Rave Radio: Offline (0/0)
Email: Password:
Anonymous
New Account
Forgot Password
News (Media Awareness Project) - CN BC: Grow-Op Case Tossed Out Over Breach Of Rights
Title:CN BC: Grow-Op Case Tossed Out Over Breach Of Rights
Published On:2011-11-04
Source:Province, The (CN BC)
Fetched On:2011-11-06 06:00:49
GROW-OP CASE TOSSED OUT OVER BREACH OF RIGHTS

The case against a man charged after 500 marijuana plants were found
in a Gibsons home has been dismissed after a judge ruled that RCMP
violated the accused's rights.

In May 2009 Van Dang Truong was charged with production of marijuana
and possession of marijuana for the purposes of trafficking.

RCMP executed a search warrant on a two-storey house and found more
than 500 marijuana plants along with fans, lights and other equipment
common to grow-ops.

Truong was arrested on the upper floor of the home.

At trial, the accused made a number of Charter challenges, including
that his right to be secure from unreasonable search and seizure was
breached and that the warrant was invalid.

The trial judge, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Nathan Smith, found that
while the warrant was valid, the RCMP made an improper entry into the
home. In the absence of urgent circumstances, police are required to
knock first, announce their presence and allow a reasonable time for
any occupants to respond.

Police in the Truong case knocked on the door, but waited at most
only 45 seconds before using a battering ram to bust into the home.

Following his arrest, Truong was also denied his right to speak to a
lawyer of his choice.

When asked by the officers whether he had a lawyer, the accused gave
police a name, but the officers ignored that request, a "significant"
breach of his rights, said the judge.

"In this case, I have found the police took what can best be called a
casual approach to the accused's rights under the Charter, doing the
minimum necessary to honour them in form while effectively ignoring
them in substance."

The judge said he was "driven with some reluctance" to the conclusion
that to admit the evidence would bring the administration of justice
into disrepute.
Member Comments
No member comments available...