| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
 Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2005 10:00 am Post subject: U.S. seeking extradition for offences COMMITTED IN CANADA |
 |
|
Did Canada unknowingly vote for Bush?
Why is the U.S. increasing its efforts to prosecute Canadians and why is Canada going along with it?
The Globe and Mail
Pot activist faces extradition
Pro-marijuana activist Marc Emery faces the possibility of life in a U.S. prison for selling seeds over the Internet
By Rod Mickleburgh
July 30/05
| Quote: | The BC3 extradition hearing is now scheduled for June 1-5th, 2009, according to Cannabis Culture online March 16/09.
|
| Quote: | Marc Emery, Canada's most prominent pro-marijuana activist, is facing the possibility of life imprisonment in the United States for selling marijuana seeds over the Internet to U.S. customers. (See also Jurisdiction in Cyberspace by C. Ian Kyer of Fasken Martineau's Toronto, Ont. office).
In a stunning development, RCMP officers arrested the self-proclaimed “Prince of Pot” in Halifax yesterday after a U.S. federal grand jury indicted him on charges of conspiracy to distribute marijuana seeds, conspiracy to distribute marijuana and conspiracy to engage in money laundering. (See the excellent newsletter, Moneylaundering.com, which provides full information on internationally imposed U.S. money laundering legislation set out below. Note the penalties of criminal and civil forfeiture created by the legislation, thus ensuring a steady flow of international assets to the U.S. Treasury:
| Quote: | • Laundering of Monetary Instruments - Title 18, USC Sec. 1956
• Monetary Transactions in Property Derived from Specified Unlawful Activity - Title 18, USC Sec. 1957
• Prohibition of Unlicensed Money Transmitting Businesses - Title 18, USC Sec. 1960
• Civil Forfeiture - Title 18, USC Sec. 981
• Criminal Forfeiture - Title 18, USC Sec. 982
• Providing Material Support to Terrorists - Title 18, USC Sec. 2339A
• Providing Material Support or Resources to Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations - Title 18, USC Sec. 2339B
• International Emergency Economic Powers Act - Title 50, USC Sec. 1701-1707). |
|
| Quote: | The charges stem from Mr. Emery's lucrative sale of marijuana seeds, an activity he has carried on from his Vancouver base with minimal legal penalty for 10 years.
“I've sold about four million seeds,” the marijuana mogul boasted in a 2002 media interview. “Unlike most other seed dealers, I use my real name and I'm easy to find.” U.S. drug-enforcement officials said they will seek Mr. Emery's extradition from Canada to stand trial in Seattle, where conviction on either of the marijuana charges carries a minimum prison term of 10 years to a maximum of life. Special Agent Rodney Benson of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) said Mr. Emery, 47, has distributed millions of cannabis seeds to U.S. customers over the years, earning as much as $3-million annually. (See DEA news briefs, "Prince of Pot" Arrested by US-Canadian Task Force, Major Distributor of Marijuana Federally Indicted in Seattle, Washington and Statement from DEA Administrator Karen P. Tandy, Major North American Marijuana Trafficker Self-Proclaimed “Prince of Pot” aka Marc Scott Emery Arrested Today, both dated July 29/05).
... The arrest of Mr. Emery, also head of the B.C. Marijuana Party, was accompanied by a simultaneous Vancouver Police raid of party headquarters on the edge of the city's drug-ravaged Downtown Eastside. Police were acting on a search warrant signed by Associate Chief Justice Patrick Dohm of the B.C. Supreme Court, who agreed there were reasonable grounds to believe that the three conspiracy charges “over which the United States of America has jurisdiction have been committed.” ...The extradition hearing is certain to highlight a clash between the Draconian drug laws of the United States and Canada's more benign approach to marijuana use. Only last week, the B.C. Court of Appeal rejected a two-year jail term for a convicted marijuana grower as excessive (see R. v. Shaw) , while Ottawa is moving to decriminalize possession of small amounts of pot.
... U.S. officials praised the “outstanding co-operation” of Canadian law-enforcement agencies in their 18-month investigation of Mr. Emery's seed business, 75 per cent of which they said was aimed at Americans. |
More Canucks prosecuted south for cross-border offences:
CNN.com
Drug tunnel found under Canada border
Five arrests made after agents monitored construction
By Terry Frieden
July 22/05
| Quote: | Federal agents have closed down the first known smuggling tunnel under the U.S.-Canada border and arrested on drug charges the three Canadians who allegedly built it, law enforcement authorities said Thursday. The three men from Surrey, British Columbia, were taken into custody Wednesday night as they emerged on the U.S. side of the tunnel they had built during the past year, according to Drug Enforcement Administration officials. Two U.S. citizens also were arrested for transporting marijuana authorities said was taken through the tunnel. The DEA said the newly completed tunnel is the first discovered on the northern border. Several tunnels have been discovered along the Mexico border. The 360-foot tunnel runs from under a Quonset hut on the Canadian side of the border to the living room of a house in Lynden, Washington, authorities said. The town is about 90 miles north of Seattle.
... The Canadian defendants were identified as Francis Devadra Raj, 30; Timothy Woo, 34; and Johnathan Valenzuela, 27, all of Surrey. They were scheduled to appear Thursday in federal court in Seattle to face charges of conspiracy to distribute marijuana and conspiracy to import marijuana, authorities said. The officials said they expected the three to be prosecuted in the United States rather than Canada because no illegal drugs were transported from the U.S. side of the border. |
So does this mean all cross-border matters are U.S. matters?
It's beginning to seem that way. What are the limits of U.S. jurisdiction in Canada, we wonder, especially when when U.S. law poses much tougher penalties? What legislation besides U.S. drug laws did Canada sign on to in our various shared border agreements? We'll try to find out more as we continue our coverage of this case. Please check back soon for updates.
What did B.C. 's solicitor general, former dairy farmer, realtor/developer, have to say about the U.S. arrest?
| Quote: | | B.C.'s solicitor general says he's glad the three Surrey men charged with smuggling pot through a cross-border tunnel were arrested in the U.S. – not Canada – because penalties are harsher across the border. ... "The sentencing that's doled out for people who engage in production or trafficking of marijuana has become a bit of a joke. And our American friends apparently don't treat it as lightly, nor should they." ... Les says it's time Ottawa instructed judges to hand out long sentences to drug dealers in this country. "I think we need our federal government to instruct the courts through legislation or otherwise to deal more seriously with the trafficking of these drugs that are destroying our kids," he says. "I'm a great advocate of putting these people away for a considerable amount of time so that they're unable to visit their nefarious effect on our communities." (From Tougher drug sentences needed, says solicitor general at CBC.ca, last updated Jul 22/05). |
Aren't there rules against commenting on a matter still before the court?
Yes, we would have thought so - something to do with the increasingly quaint notion at common law of the presumption of innocence, a right supposedly guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights of Freedoms. Here's what we got when we searched the phrase, contempt of court:
| Quote: | Contempt of court is the only crime in Canada that is not included in the Criminal Code. Instead, it is an "inherent" power of the court - a common law power that has evolved through hundreds of years of case law. As a result, the meaning of contempt and the circumstances to which it applies are not always clearly defined, and continue to evolve. The law of contempt is one of the more confusing and controversial areas of media law, and is a frequent source of irritation to some defenders of freedom of the press. It is also an area where clear distinctions between Canadian and U.S. law highlight the greater restrictions that Canadian journalists face.
Simply put, contempt of court is defined as "any act which is calculated to embarrass, hinder or obstruct court in administration of justice, or which is calculated to lessen its authority or its dignity" (Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th edition). In practical terms, comtempt most commonly means disobeying a court order (e.g., defying a publication ban), or prejudicing the right of an accused to a fair trial (emphasis added) (e.g., imputing or prejudging guilt or innocence). |
For obvious reasons, the post of solicitor general is usually filled by a lawyer, so we searched the Law Society of B.C.'s website to see what rules might apply if Mr. Les had made his comments as a member of the local bar. See CHAPTER 2, INTEGRITY of the Professional Conduct Handbook, which states as follows:
| Quote: | Dishonourable conduct
1. A lawyer must not, in private life, extra-professional activities or professional practice, engage in dishonourable or questionable conduct that casts doubt on the lawyer's professional integrity or competence, or reflects adversely on the integrity of the legal profession or the administration of justice.1 (emphasis added) |
What is Canada's policy with respect to proceeds of crime?
The Vancouver Sun
Losing the war on bikers: B.C. wants to make it easier to seize proceeds of crime
By Jeff Rud
June 10/05
| Quote: | Solicitor-General (then) Rich Coleman said B.C. plans to follow the lead of Ontario by introducing civil proceeds of crime legislation to enable authorities to seize cash and property related to crime without the burden of having to prove a criminal conviction. (emphasis added) The alleged offender would have to show in a civil proceeding that his assets were legitimately obtained. A judge would sign an order allowing the province to take over the property and dispose of it if he couldn't do that.
Critics worry such legislation would go too far. Simon Fraser University criminologist Neil Boyd said the burden of proof in a civil case is a "pretty flimsy threshold" on which to decide to snatch property and essentially brand as a criminal somebody who hasn't been convicted. "It's pretty dangerous,'' Boyd said. "We have a criminal law system that is premised on the idea that you should be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt . . . (emphasis added) The difficulty I have with using the civil standard to take away property that is alleged to be proceeds of crime is that you're dealing, in probabilistic terms, with 50.1 per cent vs. 49.9 per cent -- that's what the burden of proof is in civil cases.''
Ontario is the only Canadian province to have such legislation. The Remedies for Organized Crime and Other Unlawful Activities Act was proclaimed in April 2002. The Ontario government and law enforcement have recorded more than 50 civil forfeitures during the first two years. The province has collected millions of dollars through forfeiture proceeds and Ontario Attorney-General Michael Bryant expects the haul to grow significantly. "In short order, we should be able to recover in the tens of millions of dollars,'' Bryant said in an interview from Toronto.
... Manitoba legislators have followed Ontario's lead, although that province's Criminal Property Forfeiture Act has yet to be proclaimed.
The B.C. Civil Liberties Association has yet to offer an official position because it hasn't seen literature on the subject. (But see p. 14 of commentary on similar federal legislation here, which was apparently fast-tracked through Parliament in 2001). But offering a personal opinion, civil liberties association executive director Murray Mollard wonders if such a law would be constitutionally valid. "The idea of a reverse onus of such a significant impact on a person's personal circumstances sounds like the kind of thing that would be ripe for a legal challenge,'' he said. But one constitutional challenge against the Ontario law has already failed and that province's attorney-general is confident that it is bulletproof. |
Link to this entry
http://www.pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=161#161
Last edited by legal on Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:46 pm; edited 36 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Our e-mail to Marc Emery:
| Quote: | From: legal@pokerpulse.com
To: bcmp2005@yahoo.ca
Cc: legal@pokerpulse.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 10:17 AM
Subject: PokerPulse is covering the Emery case
Hello BC MJ Party,
Just a quick note to let you know we're following Mr. Emery's very disturbing case at our legal forum. We began the forum only a year ago with the intention of exploring gaming laws internationally but it became clear very quickly that the U.S. agenda would take priority. We've examined at some length the Pasquantino cross-border smuggling case prosecuted as wire fraud, in which the U.S. overturned the common-law revenue rule and hundreds of years of precedent along with it. Of particular note, we found some deeply distressing material on civil forfeiture/proceeds of crime, a revenue stream which appears to be propping up a faltering U.S. Treasury. We're especially concerned about the role of so-called money-laundering provisions in this regard. Is Mr. Emery being used with the approval of Ottawa and Victoria to prop up America's Iraq war chest, we wonder?
Legal@pokerpulse.com
http://www.PokerPulse.com
Tracking Internet poker worldwide.
P.S. We would be pleased to provide clickable Help Free... artwork that links back to your site, where we would like to view some briefs by Mr. Emery's counsel, if possible. We think it's very important for all Canadians to know precisely how Mr. Emery became subject to U.S. law and how the hurdle is to be overcome. We have a family member with muscular dystrophy whose symptoms are alleviated considerably by medical marijuana. |
| Quote: | | We will continue to monitor sites, such as the B.C. Marijuana Party and the equally illuminating rollitup.org for developments. Please check back soon for updates. |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=162#162
Last edited by legal on Mon Mar 16, 2009 4:39 pm; edited 9 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
10 yrs. to life and no parole
Emery's counsel to argue against extradition to the U.S.:
cbc.ca
As It Happens
Featuring Vancouver attorney John Conroy Q.C., representing Emery in his upcoming extradition hearing
Part Two
Aug. 3/05
| Quote: | When the smoke cleared, Marc Emery found himself in the biggest trouble of his life. The marijuana activist and two of his staff were arrested on Friday on a warrent from the American Drug Enforcement Administration. Emery ran a mail-order marijuana seed operation that sold product to American customers and shipped it to the U.S. The threesome face possible life sentences in American prisons on a variety of drug-related charges.
Before any of that happens, though, Mr. Emery will have to be extradited south of the border. His legal team is working to prevent that from happening.
John Conroy is Marc Emery's lawyer. He is in Abbotsford, B.C. (From the lead-in) |
Mr. Conroy told CBC he had been approached, not surprisingly, perhaps, by more than a few outraged retired attorneys and university law professors with offers of assistance on behalf of his client. Not that he'll need it. View highlights of Mr. Conroy's previous defence work at R. v. Cresswell both at trial and on appeal, a fascinating case in which he challenged the legality of an RCMP currency exchange/money laundering sting operation.
| Quote: | | The judicial phase of the extradition process is a determination only that the evidence is sufficient to warrant that the person be extradited. The ultimate decision with respect to whether the person will, in fact, be surrendered to the extradition partner is that of the Minister of Justice. At this phase of the process, the Minister will consider any written representations from the person or the person’s counsel with respect to why the person should not be extradited or concerning any conditions to which the surrender should be subject. In reaching a decision on surrender the Minister will be obliged to weigh the submissions of the person against Canada’s international obligations with respect to extradition. The Minister in reaching his or her decision must respect the rights of the person sought as guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Extradition Act obliges the Minister to deny surrender if he or she is satisfied that the surrender would be unjust or oppressive having regard to all the relevant circumstances; or the request for extradition is made for the purpose of prosecuting or punishing the person by reason of their race, religion, nationality, ethnic origin, language, colour, political opinion, sex, sexual orientation, age, mental or physical disability or status or that the person’s position may be prejudiced for any of those reasons. (emphasis ours). |
More on Canada's bilateral Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) with the U.S.. See also extradition procedures generally under 2.4. The Decision to Surrender.
| Quote: | The extradition hearing:
A date has not yet been fixed for the extradition hearing following an initial appearance Sept. 16/05 at 3 p.m. in courtroom 20 of Vancouver's B.C. Supreme Court. The next appearance to fix a date is Oct. 21 at 2 p.m. Please check back for updates. |
Further reading:
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=163#163
Last edited by legal on Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:13 pm; edited 10 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Worldwide demonstrations to protest Emery's extradition:
The Globe and Mail
Pot activist rallies support
by Amy Carmichael
Sept. 10/05
| Quote: | “I want to tell you,” he shouted above the yells, “you are part of a great awareness. Today, 40 cities around the world, from Warsaw, Moscow, Russia, London, Paris, Madrid, Italy, they are rallying at Canadian consulates around the world. In Melbourne, Australia, and Sydney, Canadian embassies are being picketed!”
He said Canada has made a huge mistake. “The government is threatening to extradite me to the U.S. to certain death for doing something no one has ever gone to jail for, that people only ever receive minor fines for.” Mr. Emery said there are about 50 pot seed companies in Canada selling seeds every day. The businesses, people who buy from them, people who smoke pot, believe in Canadian sovereignty, are all appalled he said. Mr. Emery referred to a poll by the Globe and Mail that showed the majority of Canadians are opposed to his extradition. “People understand if it happens to me, it can happened to a New Zealander, a Mexican person. It can happen to an Australian or a person in England or Paris.
“Americans don't honor treaties. We've seen that with softwood lumber. They can spear people away from any of these countries and put people away for long draconian periods of time.” |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=174#174
Last edited by legal on Mon Mar 16, 2009 4:55 pm; edited 5 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2005 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Don't-pay-your-Skytrain-fare advocate applies to be Emery's intervenor:
| Quote: | Robert Arthur Menard claims that The Elizabeth Anne Elaine Society is concerned with the way in which these proceedings were instigated and are being conducted and has worries that the requirement of clear and informed consent is not being properly procured. He is very concerned that the compassionate judicial system of this land, one which this Nation has struggled to create and maintain, is under assault by a power which is blind to the societal worth of compassion, and is in fact in the corporate business of securing workers for their prison factories. He is further concerned with the fact that the provincial and federal governments of this land are not fulfilling their duty of defending their citizens and do in fact seem to be in collusion with a threatening foreign party. A further concern is the fact that the people of Canada and of British Columbia are not being represented by any party before the court, and thus the court may completely lack authority in this matter. He will further present an argument advancing the belief that the actions of the accused are not unlawful as required by the applicable Treaty but merely illegal and thus not covered by the Treaty.
… Robert Arthur Menard claims that he has a direct interest in this case, since it is apparent at least to him that the governments of this land have abandoned their posts as no one in the court is representing or acting on behalf of the Canadian people. This is not normally the case, as the prosecutor normally acts upon their behalf. In this case, the prosecutor is on record stating she was “speaking on behalf of the DEA”. It is thus clear she is not and cannot be considered to be representing Canada or its people. Mr. John Conroy is on record as speaking on behalf of his clients and they certainly do not form the whole of nor represent the Canadian population. t is a deep and fundamental assault on the Canadian psyche to know concerns which have been voiced across this land in every major newspaper will not be shared in any manner in a proceeding which may set a precedent which the majority clearly fears. |
Despite Mr. Menard's assertions, the matter was respectfully dismissed largely on the basis that the judge found he had no authority to consider such an application:
| Quote: | When this Court sits as a superior court, it may grant intervenor status on the basis of its inherent jurisdiction (see Mullins v. Levy, 2002 BCSC 1366 at para. 3 and Squamish (District) v. Great Pacific Pumice Inc., 2001 BCSC 406 at para 11).
[18]However, in relation to extradition proceedings, this Court does not have plenary jurisdiction. The Supreme Court of Canada has repeatedly held that the jurisdiction of an extradition judge is limited and that a judge acting pursuant to the Extradition Act must find statutory authority for the powers he or she exercises. |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=195#195
Last edited by legal on Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:19 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Extradition Update:
More lawyers, more time required for RCMP to process evidence
B.C. Marijuana Party Emery extradition update June 6/06:
| Quote: | On Fri., Sept. 16/05, the BC3? were back in B.C. Supreme Court. Two matters were before the court: the extradition and the MLAT hearings. MLAT is the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty, and that process involves the raid on the BCMP, the seizure of evidence and whether that evidence should be turned over to the United States. The MLAT process is distinct from the extradition hearing, but is heard (usually) at the same time.
At the hearing two new attorneys appeared on the record. Ian Donaldson, Q.C. of the Vancouver criminal law firm Donaldson & Jette, appeared for Marc Emery. Mr. Donaldson is a very experienced criminal defense attorney, a Bencher of the Law Society and one of the top extradition lawyers in the province. His expertise will be invaluable as the case proceeds. Joe Arvay, Q.C., another senior counsel who has represented the B.C. Civil Liberties Association in many constitutional cases (including a Supreme Court of Canada challenge to cannabis laws - search Arvay at Cannabis Health Home - ), appeared for Greg Williams. John Conroy continued his representation of Michelle Rainey.
Because the new lawyers were, well, new, the court adjourned the extradition proceeding for another month to allow them to go through the disclosures. The MLAT hearing was also put off a month. This was at the request of the Crown, who informed the court that the police had not yet been able to process all the documents from the various hard drives seized on the day of the raid. The MLAT hearing was set for late October, the same day as the continuation of the extradition. All of the BC Three are now represented by experienced counsel. |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=225#225
Last edited by legal on Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:25 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 1:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Does the IOSCO Multilateral Memorandum of Understanding really authorize this?
Who will the long, long arm of the U.S. touch next?
The Globe and Mail
SEC determined to target Canadian
By Janet McFarland
Jan. 30/06
| Quote: | The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission says it has the legal right to prosecute Canadian investor John Fraleigh on charges of illegal insider trading, even if he is not a U.S. citizen or resident. It filed a legal response in U.S. court on Friday, opposing a motion filed by Mr. Fraleigh earlier this month to have his case dismissed because of lack of jurisdiction.
The SEC argues it has legal authority over Mr. Fraleigh because he conducted his trades in the United States on the Chicago Board Options Exchange. It says Mr. Fraleigh has also maintained a variety of "continuous and systematic" contacts with the United States, which also give it jurisdiction in the case. (emphasis added)
Mr. Fraleigh, a professional investor who lives in Toronto, is accused of buying call options of Vancouver-based mining company Placer Dome Inc. on Oct. 25 and 26 last year, just days before Barrick Gold Corp. of Toronto announced a takeover bid for the company. The SEC alleges Mr. Fraleigh bought the options "based on material non-public information" about Barrick's offer, earning a profit of at least $3-million (U.S.) on the trades.
...The Ontario Securities Commission hasn't started any proceedings against Mr. Fraleigh, but says it is investigating his Canadian trading.
In his U.S. court motion, Mr. Fraleigh argued that the SEC should relinquish its jurisdiction in the case and allow the OSC to take the lead role, saying it is inefficient for two regulators to conduct hearings into what is essentially the same matter. He also argued it is an undue financial burden to have to hire lawyers in two countries. But in its filing Friday, the SEC said it makes no sense to relinquish jurisdiction to the OSC, since the Canadian regulator hasn't charged Mr. Fraleigh, and may not do so. The SEC also said the cases are not the same because the transactions in both countries are different, and because insider trading laws and penalties differ between Canada and the United States.
The SEC said Mr. Fraleigh has at least $4-million (Canadian) in various brokerage accounts in Canada and the Bahamas that he could use to pay for his defence. (emphasis added) (-- p. B4) |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=231#231
Last edited by legal on Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:41 pm; edited 4 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 10, 2006 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Globe and Mail
Toronto's once great daily trombone
Canadian solicitor-client privilege feared under attack
Ruling by U.S. judge ordering the handover of confidential files may threaten Canada's legal sovereignty
By Beppi Crosariol
July 5/06
| Quote: | Call it a case of invasion of privilege, American-style. A New York judge last year ordered Canadian defendants in a class-action lawsuit to ignore Ontario law by handing over confidential solicitor-client files to U.S. plaintiffs. Ultimately, the lawyers involved were able to resolve the matter through negotiation and the documents remain safely under wraps on this side of the border. But Canadian lawyers, stunned by the judge's long-arm tactics, say the threat to Canada's legal sovereignty is far from over.
...Under Ontario law, auditors can compel clients to submit confidential legal opinions as part of their due diligence in preparing financial statements. But such exchanges -- made under a so-called partial waiver -- are still considered legally protected in Ontario from the prying eyes of third parties, including the courts in the event of future litigation.
And therein lays the crux of Philip's jurisdictional tangle. On April 25/05, U.S. Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman of the Southern District of New York ruled that the legal opinions, once relinquished to Deloitte, were no longer deemed privileged under New York law. Contrary to Canadian law, auditors in the United States are seen as fully independent third parties, so legal correspondence in their possession is unprotected by privilege. (emphasis added)
"A company is in an impossible position if a Canadian auditor asks for documents relating to an action," said David Byers, head of the litigation department at Stikemans. "Those same facts could be put before a U.S. court. The company really, really is in a Catch-22."
For large Canadian law firms that have opened U.S. offices to chase more cross-border work, the case raises its own set of thorny business development issues. Under normal circumstances, U.S. courts would have no jurisdiction over documents produced by a Canadian law firm for a Canadian client. The fly in the ointment in this case was the fact that two of the firms, Stikemans and Blakes, both operated satellite offices in the United States at the time, placing them within the U.S. court's reach. As for Gowlings, it too was roped into the tangle even though it has no U.S. address. Why? Because it retained a New York firm, Friedman Kaplan Seidler & Adelman LLP, as a consultant in its CIBC litigation against Philip. And Friedman Kaplan was privy to some of Gowlings' records by virtue of an electronic connection - common in cross-border alliances - to the latter's computer database. ..."a U.S. court can say 'Push this button,'" Gowlings' Mr. (Glenn) Hainey said. (emphasis added) (-- p. B9) |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=232#232
Last edited by legal on Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:28 pm; edited 6 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Gobe and Mail
Another mediocre Toronto daily
Marijuana outstrips wheat as
No. 1 cash crop
From the Guardian
Dec. 19/06
| Quote: | | Los Angeles. Marijuana is now the biggest cash crop growth in the United States, exceeding traditional harvests such as wheat, corn and soybeans, says a new report by DrugScience.org, a group that would like to see marijuana reclassified as a Schedule 1 drug such as heroin. (From the World in Brief, p. A2 |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=331#331
Last edited by legal on Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:29 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Harper's Magazine
Magazine Subscription
Harper's Index
March, 2007
| Quote: | Number of U.S. states where marijuana is the top cash crop: 12
Percentage change since 2002 in the number of teens using illegal drugs: -15.
Percentage change in the number of adults in their 50s doing so: +63. (-- p. 13) |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=332#332
Last edited by legal on Mon Mar 16, 2009 5:29 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 4:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BC3 extradition hearing set May 28/07:
Cannabis Culture Magazine
No extradition for the BC3!
By Marc Emery
Undated when we checked Mar. 5/07
| Quote: | | Marc Emery, Michelle Rainey, and Greg Williams will appear in a B.C. Supreme Court on May 28th, 2007 to begin the extradition hearing, scheduled to last 5 full days. The U.S. prosecutors will attempt to extradite these three Canadian cannabis activists to the U.S., where they face 10 years to life in prison for "Conspiracy" charges. |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=333#333 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Georgia Strait
Marc Emery plans to run B.C. Marijuana Party from his U.S. prison cell
By Carlito Pablo
Aug. 18/09
| Quote: | Marijuana activist Marc Emery swears imprisonment in the U.S. won’t put out the fire in him.
In a phone conversation today (August 18), following his talk last evening at the Vancouver Public Library’s central branch as part of his cross-country farewell tour, Emery told the Straight that he will continue to run the B.C. Marijuana Party from jail.
Vancouver’s so-called Prince of Pot is also hoping to get some of his work published and even run in a Canadian election while doing time in a U.S. federal prison. Emery has entered into an agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice to plead guilty to the charge of conspiracy to manufacture marijuana. He previously operated a Vancouver-based mail-order business that sold marijuana seeds. His shop was raided by Canadian police and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration in 2005, and he was arrested and charged by American authorities for selling marijuana seeds over the Internet.
Emery’s camp has noted that the cannabis activist paid $600,000 in income tax over the years he was in business.
Emery chose to go with a plea agreement rather than continue to fight extradition to the U.S. and face the prospect of a 30-year prison term. He will turn himself in at the border next month, and is expected to be sentenced to five years in jail by U.S. District Court judge Ricardo Martinez on September 21 in Seattle. Rallies around the world are being organized for September 19.
Emery said he hopes that he will be transferred to Canada, where he could be out on day parole after 10 months in prison. Day parole would see him out working during the day but back in a halfway house by evening. Once in Canada, Emery could also get full parole after 20 months. “Normally transfers are automatic for any Canadian prisoner in the United States,” Emery said. “We have treaty transfers. They get transferred automatically normally. But the Conservatives have stopped transferring marijuana prisoners back. So it requires some degree of lobbying now to get transferred back.” |
Link to this entry
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=684#684 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Memberlist 
Usergroups
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
