Recent Articles

Recent Comments

« | Main | »

Regina v. Dunsdon Provincial Court Reasons

By Hempology | May 6, 2005

There are striking similarities between the court cases of Mary Jean Dunsdon, aka Watermelon, and that of Ted Smith; both were charged with the trafficking of cannabis resin. Watermelon was charged for selling cookies, while Ted was charged for selling cookies, massage oil, salve and edible vegetable capsules filled with extra virgin olive oil infused with cannabis (Ryanol). The following are exerts from her decisions of Oct. 15, 2004 and Jan.5, 2005. Oct. 15, 2004

6) The difficulty in this case is that the analyst was unable to identify either cannabis resin or cannabis (marijuana) by sight in the sample of the cookie that she analyzed. What she was able to do was to identify a number of other cannabinoids under Schedule II that are mentioned separately there.
7) In creating these different offences for those two substances, resin and marihuana, Parliament has ascribed different weights of those substances that will attract, not only different penalties, but different court process. The analyst, Jenny Luk, who gave evidence in this case, said that they cannot quantify cannabis resin when it is in the form of a baked product, such as a cookie. It therefore becomes impossible to place it in one of these categories that the Parliament has created, because it cannot be seen and it cannot be quantified.
10) This is not a case that is going to throw the law or law enforcement into a tailspin. It is simply a case where it was wrongly charged. Had the charges been worded differently, then it most likely would have led to a more successful prosecution. Perhaps that is why there have been no cases in these 7 or 8 years, and it is simply not problematic except if the wrong charge is laid.

Topics: CD-6th, Spring 2005 | Comments Off

Comments are closed.