From: johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   JCT: https://youtu.be/g2NIlv7rEQ4 is the report by John   
   Conroy of the first day's hearing of his Allard et al v. HMQ   
   hearing in Vancouver about the 150gram/day limit based on   
   the 1-3g/d estimate, I noted the boss trump mentioned only   
   in passing and two others not played at all:   
      
   6:15 John Conroy notes Health Canada argued for the 150-gram   
   cap based on studies showing an average of 1-3 grams per day   
   while later noting Health Canada own stats showed 17.7g/d:   
      
   Mar 21 2014 Reasons Manson J. stated in Para.55:   
        As of Dec 3, 2013, the average daily dosage is 17.7   
        grams per day. Despite this, the average amount   
        used by those being supplied by Health Canada was   
        between 1 and 3 grams.   
      
   JCT: So, given the judge said:   
   a) 17.7 actual v. 1-3g/d estimate? tough case?   
   b) 1-3g/d stat includes only purchased and not self-grown in   
   the total estimate!!   
   c) 1-3g/d is not an average, not saying "2" means fix.   
      
   c) may take someone with my math to catch but not ending up   
   averaging 1-3 as 2 had to have a reason. I did a statistical   
   analysis of their surveys and found replete with   
   misrepresentations;   
   b) clear they should have counted both purchased and self-   
   grown in determining the total;   
   a) 17.7g/d is the Ace Conroy should be bashing, not just   
   mentioning the judge gave the actual average in discussing   
   the estimate of that average!!!   
      
   Justice Phelan prevented these arguments from being brought   
   before the court in our Gold Stars Actions. But he knows   
   about the fraudulent surveys no matter what anyone tells him   
   about them now. Or should know about them!!   
      
   Judge Phelan knows about the actual dosage being under-   
   estimated by a factor of 9! (Average 1-3 = 2; so 18/2=9), or   
   should!   
      
   Justice Phelan knows everyone's been severely under-   
   medicated even if he did not let it come before the court.   
   But he knows what has been done to this class of most sick   
   patients and posterity will be pretty good at math.   
      
   10:30 Conroy: A viable exemption the courts have said should   
   exist.   
   JCT: And if no exemption exists, a Bad Exemption, then there   
   is No Offence! He could have mentioned how BENO works. R. v.   
   J.P.: Bad Exemption = No Offence! Charge quashed!   
      
   And nothing can be done about Beemish being Left-Out and   
   Hebert being Amended-Out than waiting other filing a motion   
   for immediate relief with the appeal... which he hasn't   
   done.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)