Donations Gratefully Accepted
Annual Subscription to printed version $10

Contact CANNABIS DIGEST at: (250) 381-4220 or hemp101@shaw.ca

Cannabis Digest is a quarterly publication of the International Hempology 101 Society, which provides current legal, medical, and political updates concerning the medicinal use, growth and supply of cannabis. The Cannabis Buyers’ Clubs of Canada helps people with permanent physical disabilities and diseases. The Cannabis Digest is available online and in newsprint.

Thanks to our contributors: Ted Smith, Gayle Quin, Veronica Horn, Carola Schleuss and Dave Hodgkinson.

Krieger, 52, who suffers from multiple sclerosis, was convicted last September, of two charges of trafficking cannabis.

Pepler rejected defence lawyer John Hooker’s argument the charges against his client were unconstitutional.

In each case Krieger sent quantities of the drug by courier to a Manitoban who required pot for medicinal purposes.

The Calgary area resident sent 306.5 grams on Dec. 23, 2003, and another 495 grams on Jan. 8, 2004, as part of his work with the Compassion Club and the Krieger foundation.

The street value of the drugs if sold at the gram level was about $8,000.

Hooker had sought a fine, arguing Krieger’s crimes weren’t for commercial gain.

But Pepler agreed with Couper’s assertion jail was warranted, even though he had concerns about Krieger’s ability to access marijuana while behind bars.

Couper told the judge the provincial government has not yet made provisions to allow prisoners with constitutional exemptions to the pot law access to the drug.

Krieger was granted an exemption to grow his own pot after Alberta courts ruled there was no other way he could get the drug he was permitted to use for medicinal purposes.

“The provincial corrections people essentially won’t allow him to have marijuana inside the institution,” Couper said outside court, in explaining the delay in sending Krieger to custody.

“He delayed the sentence to allow the provincial corrections people to sort it out.”

The matter will be brought back to court June 18, to determine of the problem has been resolved by then.

Krieger can commence his jail term in the meantime if corrections officials find a way to allow him access to pot, which relives symptoms of his MS.

Ian Mulgrew
Vancouver Sun

The B.C. Court of Appeal has told lower court judges that pot growers should be jailed to buttress the anti-marijuana law. In a significant unanimous ruling that tries to address vexing questions raised by judges dealing with pot offenders, a three-judge panel unanimously ordered a 12-month jail term for a Courtenay man with no criminal record who was caught growing dope for profit.Writing with the support of her colleagues Mary Newbury and Risa Levine, Justice Catherine Ryan said the $20,000 fine Michael Van Santvoord received was too lenient because of the need to deter others from growing.

That’s why a conditional sentence would have been inappropriate as well, Ryan emphasized.

Provincial Court Judge Brian Saunderson last August fined 41-year-old Van Santvoord $20,000 after he pleaded guilty to operating a sophisticated commercial operation.

Justice Ryan said that wasn’t punishment enough — jail time was necessary.

“What is communicated [by the original decision] is a frustration with the efficacy of laws that are not universally embraced by Canadian citizens,” Ryan wrote. “Whatever a judge’s private views, his or her duty requires that judge to enforce the laws that Parliament has lawfully enacted . . . . Indeed, there can be no question that the law at issue in this case is a legitimate expression of Parliament.”

Police in B.C. describe the rise in illicit marijuana production as an “epidemic” and say tens of thousands of people have turned to growing pot as a mortgage helper and income supplement.

The appeal court reviewed some 20 cases involving first offenders similar to Van Santvoord, a former tree-planter reared by hippies, in which the maximum sentence was 18 months imprisonment.

“Mr. Van Santvoord’s crime is a flagrant violation of the law,” Justice Ryan said. “I would, therefore … impose a sentence of 12 months.”

In December 2004, police caught Van Santvoord at a road stop with a little less than two kilograms of marijuana. Later, they seized hundreds of plants, clones, dried product, financial records, a business plan, money and equipment at two homes in the Comox valley.

They also seized a how-to video Van Santvoord was making that boasts of his horticultural expertise and prowess at producing pot.

His business plan projected a net profit of $158,905 a year.

As far as the cops were concerned, the potential profit was two or more times that.

Entitled “Dare to Dream,” Van Santvoord’s accounting sheets included the costs of a new truck, computer, TV, DVD and stereo, wardrobe, dental work, and mutual funds.

The Crown argued that a year or two in jail was appropriate; Van Santvoord wanted the Court of Appeal to reduce what he considered too stiff a fine.

His lawyer suggested a conditional sentence served in the community of between 12 to 18 months.

In his original decision, Judge Saunderson discussed at length the difficulties of sentencing otherwise law-abiding citizens to jail because they were cultivating marijuana.

A few weeks before Saunderson sentenced Van Santvoord, a B.C. Supreme Court judge gave two other men from Courtenay two years less a day in jail for an identical crime.

“The plethora of charges related to grow-ops provides support for the proposition that the present range of sentences, particularly in respect of grow-ops of considerable size, does not promote the principle of general deterrence,” Justice Ian Pitfield said in sending them to the lockup.

“Unless other means of reducing illegal production specifically and generally can be found, custodial sentences … will likely provide the only realistic means of constraining illegal activity of this kind, and the penitentiary terms … may be preferred.”

He labelled growers “a danger to the public,” while Saunderson said pot-growing seemed to him to be a victimless crime committed by ordinary people usually in a financial squeeze.

Regardless of where you stand, Saunderson noted that B.C. has reputedly the highest per-capita use of illegal drugs in Canada and the lowest penalties for breach of the drug laws.

His ruling brought to the fore the serious concerns of judges.

Criminal laws should not be capriciously enforced, nor should the penalties for breaking such laws be so varied that one person is given a stiff prison term and another from the same community handed a fine for a similar-fact offence. That is not only unfair, but also erodes confidence in the judiciary and the rule of law.

With this ruling, the appeal court weighed in on that judicial debate and came down on Pitfield’s side.

“In my view, the facts of this case and the circumstances of the offender warranted a sentence designed to deter and denounce the conduct,” Ryan wrote.

“A fine, even one that reduces the profit motive, does not, in this case, properly address those sentencing objects.”

Like it or not, this ruling says, that’s the law and if you don’t obey it, you’ll go to jail.