Pubdate: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 Source: Campbell River Mirror (CN BC) Copyright: 2008 Campbell River Mirror Contact: http://www.campbellrivermirror.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1380 Author: Judge Brian H. Saunderson GOOD POINT: FOR THE RECORD In your issue of November 21, 2008 you chose to publish a letter from Sgt. Darrel D. Brown, a retired Sheriff with 29 years of service in Los Angeles County. The letter appeared under the bold caption "Court sends the wrong message." Of course, it was your right to publish the letter as is without editing it, or not publish it at all. But because it concerned such a high profile matter in our fair city, and on its face was so contentious, you might have checked it for accuracy and, in a companion article on the same page, pointed out its failings. Indeed, it would have been appropriate for Mr. Brown to have ensured that his letter was factually correct before submitting it for publication. The citizens of Campbell River deserve better from you and from him. I will set the record straight. Judge Jack did not participate in the "deal" that was made between Crown counsel Christopher Gibson and defence counsel Douglas Marion. To have done so would have been improper. He was presented with a joint submission regarding sentence after a plea bargain had been negotiated privately between the lawyers. Our Court of Appeal has said that, while judges are not required to accept and follow joint submissions, they must treat them as very persuasive and not reject them unless they are clearly wrong. In this case, Julie Hansen was charged with (i.e. accused of) possession of money obtained from drug trafficking, possession of a small quantity of marijuana, and trafficking in cocaine, all occurring in early July 2008. The court denied bail and ordered her detained in custody until the matter was finally concluded. She entered pleas of not guilty on all matters, as was her right. By the time she was sentenced on November 7, 2008, she had spent some 4 months in jail. Crown and defence counsel agreed to a deal whereby she would plead guilty to possession of about 5 grams of marijuana, and the other charges would be dropped. I am informed that Crown counsel made the deal knowing there was no substantial likelihood of conviction. That is one of two criteria he must consider before proceeding to trial. It is Crown counsel, not the police, who decide what charges to lay and whether to proceed to trial on any or all charges. Judge Jack ordered that the money seized by the police from Julie Hansen, some $1,730, be returned to her, not to her lawyer. In light of the charge to which she pled guilty, there was no legal basis for the police to keep the money. Mr. Marion took the case on a legal aid basis, which means his fees are paid, ultimately, by the taxpayer, not his client. Mr. Brown wrote, "I am sure that the returned monies were given as payment to the defence lawyer; thus he was also "paid off" with drug money." No factual basis was given for that assertion. The statement is probably libellous. The Court did not send the wrong message. The court sent no message at all. It acted completely in accordance with the law. Judge Brian H. Saunderson - --- MAP posted-by: Larry Seguin