John The Engineer Turmel's
Marijuana "Stay-Out-Of-Jail" Quash and Prohibit charges forms
Appeal old convictions and "Get-Out-Of-Jail" Inmate Appeal Forms
Author: Kim Lunman
The Justice Department intends to cease prosecutions on the cases because of an Ontario court ruling in 2000 that found medicinal marijuana users had the right to possess less than 30 grams of pot. The judge delayed that ruling's effect for one year in the hope the federal government would introduce a
medicinal one day before the year long grace period ended 2001. The Ontario ruling created a legal loophole, effectively invalidating Canada's marijuana possession law as unconstitutional because it failed to provide an exemption for medical use. "We estimate there are about 4,000 pending files," Ms. Boulay said.
What about the 100,000 Canadians
ALL CURRENT CHARGES LAY OFF YOUR LAWYER STAND MUTE, NEVER PLEAD The POLCOA Proposition, by John C. Turmel Ontario Provincial and Superior Court judges Phillips and Rogin dismissed the s.4(1) marijuana possession charge against J.P. as "no longer known to law" because, after the Parker decision struck down the prohibition on possession of marijuana in CDSA s.4(1) because the MMAR had failed to comply with the Parker ruling, they had to follow Parliament's Interpretation Act s.2.2 which said that struck-down laws were to be "deemed repealed." Ontario Court of Appeal Justices Doherty, Goudge and Simmons over-ruled them ordering courts to deem the struck-down prohibition as not "repealed" but only "absent" until fixed by the courts, even after two years of absence. There exists no provision for laws being absent sometimes and not absent at other times but the court just made up whatever was needed to trick Canadians into believing courts could bring laws back to life. A Crown who decides to fight a POLCOA motion puts the judge in the difficult position of:: Obeying Parliament and disobeying the Higher Court, or, Obeying the Higher Court and disobeying Parliament. cases If your judge decides he's going to use the Nazi Nuremberg defence of "just following superior orders" to disobey Parliament, then the Sfetkopoulos and Beren decisions show that the MMAR became flawed just two months after they had been fixed by the courts so that Crown Attorney Sean Gaudet's Memorandum to the Supreme Court of Canada admitted: " The Court in R. v. J.P. ruled that the combined effect of Parker and Hitzig meant there was no constitutionally valid marijuana possession offence between July 31 2001 and Oct 7 2003, the date the MMAR were constitutionally rectified by the decision in Hitzig. Courts may construe the Federal Court of Appeal's decision as creating a similar period of retrospective invalidity dating back to December 3 2003, the date that s.41(b.1) was re-introduced into the MMAR." Beren added: "since S.54(1) was re- introduced into the MMAR." http://turmelpress.com/timeline.htm has all the Canadian jurisprudence leading up to 2005. After that it's all in Prohibition of Charges kit. IF YOU ARE CHARGED: By remaining mute pursuant to Section 606(2) of the Criminal Code, you retain privileges that you lose by pleading not guilty.Never plead not guilty. Stand mute Your lawyer makes more money defending the charge than quashing it so lay the lawyer off until the charge is quashed or not. If no, you are back to square one and can re-hire the lawyer then. Do not diss the lawyer for not knowing about these cases, they're trained to defend. To quash is offence, best left to combat engineers. ONTARIO COURTS FORMS BUILDING YOUR CASE BOOKS These pages provide instructions on how to use the guerrilla law forms I have engineered to help have those criminal records overturned and fines returned to those innocent victims. All they have to do is learn the case law timeline. The Documents now include a motion to cite the Attorney General for abuse of process and contempt of court for deliberately ignoring the Parker and Krieger decisions and continuing to bust Canadians after admitting the sections were invalid to the Supreme Court. So Quash as Unknown to law, Stay as an abuse of process, and cite Crown for contempt of courts. IF EVER CHARGED (kits have instructions): Marijuana Legal Defence & Offence Kits http://johnturmel.com/kits.htm - Motion to Quash (S.601) - Motion for Charter relief - Motion for Return of Controlled Substance - Motion to expunge bogus conviction - Motion for release pending appeal - Motion citing Crown for contempt of court for trying to get the court to convict under an offence that has been struck down. Court rules at: www.ontariocourts.on.ca/ court_of_appeal/selfhelp/inmate.htm