Predictions

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
wow, just wow. So Manson did take it as a slap in the face from conroy and co. Unreal, what fucking trickery...anyone else catch him protecting the mmpr, douche.
I think that was all part of the original decision...the government argued that continuing the mmar would unfairly compromise the LP start up. Hence the cut-off dates that limited mmar production licenses to give LP's a bigger clientele.
 

cannadan

Well-Known Member
so we are a commodity to be given away.....?
so the judge thinks its fair.....to screw over a portion....of the patients..?
so the lp's have a captive clientele
they have really under estimated what effect they are having on peoples lives....sick people.....
 

WHATFG

Well-Known Member
Really just have to look at the people here who have tried to get good meds and are now going to CC's or growing their own. Instead of taking the time to phase a new program in, they tried to abruptly pull the plug and NOBODY anticipated that we would win the injunction. While that may have been the plan all along, to allow LPS a chance to get on their feet, it is a miserable failure for the people who actually do need this shit.
 

CalyxCrusher

Well-Known Member
If all goes well, there will still be the issue of all the people who get sick in the future or those who couldn't afford the lofty fees to sign onto the old program being given the choice to grow. No one has a choice on when they get sick, and it would be foolish for them to try to impose such discriminating guidelines as ONLY allowing grandfathered patients to grow for themselves.
 

bigmanc

Well-Known Member
I think we are headed to legalization...the U.S. is sooooooo far ahead of us it pathetic. Nig nog should be gone come October and on to bigger and better things in 2015!
You can only hope so, while the US wins mmj battles the groups that appose mmj keep working hard to ban it...washington is on the verge of loosing it apparently
 

The Hippy

Well-Known Member
Really just have to look at the people here who have tried to get good meds and are now going to CC's or growing their own. Instead of taking the time to phase a new program in, they tried to abruptly pull the plug and NOBODY anticipated that we would win the injunction. While that may have been the plan all along, to allow LPS a chance to get on their feet, it is a miserable failure for the people who actually do need this shit.
Doing my part to make sure they fail .
 

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
I think we are headed to legalization...the U.S. is sooooooo far ahead of us it pathetic. Nig nog should be gone come October and on to bigger and better things in 2015!
I think so too. The increasing number of States legalizing and raking in enormous profits can't be ignored by Canadian politicians anymore. Even if harptler is re-elected (did I just write that?...shudder), the issue will be front and center during the campaign and he'll have to answer to the majority of Canadians who favour legalization. I think we'll see the policy the cons and rcmp talked about awhile ago, allowing fines instead of charges for possession used as an election tool. He'll try to make it seem like he's softening on the pot issue when in fact he isn't doing shit. I can't remember the last time I heard of someone getting busted for possession...the cops just confiscate. But...if all things are right (Left) in Canada, Trudeau will win and quickly legalize.
 

Sandy420

Well-Known Member
You are welcome. Court is tomorrow morning at 9:30 am in Vancouver. If anyone can go there then please do! let everyone know, share, tweet, post etc!
 

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
You are welcome. Court is tomorrow morning at 9:30 am in Vancouver. If anyone can go there then please do! let everyone know, share, tweet, post etc!
I don't get why they just didn't ask for the adjournment last time they were in court if that's what they are going to do. What changed in the last month or so?
 

doingdishes

Well-Known Member
this is such a drag! we will be broke, immobile, dead or on welfare before we get our time. this is really becoming silly. this isn't big business for us...It's quality of life
i bet if one of those judges family members were involved in the case as a plaintiff, the wheels would turn a lot faster!
 

Sandy420

Well-Known Member
What is worrisome to me is that the Smith case has very little funds so who is paying Kirk Tousaw and Now John Conroy?

Us patients raised over two hundred thousand dollars towards the legal costs for our case not the Smith case but we have to sit back and wait for the Smith case? I support the Smith case but I'm a 'Left out' under the MMAR and I don't want this adjournment.
 

WHATFG

Well-Known Member
What is worrisome to me is that the Smith case has very little funds so who is paying Kirk Tousaw and Now John Conroy?

Us patients raised over two hundred thousand dollars towards the legal costs for our case not the Smith case but we have to sit back and wait for the Smith case? I support the Smith case but I'm a 'Left out' under the MMAR and I don't want this adjournment.
Maybe you should ask WILCOX...he's on Facebook...but we're not "friends" so I'm not worth speaking to...marbe he'll respond to someone else...
 

Sandy420

Well-Known Member
John Turmel weighs in, JC: The reason for seeking the adjournment is because the
Smith case ,the BC extracts case in which Kirk Tousaw who is
helping in this case is lead counsel, that will consider the
same or substantially similar issues ,is now to be heard in
the Supreme Court of Canada on March 20th with various due
dates during the time set for this case and I am also being
asked to help in that case. It does not make sense for us to
proceed in a trial court when the same or similar issues
will be considered and decided soon by our highest court for
the first time that will provide guidance on the law and
maybe the evidence in this lower court case. It will
hopefully help define the issues in this case and maybe
reduce the court time costs etc

JCT: Sadly, the Left-Outs will just have to wait some more.

If adjourned we will seek to vary the injunction some way to
allow for address changes pending trial.

JCT: Justice Manson already refused:
[6] Given that Ms. Beemish did not possess a valid
license to possess on Mar 21 2014 (the license having
expired on Jan 4 2014) and that Mr. Hebert could no
longer renew his designated production license (having
moved residence on Oct 30 2013) neither Ms. Beemish nor
Mr. Hebert were covered by the injunctive relief
granted. The fact they did not possess valid licenses as
of the transitional dates was determinative of their
inability to be covered by the injunctive remedy
granted.

JC: If we do not get the adjournment we will try and call
the evidence of the problems experienced by many on this
issue since and how they remain in a Parker situation of
having to choose between their liberty and their health. We
will call the evidence we tried to introduce in the Court of
Appeal.

JCT: Conroy thinks Judge Manson is going to let him call
evidence that shows he's wrong? Twice? Bet not.

So Owens strikes the an on derivatives? How does that help
anyone who's been Left Out? Sounds like a hopeless cause
either way. Just another reason to keep raising funds.

So, I'll give you a day to see if anyone can figure out what
his best move actually is. Just think: What would the combat
engineer do? Certainly not make my guys wait until a
decision on something that doesn't matter gets decided.
 

Flash63

Well-Known Member
fyi
"in the matter of Allard et al. and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2014 FC 280. A hearing will take place tomorrow, Tuesday January 6th, 2015, at 9:30am PST at the Vancouver Federal Court House. At this hearing Mr. John Conroy, Q.C., will be seeking an adjournment of trial proceedings."
 
Top