TURMEL: Gisele Pilon gets harshest sentence from Judge Charbonneau

JCT: These are the relevant facts:

RELEVANT FACTS

1. Raymond Brunet had a Health Canada permit to possess and
produce marijuana for medical purposes at his home.

2. On Jun 25 2020, Gisele Pilon received a medical document
to use marijuana for medical purposes.

3. On Sep 23 2020, Gisele Pilon submitted an application for
a medical marijuana possession and production permit to
Health Canada.

4. On Dec 16 2020, Gisele Pilon and Raymond Brunet were
raided accused under Cannabis Act prohibitions on Marijuana
Possession in S.8(1)b), Distribution in S.9(2), and
Production in S.12(5)

5. On June 28, the Accused were charged.

6. On Feb 3, Accused Gisele Pilon received a medical
exemption.
----------

JCT: So the Crown knew all this but decided to go for jail
time and seizure of her house. She filed a constitutional
motion based on:

Cannabis Regulations defects:

312(1)
medical document requirement for a non-lethal substance;

273(2)
period no longer than 1 year for permanent diseases

273(4)
exemption valid when registered

317(1)(f)
may revoke permit on "reasonable" suspicion

318(1)(c) 318(3)
must revoke on "reasonable" suspicion

317(1)(g)
no more than 2 licenses per grower to inhibit small dosers
from finding a grower;

317(1)(h)
no more than 4 licenses per site to deter economy of scale;

321(a) 325(1)/(2)/(3)
Plants allowed = 4.866 * grams prescribed

309(3) 312(3) 311(2) 312(4)c)1)
Cannot grow if criminal record within 10 years making sure.

THEORY OF THE DEFENCE

A) NO CHARGE WITHOUT HEALTH CANADA PROCESSING DELAY

In Raymond Turmel v. HMQ T-977-13, the time to process an
application to produce marijuana under the MMAR was touted
before Justice Roy by Dr. Stephane Lessard, Health Canada
Controlled Substances and Tobacco Directorate Director, as
"done in under 4 weeks. Renewals far less."

Had Health Canada kept up its "under 4 weeks" processing,
Accused Gisele Pilon would have been exempted to produce
before Oct 21 2020, almost 4 weeks before the raid.

On Jan 28 2021, Accused Gisele Pilon filed an action T-193-
21 in Federal Court for damages due to permit processing
delay over 4 weeks and asked the court for an interim
exemption retroactive to 4 weeks after Sep 23 2020.

She joined almost 400 other self-represented plaintiffs for
damages due to delay up to 11 months for Igor Mozayko T-92-
18. Over 80 plaintiffs filed motions seeking interim
exemptions pending delivery of their permits which were
mooted by the "Hop-to-it" delivery of the permit.

On Feb 3 2021, Health Canada granted Gisele Pilon's a "Hop
to it" permit.

The only reason the Accused was charged was because Health
Canada permit processing was still being delayed by short-
staffing. Had the Accused not filed the Action for interim
exemption, there is no telling how many months more
processing could have taken.

B) EFFECTIVE DATE OF EXEMPTION

In 2003, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled in Hitzig v. HMQ
that the prohibition had been invalid absent a functional
exemption regime and fixed the regime to resurrect the
prohibition. Paragraph 170 of the decision states:
"Prohibition is now no longer invalid, but is of full
force and effect. Those who establish medical need are
simply exempted from it." http://ontariocourts.on.ca/decisions/2003/october/hitzigC39532.htm

On Dec 15 2004, in Queen v. Johnny Dupuis, 2004 IIJCan 48452
(QC C.Q.) the Honorable Pierre Chevalier J.C.Q. stayed the
proceedings when the Accused established medical need by the
testimony of his doctor.

Though Cannabis Regulation 273(4) states the exemption is
valid when it is registered, the accused submits she was
exempt having established her medical on June 25 2020 when
her doctor signed her medical document.

C) PROHIBITIONS UNCONSTITUTIONAL ABSENT MEDICAL EXEMPTION

The constitutional challenge is that the Medical Marijuana
regimes since 2001 have offered illusory access and supply.

The R. v. Parker [2000] decision ruled the Possession
Prohibition on marijuana is invalid absent a valid medical
Exemption.

The R. v. Krieger [2003] decision ruled the Production
Prohibition is invalid absent a valid medical Exemption.

If the Possession and Production offences are invalid absent
a functioning medical exemption, there is no logical reason
for a criminal prohibition against the distribution of the
substance that is legal to produce and possess.

52. S.309(3)
skilled growers can't go straight.

286(1)(d)
L.P. must cancel upon "reasonable" suspicion

286(2)
L.P. may cancel for business reasons

266(2)(b) 3b, 4b, 5b, 6b, 30*g
May not possess more than 150 grams in away from home

308
Health Canada may require additional information not on the
form.

No exemption from "distribution" for sharing and sampling
among patients

No help allowed to grow

Processing delays exists

S.12(5) Cannabis Act
4 plants max per household, not per human.

All these impediments to access and supply make the
exemption in the Cannabis Regulations illusory and the S.
8(1)b) Possession, S.9(2) Distribution and S.12(5)
Production prohibitions on marijuana of no force and effect
absent the functional exemption.

THEORY OF THE DEFENCE

A) NO CHARGE WITHOUT HEALTH CANADA PROCESSING DELAY

In Raymond Turmel v. HMQ T-977-13, the time to process an
application to produce marijuana under the MMAR was touted
before Justice Roy by Dr. Stephane Lessard, Health Canada
Controlled Substances and Tobacco Directorate Director, as
"done in under 4 weeks. Renewals far less."

Had Health Canada kept up its "under 4 weeks" processing,
Accused Gisele Pilon would have been exempted to produce
before Oct 21 2020, almost 4 weeks before the raid.

On Jan 28 2021, Accused Gisele Pilon filed an action T-193-
21 in Federal Court for damages due to permit processing
delay over 4 weeks and asked the court for an interim
exemption retroactive to 4 weeks after Sep 23 2020.

She joined almost 400 other self-represented plaintiffs for
damages due to delay up to 11 months for Igor Mozayko T-92-
18. Over 80 plaintiffs filed motions seeking interim
exemptions pending delivery of their permits which were
mooted by the "Hop-to-it" delivery of the permit.

On Feb 3 2021, Health Canada granted Gisele Pilon's a "Hop
to it" permit.

The only reason the Accused was charged was because Health
Canada permit processing was still being delayed by short-
staffing. Had the Accused not filed the Action for interim
exemption, there is no telling how many months more
processing could have taken.

B) EFFECTIVE DATE OF EXEMPTION

In 2003, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled in Hitzig v. HMQ
that the prohibition had been invalid absent a functional
exemption regime and fixed the regime to resurrect the
prohibition. Paragraph 170 of the decision states:
"Prohibition is now no longer invalid, but is of full
force and effect. Those who establish medical need are
simply exempted from it." http://ontariocourts.on.ca/decisions/2003/october/hitzigC39532.htm

On Dec 15 2004, in Queen v. Johnny Dupuis, 2004 IIJCan 48452
(QC C.Q.) the Honorable Pierre Chevalier J.C.Q. stayed the
proceedings when the Accused established medical need by the
testimony of his doctor.

Though Cannabis Regulation 273(4) states the exemption is
valid when it is registered, the accused submits she was
exempt having established her medical on June 25 2020 when
her doctor signed her medical document.

C) PROHIBITIONS UNCONSTITUTIONAL ABSENT MEDICAL EXEMPTION

The constitutional challenge is that the Medical Marijuana
regimes since 2001 have offered illusory access and supply.

The R. v. Parker [2000] decision ruled the Possession
Prohibition on marijuana is invalid absent a valid medical
Exemption.

The R. v. Krieger [2003] decision ruled the Production
Prohibition is invalid absent a valid medical Exemption.

If the Possession and Production offences are invalid absent
a functioning medical exemption, there is no logical reason
for a criminal prohibition against the distribution of the
substance that is legal to produce and possess.
-----------------

JCT: In pre-trial discussions, Judge France Charbonneau
decided to amend the indictent to proceed by way of summary
conviction rather than by indictent so they could plead
guioty and she could grant them discharges with no criminal
records. She also ordered the Crown to drop the claim to
seize the house. Even though the Crown still pushed for a
sentence of incarceration, the judge told them to read
between the lines.

Sadly, the Hitzig 170 argument that Gisele was exempted from
the date the doctor signed would not be heard and it was
going to be our last chance to make that argument. But
coming out of it with no criminal record and no house
seizure was just too tempting to keep fighting.

The judge had asked them for their medical documentation and
final submissions. So I prepared:

Sentence submissions for Sep 22 2022

In 2013, Dr. Stephane Lessard, Controlled Substances and
Tobacco Directorate, told Federal Court Justice Roy that
Under the MMAR, processing an application to produce
marijuana was "done in under 4 weeks."

Under the Cannabis Act & Regulations, it took up to 11
months. Mine had taken 7 months before my Federal Court
Statement of Claim and motion for interim exemption pending
delivery prompted Health Canada to quickly issue it to
mooten my hearing.

The Ontario Court of Appeal's 2003 Hitzig decision stated:
"Those who establish medical need are simply exempt." When
Health Canada originally issued permits, they were backdated
to start on the day the doctor signed to establish medical
need and ended a year later.

My constitutional motion herein argued that my exemption
should not have started when Health Canada issued the permit
but when the doctor signed the medical document to establish
medical need. Temporary Driver Licenses are issued upon
passing the test until delivery of the permit. Health Canada
should do the same upon the doctor signing to establish
medical need.

It was only when Federal Court Justice Brown asked how the
backdating worked reduce the period of the permit by the
number of months it took to process the permit that Health
Canada started the period of the permits upon issuance for
the full period of the year prescribed. This policy violates
the Hitzig decision leaving patients not exempted while
Health Canada processed their permits.

The fact periods on the permit did start upon the date the
doctor signed the medical document is an admission that even
Health Canada accepted that exemption started upon the
doctor signing to establish medical need.

Had I applied while Health Canada was backdating the permits
to when the doctor signed the medical document, I would have
had a document to present to the court exempting me since
then.

I would not have been charged in December But for Health
Canada's failure to expeditiously process my application and
for the change in starting th permit when it was issued.

As I should not be punished for Health Canada's failures,
I would therefore ask for an Order granting me an absolute
discharge and for the return of my equipment.
Gisele Pilon
--------------

JCT: So here is Justice France Chabonneau's decision:

COUR SUPIRIEURE
(Chambre criminelle)
CANADA
PROVINCE DE QUIBEC
DISTRICT DE GATINEAU
N0: 550-01-122287-214
DATE : Le 30 septembre 2022

SOUS LA PRISIDENCE DE LHONORABLE FRANCE CHARBONNEAU, J.C.S.

SA MAJESTI LE ROI
Poursuivant
c.
GISHLE PILON
Accusie
Et
RAYMOND BRUNET
Accusi

TRANSCRIPTION D'UN JUGEMENT RENDU ORALEMENT1
TRANSCRIPT OF JUDGMENT RENDERED ORALLY1

I. INTRODUCTION

[1] Le present jugement fait suite a plusieurs seances de
facilitation entre Madame Gisele Pilon, Monsieur Raymond
Brunet, la Poursuite et le Tribunal. Les accuses, qui se
representent seuls, ont enregistre, le 7 septembre 2022, un
plaidoyer de culpabiliti sur le deuxieme chef d'accusation
tel qu'amende par la Poursuite dans le but de faciliter les
negociations.

[1] The present judgment is after several facilitation
sessions between Madame Gisele Pilon, Mister Raymond Brunet,
the Prosecution and the Court. The accused who represent
themselves have registered a plea on September 7 2022 of
guilty on the second count in the indictment as amended by
the Prosecution in the goal of facilitating the
negotiations.

1 Transcription revisee du jugement rendu oralement le 29
septembre 2022. Les prisents motifs ont iti modifiis et
remaniis pour en amiliorer la prisentation et la
comprihension comme le permet larrjt Kellogg's Company of
Canada c. P.G. du Quibec, [1978] C.A. 258, 259-260, le
dispositif demeurant toutefois inchangi JC2266

1 Revised transcript of the judgment rendered on September
29 2022. The present reasons have been modified and amended
to improve the presentation and comprehension as permitted
by Kellog Company of Canada v. P.G. du Quebec [1978] C.A.
258, 259-260, the contrivance remains unchanged.

[2] Ils ont plaidi coupable au deuxihme chef d'accusation tel
qu'amendi pour jtre pris par voie sommaire:
Dans le dossier 550-01-122287-214
Le ou vers le 16 dicembre 2020, ` Plaisance, district de
Gatineau, dans une maison dhabitation oy risident
habituellement deux ou plusieurs individus bgis de 18
ans ou plus, a cultivi une ou plusieurs plantes de
cannabis, portant ainsi le total de plaintes cultivies,
multipliies ou ricolties dans une maison dhabitation `
plus de quatre (4) plantes de cannabis en mjme temps,
commettant ainsi une infraction sommaire lacte criminel
privu ` larticle 12(5) (9)b) de la Loi sur le cannabis.

[2] They pleaded guilty to the second count as amended to be
tried by summary conviction:
In the file 550-01-122287-214
On or about December 16 2020, at Plaisance in the
district of Gatineau, in a residential house where
resided habitually two or more individuals aged over 18
years or more, did cultivate one or more cannabis plants
with a total of plants cultivated, grown or harvested in
a residential house a more than 4 cannabis plants
together, thusly committing an infraction punishable by
summary conviction under S.12(5) (9)b) of the Cannabis
Act.

[3] Les chefs 1 et 3 ont fait lobjet dun retrait de la part
de la Poursuite.

[3] Counts 1 and 3 were withdrawn by the Crown.

[4] Toujours dans le but de faire avancer les nigociations,
la Poursuite a consenti ` lever le blocage de limmeuble de
Madame Pilon. Le Tribunal a ainsi rendu le 22 septembre 2022
une ordonnance annulant et radiant une ordonnance de blocage
dun bien infractionnel non chimique (art. 91(9) et suivant
sur la Loi sur le cannabis).

[4] Always with the goal of advancing the negotiations, the
Prosecution consented to lift the blockage on the house of
Madame Pilon. The Court did render on September 22 2022 an
Order annulling and striking the Order of blockage of a non-
chemical infractional good (S.91(9) and pursuant to the
Cannabis Act).

[5] Les accusis ont tous les deux plaidi coupable de manihre
libre et volontaire, sans promesse ni menace, aprhs avoir
iti d{ment informi par le Tribunal de toutes les
consiquences juridiques dicoulant de tels plaidoyers. Ils
reconnaissent et admettent en outre tous les iliments
essentiels de linfraction mentionnie pour laquelle ils ont
chacun plaidi coupable.

[5] The accused both pleaded guilty voluntarily and of their
own free will, without promise or threat, after having been
informed by the Court of the consequences of the such pleas.
They acknowledge and admit all the essential elements of
the infraction cited for which they each pleaded guilty.

[6] Pour les fins du prisent rhglement, les accusis
reconnaissent les faits suivants:

[6] For the goals of the present regulation, the accused
acknowledge the following facts:

[7] Lenqujte policihre a dibuti en novembre 2020 suite `
plusieurs plaintes du personnel de licole primaire Sacri-Cur
au sujet dune possible culture de cannabis au 74 Montie
Papineau, ` Plaisance. Il sagit dun immeuble de quatre
logements appartenant ` Gishle Pilon et ` un certain Jean
Brunet. Gishle Pilon demeure ` lappartement A qui se situe
au rez-de-chaussie.

[7] The police investigation started in November 2020 after
several complaints by the Sacre Coeur primary school about a
possible cultivation of cannabis belonging to Gisele Pilon
and Jean Brunet. Gisele Pilon resides in the ground level
apartment A.

[8] Les virifications auprhs de Santi Canada rivhlent
labsence de permis ou historique de permis en lien avec
ladresse situie au 74 Montie Papineau et ses risidents.

[8] The checks with Health Canada revealed the absence of
permit or history of permit connected to the 74 Montee
Papineau address and its residents.

JCT: But Health Canada did have her application for a permit
three months earlier in August as they told the police she
didn't have one in November. So even though she had her
medical document by her doctor filed with them, they still
sicced the cops on her for a raid while they delayed
processing her permit. Nasty bureaucrats.

[9] Des surveillances policihres ont iti effectuies ` cette
adresse entre le 25 novembre 2020 et le 8 dicembre 2020.

[9] Police surveillance was effected at this address
between November 25 2020 and December 8 2020.

JCT: And she had gotten her medical document on June 25,
submitted her and submitted her application on
Sep 23 2020
and two months later, Health Canada still hadn't processed
her application and told the cops she had no permit yet.

Une trhs forte odeur de cannabis frais provenait de
limmeuble et il y avait la prisence dun important systhme de
ventilation caractiristique dune culture de cannabis
denvergure au sous-sol de limmeuble.

A strong odor of fresh cannabis exuded from the residents
and there was present a strong ventilation system
characteristic of a cannabis grow over the span of the
basement of the residence.

[10] Munis dun mandat de perquisition, les policiers
procidhrent, le 16 dicembre 2020, ` une perquisition au
domicile de laccusie. Une serre intirieure fut dimantelie oy
lon y trouva et saisit 304 plants de cannabis et 6377,62
grammes de cannabis au sous-sol et dans le salon de
lappartement.

[10] With a search warrant, the police proceeded on December
16 2020 a raid at the residence of the accused. An interior
green-house was dismantled where 304 cannabis plants and
76,377 grams of cannabis were seized in the basement and in
the salon of the apartment.

[11] Les deux accusis itaient prisents sur les lieux lors de
la perquisition. Aprhs avoir iti informis de leurs droits
constitutionnels, ils ont tous les deux volontairement
dicidi de faire une diclaration, laquelle savhre
incriminante relativement ` la culture de cannabis.

[11] The two accused were present on the premises for the
raid. After having been informed of their constitutional
rights, they both decided to make a voluntary statement
which criminally aver to the production of cannabis.

[12] Ils diclarent notamment quils sont en couple depuis 2
ans.

[12] They admit to being a couple for 2 years.

[13] Raymond Brunet a un permis de culture de cannabis imis
par Santi Canada pour son adresse situie au 3, rue
Principale ` St-Andri-Avelin.

[13] Raymond Brunet has a permit to cultivate cannabis
issued by Health Canada for his address at 3 Rue Principale
at St. Andre-Avelin.

[14] Gishle Pilon avait diposi, en ao{t 2020, une demande de
permis de culture de cannabis ` des fins midicales auprhs de
Santi Canada. Cela est confirmi par la preuve.

[14] Gisele Pilon had submitted an application to cultivate
cannabis for medical purposes to Health Canada in August
2020. This has been confirmed by the evidence.

[15] Cest igalement en ao{t 2020 que Raymond Brunet apporte
une lampe et des plants de cannabis au 74 A) Montie Papineau
et ils dibutent ainsi une installation, sans avoir obtenu de
permis.

[15] Also Raymond Brunet brought a lamp and some cannabis
plants in August 2020 to 74 Montee Papineau and they started
an operation without having obtained a permit.

JCT: Of course, the judge was told how the Hitzig decision
Paragraph 170 had stated that "those who establish medical
need are simply exempt," and she established medical need
when her doctor signed. It was also pointed out how Health
Canada used to date the start of the permit when the doctor
signed.

[16] Ils ont utilisi 14 000 $ de leur prestation durgence
canadienne (PCU) pour construire la serre.

[16] They used $14,000 in their Covid funds to construct
their green-house.

JCT: They also had another $6,000 in equipment.

[17] Ils mentionnent produire du cannabis pour leur
consommation personnelle ainsi que celle de Jean Brunet et
de sa copine.

[17] They mentioned producing cannabis for their personal
consumption and for that of Jean Brunet and his companion.

[18] Les autres locataires de limmeuble ne sont pas
impliquis dans la serre.

[18] The other residents of the house are not implicated in
the green-house.

[19] Gishle Pilon obtient finalement son permis le 3 fivrier
2021 relativement ` ladresse situie au 74 A) rue Papineau,
pour produire une quantiti de 244 plants et 150 grammes.

[19] Gisele Pilon finally obtained her permit on February 3
2021 for the address at 74 Papineau St. to produce 244
plants and 150 grams.

JCT: Actually, there is no limit on stored marijuana in the
home, the 150 grams limit is for possession in public. So
their 6,000 grams were now completely legal.

II. LES REPRISENTATIONS SUR LA PEINE
II SUBMISSIONS ON SENTENCE

[20] M. Brunet a timoigni lors de laudience sur la peine.

[20] Mr. Brunet testified during the session on sentence.

[21] Le Tribunal retient plus particulihrement quil lui a
fallu attendre sept mois avant dobtenir le permis permettant
` Madame Pilon de cultiver du cannabis alors quil lui avait
fallu uniquement deux mois pour obtenir son propre permis.
Il suppose que la pandimie explique la lenteur des dilais.
Il reconnant quil naurait pas d{ inciter Madame Pilon `
partir une culture de cannabis avant quelle obtienne son
permis.

[21] The Court notes more particularly that he had to wait 7
months before obtaining the permit for Madame Pilon to
cultivate cannabis even though it had only taken 2 months to
obtain his own permit. He supposed the pandemic explained
their delays. He admits he should not have incited Madame
Pilon to start her cannabis garden before she had obtained
her permit.

[22] Il souligne quil voulait partir la serre en automne
pour pouvoir binificier de sa chaleur pour chauffer son
logement qui se situe au-dessus. Il ne cultive jamais liti.

[22] He admits he wanted to start his greenhouse in autumn
to take advantage of the warmth from heating of the upper
floors.

[23] M. Brunet est actuellement bgi de 44 ans et il demande
au Tribunal de labsoudre totalement de linfraction qui lui
est reprochie afin de lui iviter davoir un casier
judiciaire. Il souligne plus particulihrement la Section 8
du formulaire dinscription auprhs de Santi Canada +
Production ` des fins midicales personnelles ; :

[23] Mr. Brunet is actually 44 years old and asks for an
absolute discharge for the infraction for which he is
charged in order to avoid having a criminal record. He notes
S.8 of the application form for production for medical
purposes:

Section 8: Diclarations et signature du demandeur
(Demande prisentie par le demandeur)

Section 8: Declaration and signature of the applicant

Les demandeurs qui prisentent leur propre demande
doivent remplir et signer la section 8. Si un adulte
responsable prisente la demande au nom du demandeur, la
section 9 est celle devant jtre complitie.

The applicants who present their own requests must fill
and sign the S.8. If an responsible adult presents the
the request for the applicant, S.9 must be completed.

Je [nom complet du demandeur],____________ confirme que:
I, [ full name of applicant[, ____________ confirm that:

Au cours des 10 dernihres annies:
- je nai pas iti reconnu coupable, en tant quadulte,
dune infraction de vente, de distribution ou
dexportation qui a iti commise alors que jitais autorisi
` produire du cannabis en vertu de la section II, partie
14 du Rhglement sur le cannabis;
- je nai pas iti reconnu coupable, en tant quadulte,
dune infraction disignie liie au cannabis qui a iti
commise pendant que jitais autorisi ` produire du
cannabis en vertu de la Loi riglementant certaines
drogues et autres substances, sauf en vertu de lancien
Rhglement sur lacchs ` la marihuana ` des fins
midicales;
- je nai pas iti reconnu coupable, en tant quadulte,
dune infraction disignie liie au cannabis qui a iti
commise alors que jitais autorisi ` produire du cannabis
en vertu de la Loi riglementant certaines drogues et
autres substances, autre quen vertu de lancien Rhglement
sur lacchs au cannabis ` des fins midicales ou dune
injonction imise par un tribunal;
- je nai pas iti diclari coupable dune infraction
commise ` litranger qui, si elle avait iti commise au
Canada, aurait constitui une telle infraction telle que
dicrite dans les trois paragraphes ci-dessus. Je
confirme que le cannabis que je produirai sera
uniquement pour mes besoins midicaux personnels.

In the past 10 years,
I have not been found guilty, as an adult, of an
infraction of sale, distribution or export committed
while I was authorized to produce cannabis under S.II
Part 14 of the Cannabis Regulations;
I have not been found guilty, as an adult, of an
infraction related to cannabis while I was authorized to
produce cannabis;
I have not been found guilty, as an adult, of an
infraction related to cannabis committed abroad. I
confirm the cannabis I will produce will be uniquely for
my personal medical use;

Je confirme que je veillerai ` respecter la limite du
nombre maximal de plantes en production indiqui sur le
certificat dinscription.
Je confirme que je respecterai les limites de possession
applicables.
Je confirme que je prendrai des mesures raisonnables
pour assurer la sicuriti du cannabis en ma possession
qui a iti produit en vertu de la partie 14, section II
du Rhglement sur le cannabis.

I confirm that I will respect the limits on the maximum
number of plants in production indicated on the
certificate of inscription.
I confirm that I will respect the applicable limits on
possession.
I confirm that I will take reasonable measures to assure
the security of the cannabis in my possession produced
pursuant to Part 14, S.II of the Cannabis Regulations.

En signant ci-dessous, vous attestez que les
informations contenues dans cette demande sont correctes
et complhtes concernant toutes les diclarations de la
section 8. Toute information fausse ou trompeuse soumise
dans le cadre de cette demande pourrait entranner le
refus ou la rivocation de votre inscription.
Nom en lettres moulies : Signature du demandeur : Date
de la signature:
(Nos soulignements)

In signing below, you attest that the information
contained herein is correct and complete related to all
the declarations in S.8. False or erroneous information
submitted could cause refusal or revocation of the
permit.

[24] Il soutient quil pourrait ainsi perdre son permis de
production de cannabis sil devait avoir un casier
judiciaire.

[24] He submits that he could lose his production permit if
he had a criminal record.

[25] Pour lui, ce nitait quune question de temps avant quil
obtienne son permis.

[25] For him, it was only a matter of time until he
obtained his permit.

[26] Monsieur Brunet souffre de troubles danxiiti. Son
dossier midical a iti diposi au soutien de ses
reprisentations et confirme quil est suivi en psychiatrie
par le Dr Walid Darwich.

[26] Mr. Brunet suffers problems of anxiety. His medical
dossier was submitted in support of his representations and
confirm that he is under the psychiatric care of dr. Walid
Darwich.

[27] Il explique que ses troubles danxiiti et ses maux de
dos, lempjchent de travailler. Toutefois, confronti au fait
que dans les circonstances il est peu probable quil soit
diclari iligible pour effectuer des travaux communautaires,
il se ritracte et soutient que, comme il travaille pour son
phre dans la rinovation des logements appartenant ` son
phre, il pourrait tout aussi bien effectuer des travaux
communautaires ` condition davoir le temps nicessaire pour
les effectuer.

[27] He explains that his anxiety troubles and his back
pains prevent him from working. Regardless, confronted with
the fact that in the circumstances it is very likely that
he would be eligible to perform community service, he
retracts and submits that, as he works for his father in
renovating his father's properties, it could perform
community service.

[28] Madame Pilon a aussi timoigni. Elle demande pour les
mjmes raisons de ne pas avoir de casier judiciaire. Sa
situation est diffirente. Il est ivident quelle sest laissie
entranner par Monsieur Brunet.

[28] Madame Pilon also testified. She asks not to get a
criminal record for the same reason. Her situation is
different. It is evident she let herself be led by Mister
Brunet.

[29] Cette dernihre vit aussi des problhmes danxiiti
principalement causis par son fils bgi de 32 ans qui souffre
de troubles psychotiques. Elle est bgie de 61 ans et a
d{quitter il y a dix ans son poste au sein du Ministhre des
affaires itranghres en raison de ses problhmes de santi.

[29] She also lives with problems of anxiety principally
caused by her 32-year-old son who suffers psychotic
troubles. She is 61 years old and had to quit her position
with the Ministry of External Affairs because of her health
problems 10 years ago.

[30] De son ctti, la Poursuite souligne que si les accusis
rencontrent les deux premiers crithres permettant daccorder
une absolution conditionnelle ou inconditionnelle, le
troisihme crithre nest pas rencontri.

[30] On its side, the Prosecution argues that if the accused
meet the two first conditions for a conditional or
unconditional discharge, the third criterion is not met.

[31] En effet, ayant amendi linfraction, celle-ci ne privoit
plus de peine minimale et lemprisonnement nest pas
punissable de lemprisonnement ` perpituiti (art. 730 (1)
C.cr.).

[31] In effect, having amended the charge, it no longer
calls for a minimum sentence and imprisonment is not
punishable by life sentence. (S.730(1)C.C.C.)

[32] Toutefois, la Poursuite estime que les accusis nont pas
fait la preuve quil y allait de leur intirjt viritable sans
nuire ` lintirjt public, quils soient lun comme lautre
absous inconditionnellement ou conditionnellement.

[32] Nevertheless, Prosecution maintains the accused have
not made the case that it was in their real interest without
offending the public interest, being one as the other
exonerated conditionally or unconditionally.

[33] La Poursuite riclame donc une peine demprisonnement de
30 jours ` jtre purgis de fagon discontinue dans le cadre
dune ordonnance de probation pour Monsieur Brunet.

[33] The Prosecution therefore seeks imprisonment for 30
days served intermittently within an probation order for Mr.
Brunet.

[34] Quant ` Madame Pilon, la Poursuite estime quelle a
davantage de capaciti physique que Monsieur Brunet, de telle
sorte quune sentence suspendue serait plus appropriie ainsi
que lassujettissement ` des travaux communautaire dune
piriode de 100 heures et au paiement dune amende de 2 500 $.

[34] As for Madame Pilon, the Crown believes she has an
advantage of physical capacity than Mr. Brunet so that a

[continued in next message]

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)