General discussion


Emery - grudgingly accepts plea bargain

By Oz_Media ·
Marc Emery has agreed to accept a plea bargain and remain in Canada to serve his 5 proposed 5 year term, as opposed to extradition to the US for a much longer term.

The catalyst for this choice was urging by his lawyer's that his partners would also not face extradition and life sentences for working in administrative roles at the Vancouver seed bank.

Despite Canada having no law against the sale of seed, his running a forthright and open business in Downtown Vancouver, paying $600,000 in above board taxes to the Canadian government. US and Canadian police raided his store and arrested him to await extradition to the US for selling seeds into the US.

Seeds are easily bought on line and shipped from countless sources around the world into the US daily. However they have to make an example of someone, so why not Vancouver's Prince of Pot.

Knowing their actions would hardly impede him, they arrested his two partners and THAT was the straw that broke the camel's back.

the extradition issue really crystallized conservative Canadians who don't care about marijuana legalization per se but grabbed a hold of the flagrant breach of sovereignty which occurred when the DEA-led campaign arrested Marc, followed by the extradition attempts. Trying to take a Canadian to be tried in the US on US charges!?!?! Asinine indeed and most of Canada agreed.



This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

26 total posts (Page 2 of 3)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Wriggle, wriggle

by santeewelding In reply to and that wassupposed to b ...

Are you checking back with yourself, or, instructing me in hypothetico-deductive methodology?

Collapse -


by Oz_Media In reply to and that wassupposed to b ...

I was wondering what the f' you were talking about.

I posed a hypothetical question, which you dismissed as inapplicable because it did not reflect your reality. When I mentioned it was hypothetical, as if you actually didn't get that in the first place, you questioned the first part references, which I just also explained to you.

As for wiggling, you have done all but reply to the question, and yet I am the one have offered clarity on my intent several times now.

So one more time, "IF you were in a position where, hypothetically speaking, Canadian police requested your arrest and extradition for breaking a Canadian law, that was completely legal where you were, would you think it was fair and just for US police to raid your place of business, arrest employees that had not committed a crime either, and ask for your extradition to be tried under Canadian law? And, if so, if that same law was broken by thousands worldwide, nay even much larger and publicly available than yourself, would you not suggest your were being victimized needlessly?"

I'll answer that for ,as it is clear by your character that your reply is "Of course not. They better not dare even try! Why are they making an example out of me when I am but a tiny, almost insignificant part of the problem?"

Funny but when I posted about his initial arrest several years ago, most in America that had replied, agreed it was wrong.

Now, because people simply must disagree with me for the sake of disagreement, I see people holding on to the weakest arguments to defend themselves.

You are simply laughable. You spew utter nonsense and then try to defend it by talking in circles and pointing a finger and blaming me for wriggling.

No wonder nobody takes American's seriously.

Collapse -


by santeewelding In reply to and that wassupposed to b ...

I had no idea of who or what this was about until you brought it up.

I do have an inkling of who, what, and how you are about, to which I pay near all my attention, to near exclusion of your subject matter.

How it is that you contain the matter of a subject is therefore paramount to me. It's a double whammy when the very subject is your containment.

Container fractured, your matter runs out all over the floor, uncontained. In the case of containment itself being the subject, you run out all over the floor, uncontained.

Second thought, maybe you had better not relax.

Collapse -

Oz said, "No wonder nobody takes American's seriously."

by maxwell edison In reply to and that wassupposed to b ...

They don't take American's what seriously?

Collapse -

Any American's ability

by neilb@uk In reply to and that wassupposed to b ...

to use apostrophes appropriately?

Well, more likely it's the caulkhead turned canuck who seems to have problems...

Collapse -


by maxwell edison In reply to and that wassupposed to b ...

Any American's ability to use apostrophes appropriately?

Unfortunately, you're correct more than not.

Collapse -

Let's does that go again?

by puppybreath In reply to Emery - grudgingly accept ...

They're the people that were legally elected into office. Stop whining just because your candidate(s) didn't win and you don't agree with their decisions. You can remove them in the next election if you don't like the way things are being run.

"But along the way he has angered the anti-drug law-enforcement community -- the same gang that insists we must continue an expensive War on Drugs that has failed miserably for more than a quarter century and does more harm than good.

Canadian police grew so frustrated that neither prosecutors nor the courts would lock up Emery and throw away the key, they urged their U.S. counterparts to do the dirty work."

Collapse -

Those are teh words of Cannabis Culture

by Oz_Media In reply to Let's does that ...

Canadian RCMP insists it was due to a prior, longstanding agreement that was put in place to allow for border crossing criminals to be tracked down, avoiding the same rush to the mexican border menatlity seen in the south.

In case you haven't noticed, Canada does topple its government at will. Where have you been?

That "GANG' they are referring to is the US war on Drugs.

In short, US DEA agents pushed local Vancouver City Police, to enforce a US search warrant on Canadian soil and tried to exatrdite him. Canadian courts said, NO WAY, and protecte dhis right to trial in Canada. Now it has come ot a point of a plea bargain due to his partners facing extradition charges.

You are also missing the key point, he is being tried for a "crime" that is NOT a "crime" in Canada. Something that he has legally operated as a business and paid over half million in taxes for.

It's no different than Canadians insisting the US police go and arrest someone in their business for having a gun under the counter that doesn't pass Canadian registration laws. And THEN insisting he is either brought to Canada for trial or stays in America to be tried for a crime that doesn't exist in the US.

This is about the legal, judiciary system, cowtowing to teh US legal system, not someone sitting in Canadian Parliment.

When you get the story straight, or at least go back far enough to understand what really happened, try to offer a more realistic and reasonably accurate reply instead.

Collapse -

But it was a crime in the US, and he knew it

by JamesRL In reply to Those are teh words of Ca ...

There have been cases where someone in the US has shipped guns that were illegal in Canada from the US to a Canadian. Do you think Canada should not ask the US to extradite someone in that case?

Its the same principle.

Edited to add: If he had chosen not to ship seeds to the US and only to ship to Canadian customers, he would not have gotten into this position.

Collapse -


by Oz_Media In reply to But it was a crime in the ...

Why would he be subject to exatratidion OR facing a far more severe sentence in Canada?

Back to Community Forum
26 total posts (Page 2 of 3)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums