Case update for those with an interest

[danoz]

Lightning arn't you the fella that wrote that final reply to poor old leafy about the physics behind rare earth magnets.

 

hahahahahaa shit if you have devoted a simular effort to the law surrounding your case as yo have the laws of physics then i feel sorry for the judges when they get to you. subconscience prejudice also works in your favour.

 

would love to see it unfold

 

BEST of luck

 

where can i find your the case you have made?

Edited November 4, 2008 by danoz

[entheofarm]

thats a strange comment from someone who supports current legislation of cannabis danoz! very fucking strange!

[lightning]

Danoz yes I am the person that posted the reply to leafy about the physics of rare earth magnets and yes I have put the same intellect and intensity to the study of the law over the last two years, probably more so.

I have now finished my study and am ready to be examined.

 

As I said in my earlier post the full argument will be published once it has been lodged with the court and the trial is underway which, by rights, should be tomorrow nite. A brief outline of SOME of the arguments was posted in my thread https://cannabis.community.forums.ozstoners...amp;hl=holy+war a couple of months back which will give you an idea of the direction.

 

Thanks all for the support which has been rolling in. You know who you are.

Recieved with much thanks

[danoz]

Entheofarm this post is about lightning's legal case. Didnt you have enough to say in the actual posts about me?

Seen as your displaying such an interest in my views why dont you go back and read the posts properly, you would then figure out why that was a dumb call, typical. How ignorant of you to cloud this mainly positive thread with a personal issue you have with me. It sez alot about your ability to reason.

Apologies to lightning for further disrupting this thread.

Edited November 4, 2008 by danoz

[Home_Grown]

Good Luck.. ya gonna need it.

[entheofarm]

oh danoz it's not personal, so sad you think so, it's cyber space nothing personal about it.

 

http://www.cannabisfacts.info/

 

not hard to research though!

[lightning]

ta homegrown yes we are going to need luck but we have three things going for us that the persecutor does not have...

1.The Truth, the WHOLE truth and nothing but the truth. (Interesting concept when you think of it)

2. Reason backed by science.

3. The Letter and Spirit of the law.

 

Put together they fulfill the requirement of the reasonable person rule of Common Law.

 

Time will tell and the next few days should be a wild ride.

Edited November 4, 2008 by lightning

[Thylacine]

Gday lightning

 

 

I might be a bit thick but I just cant work out why your legal aid lawyers would refuse to present your case?? Am I the only one who has no idea how or why they would do that? I see you called them cowards, which tells me they dont want to rock the boat and get the system offside because they have to deal with them in the future???

 

Like I said I just cant work it out, I would have thought they need a pretty good reason for not representing you? And that reason would have to be specific and pre-determined? ....man, im confused...

 

If what it sounds like is true then thats just pathetic. Whats the point of legal aid if they are to scared to act, sounds like one hell of a cash cow.....make them mandatory but with no teeth at all!!

 

Maybe once I see your argument it will become clear.....but really, unless your argument is against the law I cant see how they can refuse....what grounds do they have?

 

Again, good luck fellas, hope to hear some good news soon.

Edited November 4, 2008 by Thylacine

[lightning]

In Victoria, i dont know about the rest of oz, a defence lawyer is not allowed to put exhonorating evidence before the court if that evidence questions the validity of the law which is exactly what we are doing.

It is part of the oath they swear to join the BAR...

 

As defendants we only are oblidged to tell the truth the WHOLE truth and nothing but the truth and are allowed to put anything we want before the Jury. It is up to them to decide if what we say is relevent and reasonable

 

Justice has been killed by court room politics

Lucky I believe in life after death isn't it?

[entheofarm]

Stand pat?

 

The court has ordered you be represented, you can't be tried without it?

 

They will have to throw it out unless you agree to defend yourself which the court has already agreed you should not?

 

If the same Judge proceeded after ordering you must be represented would they not be bringing thier own judgement into question by ruling against it?