Pubdate: Mon, 25 Sep 2000
Source: Kamloops Daily News (CN BC)
Copyright: 2000 Kamloops Daily News
Contact:  393 Seymour Street, Kamloops, B.C. V2C 6P6
Fax: (250) 372-0823
Website: http://www.southam.com/kamloopsdailynews/
Author: Susan Duncan

JUDGE TOOK STAND FOR DEMOCRACY

DEMOCRACY is a fragile and valuable component of a free society. It
must be respected and protected because it is so easily violated.

That's why the Kamloops Law Courts were the scene of an argument last
week that at first glance might seem ridiculous, but, in fact,
epitomizes the weight judges place on the rights of Canadian citizens.

Police found a hydroponic grow operation in a Kamloops man's
house.

That discovery, made when officers entered his home, resulted in
charges of cultivation of marijuana and possession of marijuana for
the purpose of trafficking.

Defence lawyer Ken Tessovitch argued that the evidence RCMP presented
to a justice of the peace to gain admission to the accused man's house
was insufficient.

The judge agreed with his interpretation of the law and threw out the
evidence found by police in the search.

At that point, the Crown was left without a case and the charges
against the man were dropped.

People can argue whether the judge erred about the amount of evidence
the police should have needed to get a search warrant, but they should
respect the message sent by the ruling.

The courts will not allow police to enter a private residence unless
they have a very compelling reason to do so.

A person who views the world as black and white and spends no time
looking past the surface of an issue will pooh-pooh that position.

The man had drugs in his house and should be found guilty. They will
say if there are drugs inside the house, of course the police should
enter.

But the police can't just think criminal activity may be happening
inside someone's house. The proof must be almost overwhelming. If not,
what is to prevent the police from going into anyone's house on a whim.

Why would they not start arbitrarily choosing a house and checking it
out on a slow night?

It's a little reminiscent of Nazi Germany.

Clearly, most police officers are not inclined to harass the country's
citizens, but there have been dishonourable people both in government
and in police forces in the past.

That's why judges must be sticklers for proper process when it comes
to the way the police force handles its criminal investigations.

It is not about technicalities.

Protecting democracy is not a technicality. It's all that stands
between a free country and a police state. 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake