Pubdate: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 Source: Regina Leader-Post (CN SN) Copyright: 2009 The Leader-Post Ltd. Contact: http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/letters.html Website: http://www.canada.com/regina/leaderpost/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/361 Author: Barb Pacholik POT CASE HEADS BACK TO COURT When a judge decided more than $1-million worth of pot found near Moosomin was inadmissible as evidence, the Crown's case went up in smoke -- until the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal recently overturned that ruling. In a split 2-1 decision, the appeal court has ordered Regent Nolet and John Vatsis can be retried. But the defence now expects to take the matter to the Supreme Court of Canada. Defence lawyer Mark Brayford, one of two lawyers who handled the appeal, said the case has some significant issues that need clarity. "It's something that ultimately citizens should have a great interest in," he said in an interview Monday. "On the one hand, people don't like to see people that appear to be factually guilty go free. But on the other hand, if the police can violate your right to be free from arbitrary detention or unreasonable search and always be confident they can get the evidence admitted, then there is no need to ever comply with the rules." Crown prosecutor Doug Curliss couldn't be reached for comment. Brayford said Canada's top court is already wrestling with similar issues. He would like to see the courts fashion a policy. "If, for instance, police know they can illegally search any citizen because they're going to be allowed to use the evidence ... why would they not simply search everyone?" he contended. According to the appeal court's written judgment released late last month, Nolet and Vatsis were acquitted on drug and proceeds of crime charges after a judge excluded crucial evidence. Court of Queen's Bench Justice Jennifer Pritchard had ruled $115,000 cash and 392 pounds of marijuana, valued between $1.1 and $1.5 million, were unlawfully seized in violation of the accused's Charter rights. The Mounties found the drugs in a hidden compartment when an officer randomly stopped a semi-trailer unit Feb. 16, 2004 on the Trans-Canada Highway. In overturning that ruling, appeal court Justice Ysanne Wilkinson disagreed that the accused's rights had been breached. Her decision was supported by Justice Gene Anne Smith. In her dissenting opinion, Justice Georgina Jackson would have upheld Pritchard's ruling tossing out the cash, but would have ordered a new trial on the drug charges. While Jackson agreed the accused's rights were violated, she said the negative effect of excluding the evidence and the good faith of the officers outweighed the seriousness of the Charter violations. An RCMP officer initially stopped the vehicle to do a safety check and look for proper documentation. The constable discovered the fuel tax decal had expired and the documentation was incomplete. He asked to inspect the trailer after being told there was no load, and Nolet obliged. The trailer was indeed empty, but the constable suspected it may have been altered because "it didn't appear right." Then a check inside the tractor area turned up a small duffel bag filled with cash, mostly in small bills and divided into smaller bundles associated with drug trafficking. He arrested the truck's three occupants (one of whom has since died) for possession of proceeds of crime. When another officer arrived, a closer inspection of the trailer revealed the interior length was a metre shorter than the exterior. Because neither officer was licensed to drive a big rig, Nolet drove it to the Moosomin RCMP detachment, where officers found a hidden compartment in the trailer holding 15 boxes and two duffel bags of pot. Tossing out the evidence, Pritchard had found that once the officer looked inside the trailer and had a hunch it had been altered, his inquiry shifted from a regulatory inspection to a criminal investigation, prompting Charter rights which were violated. But Wilkinson said there were enough legitimate "red flags" for the officer to detain the semi's occupants and check further. The court found the regulatory search was not being used as a pretext to look for drugs. - --- MAP posted-by: Larry Seguin