Categories: Andrew Coyne, Capital Read

Driving while unbelievably lucky

by Andrew Coyne on Tuesday, March 9, 2010 11:56am - 171 Comments

Rahim Jaffer: arrested on charges of speeding, driving drunk, and possession of cocaine. Sentenced to … a $500 fine?

OBLIGATORY TWITTER LINES: Next time I’m hiring his lawyer… So much for tough on crime… The cocaine probably cost more than that… He’s suffered enough — he’s married to Helena… etc etc

Tags: cocaine, Crime, horseshoes, Rahim Jaffer

More by Andrew Coyne

Andrew (not PorC)

I guess conservatives are tough on crimes not committed by them.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Tceh Tceh

Rahim Jaffer Judge Doug Maund was once Chief of Staff to former Tory minister Perrin Beatty.

http://twitter.com/davidakin/status/10238005161

Rahim Jaffer Judge Doug Maund, a federal Tory, was appointed in 2000 by Jim Flaherty, then Ontario's attorney general.

http://twitter.com/davidakin/status/10238685630
http://vollman.blogspot.com Robert V

You mean Conservative not conservative.

And hypocrisy is common to all parties.

http://intensedebate.com/people/LynnTO LynnTO

It was the sentence for careless driving that got him the $500 fine, the cocaine posession and drunk driving charges were withdrawn, as the crown wasn't convinced it had enough evidence for conviction.

Cue Spock eyebrow here.

http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

I don't understand. Did he have cocaine on him at the time of the arrest or not? Did the office imagine all this?

http://intensedebate.com/people/LynnTO LynnTO

I guess cocaine is a magic powder? I really have no idea how evidence like that just disappears from the record. Unless there was some suggestion that it was improperly obtained…which, at face value, I don't even buy.

http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

Improper search is the only thing that I can think of. If that's the case, Jaffer is one lucky bastard.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Stewart_Smith Stewart_Smith

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3t4g_1VoGw4

answer in the chorus

http://intensedebate.com/people/LynnTO LynnTO

That's funny, I thought it would have been 42.

[youtube aboZctrHfK8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aboZctrHfK8 youtube]

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

exactly. who approved original charges and based on what?

catherine

I'm sure there will be an investigation to see whether the police actually confiscated cocaine and took an alcohol test or just made these charges up. Yeah, right.

Lord Kitchener's Own

Now we're questioning the motives of the Police and suggesting that they just "made up" charges of cocaine possession???

Is there anyone left in Canada who's NOT out to get the Tories?

Sigh

Nope
catherine

In case it wasn't obvious, I was being sarcastic. This story proves that friends in high places might get you something, but one thing it is not going to get you is fabricated charges. I think that is pretty obvious.
http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

Are you questioning the motives of the Crown and the Judge, suggesting that they conspired to destroy evidence and obstruct justice?

Lord Kitchener's Own

Actually, I was mocking that very suggestion, however I see from catherine's reply that said suggestion was meant to be sarcastic, so I guess there was no need to mock it!

Everyone can move along….

http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

Uh, huh – meanwhile Guergis' whole family are involved in politics up there – mayors, counsel members.

This stinks bad

Sigh

Maybe this was Helena's happy f*ing birthday present.

http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

LOL!!

Amateur Hour

A DUI charge lowered to careless driving: both are traffic violations, so this is plausible, if extremely generous. Jaffer will not have a criminal record and therefore will not face barriers to international travel.

However, dropping the possession of cocaine charge is unusual in the extreme. This charge has nothing to do with operating a motor vehicle. There's something fishy going on here.

Ted

The evidence got stuck up at an airport in some "hell hole" and had no shoes to throw at the security guard to get them to re-open the gates.
Poker Face

Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46, s. 253

It's not a traffic violation.

Lawyered.
matt

Evidence. There is no *admissable* evidence. Not on the breathalizer or on the DUI. Someone screwed up the search and detention. Police screwed up. And screwed up so bad the prosecution didn't even think the judge could keep it in notwithstanding being offside the rule book. There's an interesting story to be told here.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

No point in jailing him, Guergis can rip open iron doors with her bare hands.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

And that's just what happens when someone screws up her drink order. Imagine the damage she can do when she's really angry.

Greg

To answer your question, yes. It bothers me when this happens, especially when it seems the rich and well connected get special treatment (regardless of the party affiliation). That really burns my toast.

Richard

I guess neither of them will have to spend another day in any "hell holes", etc.
Dave

Not with her bare hands, no. She biffs boots at them.
http://intensedebate.com/people/craigola craigola

No point in jailing him, he already lives with Helena Guergis.

http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

That's good Craigola.

http://intensedebate.com/people/PeteTong PeteTong

This makes me sick.

http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

Uh, we have to be careful with our assumptions here. Unfortunately, technicalities can get people off, whether they're "connected" or not.

Lord Kitchener's Own

Thank God the Tories are in power. Soon, this kind of lax sentencing and taking the word of criminals over that of the police will come to an end. Mr. Jaffer may have benefited from the Liberal justice system in this country, but rest assured that his wife and her colleagues are working tirelessly to make sure this sort of thing never happens again.

http://intensedebate.com/people/LynnTO LynnTO

Well then, no wonder this sort of thing happens. Nobody's had any sleep, so they can't work effectively.

I call for the institution of naptime in offices everywhere!
W.B.

Dreaming of the coming Tory majority. We'll get this distinction between good decent citizens and real bad people even better defined and everybody will know where they stand.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

Based on which party they vote for.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

"I'm sure you can recognize a break when you see one," Judge Doug Maund told Jaffer in an Orangeville, Ont. court.

No kidding.

Kevin

Yes, I think he was appointed to the bench due to his powers of understatement.
Sigh

I think we all can recognise this for what it is.

matt

A cop who screwed up the search/breathalizer and breached Jaffer's Charter rights, or a cop who lost the evidence? There's a police conduct / evidence issue here that noone is discussing.

http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

Worthy to note matt. These kinds of technicalities can make us all cynical.

Dot

Rahim Jaffer leaves the courthouse in Orangeville, Ontario on Tuesday…

Small town. Cheap.

Dee

You stay classy Dot.

Dot

Orangeville is not a small town? I've only once made a pit stop there.

$500 is expensive? (not relative to his lawyer's fee, I bet)

Dee

Yeah Dot, I'm sure you weren't making any allusion to John Gomery's infamous comment, eh?

No need to denigrate an entire town due to some former Conservative deciding to drive through the area after a few beers, and with cocaine in his car.

Dot

IF I was making any comment at all about a small town, it might have something to do with the justice system there. Of this I can be sure: Orangeville gets orders and orders less of cocaine possession charges heard in its court than would say Ottawa or Jaffir's old haunt, Edmonton. And with all politics being local, the smaller the local…
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

Dot, Orangeville isn't a village. Nor is it living in 1952 or something. They might not have to fill six concurrent courtrooms with drug charge hearings, but I'm fairly sure there isn't a town with a courtroom that doesn't have its fair share of drug charge hearings.
Dot

Orangeville (2006 population 26,925; UA population 29,110) is a town in south-central Ontario, Canada, and the seat of Dufferin County.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orangeville,_Ontario

Here's a question. Do you suppose more lawyers/prosecutors/judges started their careers in small towns, or finished them there?

You are making the same mistake as others. Not all "drugs" are created equal, nor distributed the same way. You tell me. Say I wanted some coke. Would I be more likely to find some in a small town bar, or a big city nightclub?
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

Hell, Dot, you want cocaine, no need to go to the small town bar, just go to the nearest high school. And this includes high schools in towns less than half the size of Orangeville.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

There are more drugs in rural Canada than in the cities.
Dot

Cocaine, specifically? Let's not include grow-ops here.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Meth, mushrooms, and acid, anyway. Perhaps, as you say, cocaine and heroin are more an urban thing.
http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

coke has spread strongly to the country (rural areas) as well and its price point has dropped remarkably in recent years as well. i believe this development is largely (allegedly of course) attributed to biker gang related distribution.

http://intensedebate.com/people/PeteTong PeteTong

Hmmm…. we should keep track of the Crown Attorneys involved in this case and see if they get appointed by Harper to the bench.

Hutch

Crown Attorneys are appointed by the provincial goverment, so McGuinty is the one you want.

Martin Partridge

Um, no. Federal Crowns, who do the drug prosecutions, are federally appointed.

Anon

Prosecutors are hired by the province. Of course Hutch missed PeteTong's point, that these provincial employees would be rewarded through a federal appointment to the bench (ie they would become judges). Not that I agree with PeteTong, I simply can't see Harper willing to risk a scandal on the likes of Jaffer

Martin Partridge

Drug prosecutors are hired by Ottawa, not the province.
Poker Face

CA1867, s.92(15)? Or am I insane…
http://intensedebate.com/people/PeteTong PeteTong

Mr. Jaffer's criminal charges fell within the purview of the Ontario Court of Justice. The Crown Attorney for this case is Marie Balogh, who works for the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General. Her position is not a federal appointment.
Jan

For the impaired or the cocaine possession? Because drugs are Federal.
http://intensedebate.com/people/PeteTong PeteTong

Thanks Jan for that completely unenlightening and factually incorrect statement.

While the Parliament of Canada establishes the Criminal Code, the Federal Court of Canada does not have jurisdiction over criminal cases. In Canada, criminal cases, including those related to drug cases (possession and trafficking) fall within the jurisdiction of the provincial courts.

And if you don't believe me, then please explain why his drug possession charge was being heard in the Ontario Court of Justice?
Martin Partridge

Jeez, get it right people. Yes, the case was heard in a provincial courtroom, presided over by a provincially appointed judge. The cocaine offence itself, however, is federal. It requires the involvement of a federal, not provincial, Crown Attorney. The decision to drop the cocaine charge was a federal decision, not a provincial one. It dismays me that the Conservatives are saying otherwise.
matt

Martin, thank you. That said, is there any chance there is a delegation, MOU, contracting, etc. arrangement for the provincial Crown to do narcotics prosecutions in that neck of the woods?
Martin Partridge

My belief is that even if the provincial Crown speaks up in court as agent for the federal Crown regarding the drug charge, it's the federal Crown behind the scenes who must make the decision on dropping the charge. This is the point that Joe Cromartin and others have been trying to make, while being drowned out by the nonsense from Vic Toews and others.
Justin

The point is that the Crown might be rewarded with a FUTURE federal appointment (to the bench) for her efforts

http://intensedebate.com/people/avr avr

I agree that it looks like far more of a gift than he deserved, but: I'm sure everyone outraged today is, of course, equally outraged when non-high-profile, non-Conservative criminals negotiate improbably lenient plea bargains with the Crown. I mean, they'd have to be, right?

Also noteworthy: "So much for tough on crime"-style jabs are misguided; the prosecutor that agreed to this deal answers to the Attorney General of Ontario. Drug offenses under the Criminal Code can be toughened 'til the cows come home, but it's still up to the provincial prosecutors to use available criminal charges (or not) at their discretion in a case like this.

http://intensedebate.com/people/LynnTO LynnTO

Speaking for myself, yeah, I'm pretty peeved whenever a person charged with first-degree sexual assault pleads guilty to a misdemeanor, someone who kills a family while drunk gets charged only with failing to remain at the scene…etc. You do the crime, you do the time, and so on. But it's especially bad when these deals are handed to people with ties to the system, because not only are they receiving more lenient treatment, it gives the perception that people in power are above the law. And that…just doesn't jive.
http://intensedebate.com/people/john_g2708 john g

I am open to an argument of "well-connected political elites get a separate standard of official treatment regardless of party or level of government," however.

I think that's what we're looking at here. The parallels between this case and Margaret Trudeau's drunk driving acquittal are actually quite striking.

Trudeau – pulled over for driving erratically
Jaffer – pulled over for speeding

Trudeau – alcohol smelled on breath, failed breathalyzer
Jaffer – alcohol smelled on breath, failed breathalyzer – also found with cocaine

Trudeau – various rights allegedly violated by police
Jaffer – Ontario DA says "Significant legal issues are impeding the case" (of DUI and drug possession…could be illegal search?)

Trudeau – acquitted
Jaffer – $500 fine on misdemeanor charge, no criminal record. For all intents and purposes, charges dropped.

Trudeau – later admitted she was driving drunk
Jaffer – TBD?

Chantale

Ok. here's a half-baked theory and would love to get a reaction:

Maybe, just maybe, the police violates rights on a regular basis, but it is not brought forward or taken seriously because it is the rights of someone insignificant. When it is someone who has a higher profile, it is taken more seriously? They are better informed? Better understand the tools at their disposal?

Thoughts?

http://intensedebate.com/people/john_g2708 john g

Probably not far from the truth…it must be an almost impossible job to be a police officer today without accidentally violating somebody's right to something. Combined with better lawyers…

Again, Trudeau's case is particularly illustrative of this. One of the things was that the police apparently violated her rights to choice of attorney because they called the number of the lawyer she provided, and an answering machine picked up. They didn't tell her that, and told her instead that no one was home. Bingo. Violation of Charter Rights. Acquitted on that basis.

Would not surprise me in the least if Jaffer's cocaine charges disappeared in much the same way.
Jan

This is where having a high-priced lawyer really comes in handy.

W.B.

God! It's McGuinty's fault.
Martin Partridge

As I pointed out elsewhere in comments, I do not believe that the Crown responsible for this deal "answers to the Attorney General of Ontario". I haven't appeared as counsel in criminal court for a while, but in the past it was always the Federal Crown, not the Provincial Crown, who had carriage of any drug allegation. This deal, as it relates to cocaine, was done by a Harper appointee.
Lord Kitchener's Own

"So much for Tories being tough on crime"-style jabs are misguided

Fair enough. (I think the "so much for Tories being tough on crime" jabs are much better applied to the Tories killing their own crime legislation THREE TIMES) but still, everyone should be allowed to have their fun. Not being able to poke fun when a well connected Tory gets a lenient sentence after (allegedly) being caught with cocaine would be the less sexy Canadian equivalent of not being able to make fun of a born-again Republican who solicits a gay prostitute. And come on. That's just funny.
http://intensedebate.com/people/NoNameCS NoNameCS

Interesting points. But it then begs the question: if being "tough on crime" rests with the prosecutors, and if they are not applying the full power of the law already at their disposal, why is the Harper government making so much noise about toughening the criminal justice system?

Jan

Because the Conservatives are pandering to their base.

Jan

I thought drug prosecutions were a Federal responsibility.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

"… I'm sure everyone outraged today is, of course, equally outraged when non-high-profile, non-Conservative criminals negotiate improbably lenient plea bargains with the crown. I mean, they'd have to be, right?

No, actually many are not. Svend Robinson anyone?
But since when is the Left any kind of standard for moral consistency? We can do a hell of a lot better than that…I hope.

http://intensedebate.com/people/YYZ YYZ

I'm not sure there is a single political party in Canada today who has any claim to more consistency.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

I wasn't speaking of a political party, but rather of ideologies.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Geiseric Geiseric

Did they give him his cocaine back?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Fred_Moro Fred_Moro

Yes, they put the cocaine bag back in the glove compartment.
Sigh

Best question of the day
Gary

Yes, with explicit instructions to make his way to the nearest safe injection site so he can ply his trade in a Liberal approved establishment! Do you people have no shame with your hypocrisy??

Ted

Classic tale of "Our principles do not apply to us".
http://intensedebate.com/people/Nich Nich

If possession of cocaine is no longer illegal in this country I recommend a coke party to celebrate. Unfortunately, I don't have any connections to organized crime, so I hope the convenience store starts carrying cocaine soon.

But remember kids, don't do drugs and/or drink and drive, you might get a small fine.
http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

Guergis was born in Barrie, Ontario, and raised in nearby Angus, part of Essa Township, where her family has a history of political involvement. Her cousins David and Tony Guergis are respectively the current mayors of Essa and Springwater, her sister Christine Brayford is a municipal councillor in New Tecumseth, their uncle Edward was a municipal councillor in Essa from 1978 to 1985, and their grandfather George was a reeve of Essa from 1971 to 1974

….a family business

Dot

See all the photos here courtesy Mitchell (you forgot to mention Tony is Simcoe County Warden.)

http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/08/20/hockey-in-barr…
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

Oh right! It's all MY fault now!

I refuse to accept it. Just because my father-in-law was the only druggist in Angus, you will NOT pin this on me or my family!
http://intensedebate.com/people/YYZ YYZ

I'm not sure there is an ideology in Canada today that has any claim to moral consistency.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Stewart_Smith Stewart_Smith

If you wanna hang out
You've gotta take Hellena out
Cocaine
If you wanna get down
On Bruce Huron ground
Cocaine

Just don’t drive
Just don’t drive
Just don’t drive
Cocaine

If you got bad news
You got PEI blues
Cocaine
They don’t know what ya done
And you wanna run
Cocaine

Just don’t fly
Just don’t fly
Just don’t fly

Cocaine

http://intensedebate.com/people/john_g2708 john g

Hats off to that Stewart. Brilliant.
Dave

Nice.

I was thinking more of Johnny Cash…

Early one mornin' while makin' the rounds
I took a shot of cocaine and the cops they took me down
I went right home and then Helena said
I'm a gonna shriek and have a cow 'til dis issues dead

Sorry Johnny.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Stewart_Smith Stewart_Smith

There's also "a little ditie about Jaf and Guergis" out there somewhere

d.andy

Jaffy and Guergy were lovers
Lordy how they could love
Keep each other out of prison
As free as the stars above
He was her man
Wouldn't do her no wrong

Brian

I howled at all this, thanks.

Sigh

I get no jail for cocaine
Mere alcohol doesn’t fine me at all…

Dave

Excellent!

kcm

Well that's it then. Thank god our PM stacked the senate so we can get those tough on crime laws out the door now, right? This'll never happen again.

Greg

Until the next time a powerful person gets nabbed for something.
Jan

This just shows up what a putz Nicholson is. He somehow thinks he can control the treatment of crime by sentencing alone. That by taking away judge's discretion punishment is a given. There is discretion all along the way – from the police deciding not to recommend charges, to the Crown deciding now to proceed.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Canwest's Janice Tibbetts reports:

The latest information from the Canadian Centre of Justice Statistics shows that only half of the drug charges laid in 2007 resulted in a finding of guilt and 16 per cent of adults convicted of possession were sent to jail for an average of 19 days. Judges were far more likely to impose a fine, which they did almost half the time, or probation, which they did almost one-third of the time. Jaffer, however, fit in the most common category of all — the 50 per cent who saw their charges stayed, withdrawn, dismissed or discharged. So, if Jaffer got a break, so did about 12,500 of the 25,000 adults charged with drug crimes in 2007, the latest stats available.

http://communities.canada.com/SHAREIT/blogs/polit…

Dot

And the DUI portion?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

According to Ms. Tibbetts: "But whether he got an unusual break for the impaired driving charge is another question."

http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

The stat is useless without the circumstances. It could be that 90% of those charged SHOULD have the charges discharged because it was for possession of a single plant which has medicinal use. It could be the reverse. But just putting out the stat as if that's some sort of excuse or justification is a bit of red-herring.

Dot

I was going to say something similar. This is selective stats quoting, or spin. "Drug charges" could include a high percentage of marijuana, a different level than cocaine. Also, lumping in charges stayed, dismissed or discharged with withdrawn (Jaffer's situation) to arrive at 50% is also misleading.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Out of curiosity, are you accusing CanWest's legal affairs reporter of "spin" and selective stats quoting? I just linked to her article because I thought it was interesting.

Dot

Yes.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Janice Tibbetts is a reporter, not a columnist. As far as I know, nobody (aside from you) has ever accused her of bias or "spin".
Dot

I accuse you of changing my words, and then trumping up the "accusation". In the orginal I said "selective stats quoting, or spin." Of course, I ruled out the possibility that she is simply ignorant of the proper use of statistics. I'd entertain a plea bargain on that basis.

Dot

My solution: newer libraries, opera houses :)

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

Well, I like it better than my solution, which is a cop in every classroom, two in every corridor, and a platoon or two in every parking lot and/or field. Bathrooms to be closed altogether.
matt

Are you saying the opera house in Orangeville is no good? http://www.orangevilleconcerts.ca/operahouse.htm

I've only been to Orangeville once, for only a couple days, but I was extremely impressed. Really nice town. Would have thought it was smaller than what is indicated above, but it's also a fairly sophisticated place.

Dot

(Jenn I think is from Orillia – the library next to the Opera House there is being replaced)
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

Well, I was. I haven't been to the library there for a long time, though. Although I remember the weekly trip very fondly. Still, the town isn't that small Mariposa anymore and I'm more than sure it's outgrown it's library. Is it still going to be beside the Opera House?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Nich Nich

The link isn't working for me… but can I assume that that includes marijuana offenses?

Because if so, it is like including petty theft with armed robbery; or dime bags with 8-balls.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

I'll repost the link. I don't know if Janice Tibbetts' numbers include marijuana offenses, but I completely agree with your point that marijuana offenses may skew the statistics.

http://communities.canada.com/SHAREIT/blogs/polit…

http://intensedebate.com/people/Nich Nich

Thanks.

Gary

Thanks Crit,
I'm sure every one of them were Conservative operatives catching a break thanks to Harper and his minions in the justice system!

Mike T.

I trust the prosecutors and what they felt they could make out as a reasonable case and appropriate plea more than I trust the not fully informed guesswork of journalists and commenters.

If any real interesting info comes to light regarding the penalty imposed, by all means write about it. In the meantime, wild speculation does nobody any good.

Dot

The trier of fact, the individual who had to accept the plea bargain, the judge, stated: "I'm sure you can recognize a break when you see one." Perhaps others do as well.

Mike T.

one sentence, chosen by a newspaper, is interesting. but it doesn't constitute an entire file.

beentheredonethat

Funny how minim mandatory sentences only apply for the non-elect CRAP members. I got it form a MP that the Tories wanted to plea bargin this case. What’s that about semi-hidden agendas? It seems to me that the Fundamentalist cabal in the CRAP party want to etablish a two tiered sytem of Citizenship: those that are fundamentalist christian and the rest of us, those that get raptured and those get to rot back on earth.

To those of you who think that a Tory majority will change crown decisions regarding wether or not to prosecute, your are living in fantasy land. The same is true if you believe that minimum mandatory sentences will reduce crime – just look at the case in California where 11% of their budget (probably an equivalent to Canada’s economy) is being pissed away supporting prisions and paying up to $100K a year for each and every innmate, while the crime rate skyrockets.

Get a grip, read some research on the topic and start THINKING for YOUSELF for a change. The bible is 2000 years out of date (why else would there be an industry still trying to make it relevnat to today’s world?) and Old Testament morality never worked outside of early agricultural socieities. Catch up to reality already; the rest of us are waiting and you know what, even though we are not the ‘elect’ , we are good people on the whole.

PS: God is not dead, he washed his hands of human idiocy.

matt

I dream of a Tory majority that imposes capital punishment for spelling and grammar like yours.

kathryn c

matt
I'm as big a spelling and grammar nazi as anyone and I fail to see anything objectionable in beentheredonethat's post.

Jan

In B.C. if you fail a breathalyzer you automatically lose your license for 90 days. The suspension comes almost immediately after the incident. You have to wait for the trial to fight the accuracy of the results.
http://intensedebate.com/people/tobyornotoby tobyornotoby

The right question is who did Rahim Jaffer rat on to get away?
Mike T.

Fine and good, all very reasonable. Is there anything there which leads us to believe his treatment was outof the ordinary for a first offence where the Crown isn't sure it can make out possession?

matt

That's a fascinating thought. That perhaps the police detected cocaine residue, but not enough to go to trial on without substantial risk to a conviction, and had a faulty breathalizer or something, and charged to the max for fear that to do anything other than the maximum would look like giving a recent politician a break. Pretty improbable though.