I could see if we had had spotlights or even flashlights, or if we had driven in a way to sweep the fields with the truck's lights, but all we did was drive into the laneway and back out. How that equates to hunting, given the fact that I was dressed in slippers, I'll never know. Also, how can 2 people be in the same vehicle at the same time, but only 1 is charged? If he was hunting, how come I was not? If I was not, how could he have been hunting?
Massive Quebec CO fail
- Thread starter Papaclaude
- Start date
I could see if we had had spotlights or even flashlights, or if we had driven in a way to sweep the fields with the truck's lights, but all we did was drive into the laneway and back out. How that equates to hunting, given the fact that I was dressed in slippers, I'll never know. Also, how can 2 people be in the same vehicle at the same time, but only 1 is charged? If he was hunting, how come I was not? If I was not, how could he have been hunting?
Take a look at R. v. Godin, 2009 SCC 26, [2009] 2 S.C.R. 3, where the Court talks about delay and the inference of prejudice from the delay itself - thus the possibility of finding unreasonable delay without the proof of prejudice. Generally a delay of ~17 months or so will put you in that category.
http://canlii.ca/t/23rhf
You need to give notice of a Charter defence - here in BC I would give notice to Crown Counsel as well as the CO. Crown will probably stay the charges immediately if things went the way you say they did, and there really has been a 5 year delay.
http://canlii.ca/t/23rhf
You need to give notice of a Charter defence - here in BC I would give notice to Crown Counsel as well as the CO. Crown will probably stay the charges immediately if things went the way you say they did, and there really has been a 5 year delay.
- Location
- Prince Albert, Sk
I totally understand your side and situation believe me I have been in pickles before also, however this is how they would go after you in these parts, the vagueness of the law can sometimes be a disadvantage or an advantage.
Almost a he said she said scenario.It may be wrong but in their eyes they felt you were doing something illegal.Morally right and legal are not the same thing unfortunately.
Almost a he said she said scenario.It may be wrong but in their eyes they felt you were doing something illegal.Morally right and legal are not the same thing unfortunately.
Given the detail (albiet vague) of your original posts' contents, you saying this could be viewed as suspicious...
Last edited:
Given the detail (albiet vague) of your original posts' contents, you saying this could be viewed as suspicious...
That is part of the porejudice that his friend faces from this extremely long delay. Memories fade and it is easy to forget the little details, or to remember them differently than how it actually occured. There is no malice involved - it is just a fact about our memory works.
Exactly right. I remember the major things - like I know for a FACT that we had no intentions of hunting or no hunting gear with us. I remember clearly telling the CO several times "How can I be hunting when I am in slippers?" Barefoot I might add. This is because of a very painful condition I have that makes my feet feel as if they were scalded. Anything that touches them is extremely painful. I also remember that one of the fields belonged to his brother and one to his father. I think the brother still owned it, but the father had long before sold it, but not sure on that. I know we stopped there because I was thinking of buying some property, and it would have seemed like a nice area (yeah, right!). I also know that we never got out of the truck at any time. Anything else, I'm really not clear on. It just bugs the poop out of me that if we do get a judge with 2 cents worth of brains, this will get thrown out, but I'll be out a day's travel, my wife will have to take a day off work (I can't drive far for medical reasons), and it'll cost me a lot for gas, and there is sweet phoque all I can do to recoup that.
No real comment other than any person being in a position of power/authority has a huge chance of being a prick and also chances are if you are English in Quebec you're more likely to be harassed be law enforcement(speaking from experience). Also FYI I've heard Tradeex is setting up shop in Ontario I guess trying to get away from this dictatorship of a province.
Branwilder
Regular
- Location
- Durham Region, Ontario
This....
Although that was for a criminal code charge.... generally speaking I believe the case law for provincial offenses is greater than 12-13 months it will be tossed.... As long is there is a proper 11(b) motion filled before the court date.... Get your friend to inquire what he needs to do in order to file the application.
Now that is great to know. Thanx
You may be right, however, I believe for some reason or another (in Alberta anyways), the limitation of action for Wildlife Act related offences is longer than that.
In any event, the "due process" in this case appears to be quite drawn out. As stated before, a Charter argument is warranted in this case, and should be filed by his lawyer. Also, although a Stay of Proceedings may be contemplated ( usually one year for the Prosecution to gather further evidence for the charge to proceed), the Defence should apply for a withdrawal of the charge, then it is OVER. Having said that, "Stays" rarely go ahead beyond the one year period.
Good Luck
It is applicable to quasi-criminal matters like the one at hand. The important thing is that the CO may not know about the time issues, whereas Crown counsel will. Also, and I don't know how it is in Quebec, here in BC you would normally be in front of a Justice of the Peace for such a charge, and a JP does not have jurisdiction to hear Charter arguments. You need to send a notice to the CO and Crown Counsel. Notify the Judicial Case Manager (or whatever they are called in Quebec) as they may be able to remove the matter from the list (if the situation the same as here with respect to jurisdiction).
At 12-13 months you generally need to show prejudice - that is often hard to do. After 17 months or so there is a presumption of prejudice due to the delay.
This is why I believe in God ....he was kind enough to disperse the idiots equally ..... so you can find them where ever you go ..... Now if you don't know any idiots ... then just might be one of those who have been dispersed among the population to make life interesting for the rest of us
This is why I believe in God ....he was kind enough to disperse the idiots equally ..... so you can find them where ever you go ..... Now if you don't know any idiots ... then just might be one of those who have been dispersed among the population to make life interesting for the rest of us
I have no issues with this particular CO being a body cavity. It's his Constitutional right, and as you say, a certain number of them are needed for entertainment. What really ticks me off is that the system over there is behind him. You can bet it made the rounds in Qc City before they decided to proceed. Same thing with what happens with all the BS gun charges - the cops have a right to lay them, but the system is supposed to be there to help weed out the BS.
you ve got a ticket or a written notice or just a warning ?
this is their legal office (in Quebec city) giving you a month notice with a fine that you accept to pay or not then deciding for court. for a fish delays are not that long so you shoulf check with the local COs about your case if you re in the system otherwise their lawyer will certainly have stop ... fines are between 50$ and 250$ depending area and what you already done or not (COs know exactly that amount because this is their own request before the court so like a settlement ..) unless you fish in a sanctuary then it s 1000$ and no settlement ...
