEL: Judge Millar refuses to hear Tim McConnell Quash Motion!   
      
   JCT: Tim McConnell was in Gatineau Cour du Quebec Friday   
   ready to proceed with his Motion to Quash because the   
   exemption wasn't working when he was charged and the   
   prohibitions are invalid when the exemption isn't working.   
      
   The Gang of Thirty growers were also in court that day. My   
   old Crown Attorney for the 1991 Operation Blackjack raid on   
   Casino Turmel is lawyer for many of them and was for Tim on   
   a completely separate charge.   
      
   I sent Mr. Swanston the Quash motion because the Krieger   
   decision ruled the S.7 production offence invalid absent an   
   exemption and the Smith and Allard decisions striking down   
   the regime. But instead, he's managed to get a deal for   
   anyone pleading guilty of a year in jail.   
      
   So a large part of the morning was Judge Millar amending   
   their indictments so they could plead to a lesser charge.   
   Get that, her power to amend came from S.601, same power to   
   quash a completely faulty indictment and change a typo or   
   charge.   
      
   The first time Tim raised the S.601 Quash Motion to Amend,   
   the judge was convinced by the Crown that it was a   
   constitutional motion because it was based on precedent   
   constitutional wins, and needed a Notice of Constitutional   
   Question. She put it off.   
      
   In my niece's previous case Gatineau over 3 grams, the first   
   judge had also demanded such Notice and after it had been   
   served and filed, the Crown informed the next court who was   
   Judge Millar, that the Provincial Attorney General wasn't   
   coming because there was no constitutional issue being   
   raised.   
      
   So Tim McConnell showed up refusing to file the Notice of   
   Constitutional Question since the Crown didn't think it was   
   constitutional either!!! And it so happened that the judge   
   was Judge Millar!   
      
   Recap from my last report:   
            MS MOREAU: ..what was notified to the Attorney   
            General is a Notice of no Constitutional question,   
            in the sense from what I understand from the   
            motion, is that Ms. Turmel isn't contesting the   
            constitutionality. She's stating that it already is   
            unconstitutional and of no force and effect, and   
            therefore, the indictment should be quashed. So   
            it's a motion by virtue of 601 of the Criminal   
            Code, is what I understand, to quash the indictment   
            on the basis that it's already unconstitutional.   
            And it's been declared unconstitutional in other   
            decisions, is what I understand. The Attorney   
            General won't intervene because they don't   
            understand it as a Constitutional question, and I'm   
            prepared to proceed on the basis that it isn't.   
            COURT: Okay.   
      
   JCT: When Tim and Ray got into court, the situation turned   
   comically rosy! The judge whom Tim was going to have to   
   explain how Judge Millar had OKed the Crown's admission that   
   a S.601 Quash motion is not constitutional was Judge Millar!   
   Har har har har har har har har har har har har.   
      
   When the Crown tried to complain that Tim hadn't filed the   
   Constitutional Notice, Tim handed up the Millar transcript   
   of the same question! Har har har har har har.   
      
   She explained to the Crown how a S.601 Quash motion was not   
   constitutional and booked a hearing of the motion for Oct   
   27.   
      
   Now we're going to get a transcript of Tim's hearing to add   
   to the Marie hearing!   
      
   I hope Judge Millar has a moment to mention all the mistakes   
   that were made in the lunch room?   
      
   Neat eh! Court orders Tim to file a Notice. He refuses and   
   then gets backed up! Aaaaaahhhhhhh.   
      
      
   JCT: So Tim went in Friday expecting that the transcript   
   proves it's not constitutional and doesn't have to be heard   
   by the Trial judge and wanting to have his S.601 Motion to   
   Amend to a Quash dealt with. Remember, S.601 is there to   
   amend a typo by any judge of first instance as soon as it is   
   found. He wanted her to Amend the indictment under S.601   
   power just like she'd been doing all morning for the Gang of   
   Thirty.   
      
   But she just refused to deal with the S.601 Motion and put   
   it off to the Trial judge anyway.   
      
   Then she asked if he consented to the sent off the trial by   
   judge alone or if he wanted a Preliminary Inquiry, he said   
   he had not yet elected how to be tried. The Clerk then   
   pointed out Mr. Swanston had elected trial by judge alone   
   early on.   
      
   After an adjournment to think about it, Ray explained how   
   Rene Ouellet had been advised he had to move to have his   
   election annulled and did. And it was annulled.   
      
   So Time went back in and moved to annul the Election made by   
   his lawyer. The judge asked him how he'd elect if she   
   annulled and he said he would stand mute.   
      
   When others have stood mute, the judge instructs the Clerk   
   to enter a plea of Not Guilty or an election of judge and   
   jury.   
      
   Guess she didn't know she would have to do that because she   
   just told him he could not stand mute to a new election and   
   dismissed the motion to annul and adjourned him to a   
   Preliminary Inquiry on Jan 5 in Provincial Court.   
      
   This is incredible. He is going to be my 2nd ever motion to   
   Superior Court for certiorari taking jurisdiction away from   
   her for dismissing his annulment.   
      
   And more incredible! He is going to be my 1st ever Motion   
   for Mandamus in a Criminal Court (I've done many in Civil)   
   to mandate that a board, ministry, judge do their duty! And   
   her duty was to fix the Indictment before evidence starts.   
      
   In Nicola Fontana's case, Superior Court Justice David   
   dismissed the Quash motion upon first instance while Justice   
   Buffoni did the Trial.   
      
   So it's her duty to do as Justice David did and she didn't.   
   Could have done it to others before but happens to be needed   
   against her now.   
      
   Imagine, two "extraordinary" remedies sought out of one   
   hearing.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)