cannabisnews.com: Home No Place for Pot-Growers: Crown Home No Place for Pot-Growers: Crown Posted by CN Staff on November 14, 2002 at 08:49:45 PT By Dianne Wood, Record Staff Source: Kitchener-Waterloo Record Kitchener -- Will local judges start imposing more jail sentences on people who turn swanky suburban homes into large-scale pot-growing operations? Up to now, few jail terms have been handed down by Kitchener judges, especially to first-time offenders involved in marijuana-growing operations. But yesterday, a local prosecutor cited a recent, precedent-setting Ontario Court of Appeal case in arguing a jail sentence should be imposed on a man who grew pot in the basement of a Kitchener home. David Rowcliffe said 12 months in jail is fair for Cong Luong, 40, who ran a marijuana-growing operation at 34 Askin Pl. during the summer of 2001. Rowcliffe referred to the Appeal Court decision, released last month, which upheld a jail sentence for a Stoney Creek man who ran a similar operation out of his home. He was a first-time offender, like Luong. The three Appeal Court judges said the trial judge was right to reject house arrest for the Stoney Creek man "in light of the evidence of increasing prevalence of this form of offence in the local communities'' and the danger caused by rigging illegal hydro bypasses to steal electricity. Rowcliffe agreed. "House arrest may make a lot of sense when it comes to preventing someone from committing burglary or theft,'' he told Justice John Lynch in Ontario Court. "But when the tool of the accused is his home . . . keeping marijuana growers at home may not accomplish much.'' Arguing just as vigorously on the other side was defence lawyer Hal Mattson. He said if Luong doesn't qualify for a conditional sentence of house arrest, no one does. He's never committed a crime, he doesn't pose a danger to the community, he has a good work record and he pleaded guilty, Mattson said. The lawyer argued that judges should keep their focus on the offender, and not just the offence. "The issue comes down to whether a jail sentence is needed for general deterrence and denunciation,'' Mattson said, concluding that it isn't. He pointed to a controversial sentence handed down by Superior Court Justice Robert Reilly in the case of University of Waterloo professor Vladimir Platonov Reilly gave Platonov house arrest even though, as Mattson said, "He almost killed his wife'' by beating her over the head repeatedly with a rock. "Who would the public think should go to jail -- a 40-year-old man who's growing marijuana or a professor who almost killed his wife?'' Mattson asked. He also argued there's no evidence that conditional sentences aren't working as a deterrent. And he pointed to a recent Senate committee recommendation calling for the legalization of marijuana use among adults. "I doubt the Senate has endorsed the idea of dangerous commercial marijuana operations to be located in residential communities,'' Rowcliffe retorted. He said the operations pose fire risks to neighbours and endanger the safety of officials who have to dismantle the hydro bypasses. Rowcliffe said violence and home invasions have been linked to marijuana grows, although there have been no such incidents locally. Luong pleaded guilty earlier this year to possessing marijuana for the purpose of trafficking and producing marijuana. Police found 228 pot plants in the house he was renting. His sentencing has been remanded to Dec. 4. Another Kitchener judge, Justice Colin Westman, has imposed two jail sentences on people convicted of similar crimes after hearing evidence that home-grows are proliferating and have a detrimental effect on the community. And Justice Bruce Frazer handed out a jail term to a Kitchener man with a record for heroin trafficking. Frazer said public denunciation called for jail rather than house arrest. Note: Local man should get jail term, not house arrest, prosecutor says. Source: Kitchener-Waterloo Record (CN ON)Author: Dianne Wood, Record StaffPublished: Thursday, November 14, 2002Copyright: 2002 Kitchener-Waterloo RecordContact: letters therecord.comWebsite: http://www.therecord.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Cannabis News Canadian Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/can.htmMessage Mixed on Pot, Say Cops, Policy Advisers http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14687.shtmlGetting a Buzz in Vancouverhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14674.shtmlCanada Ranks Third Supplying U.S. Pothttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14647.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #4 posted by 0u8i2 on October 29, 2003 at 07:23:32 PT not so shocking, its just more blatent injusice... Rowcliffe is wrong about electricity theft ..... and the danger caused by rigging illegal hydro bypasses to steal electricity. electricity is absolutely safe for anyone, especially trained officials, THE POWER IS TURNED OFF FIRST! You better know they won't even approach the area until the powers turned off 3 ways from breakfast. [ITS SIMPLE TO DUE AND ITS SIMPLE TO CHECK AND BE 100% SAFE] It is also simple to confirm, as workers comp. keeps detailed records of all workplace injuries. this is a blatant falsehood: [quoted from article]- "endanger the safety of officials who have to dismantle the hydro bypasses." The exact opposite is in fact true. And for this shabby bit of justice, first time offenders are sentenced to jail., what next? [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by 0u8i2 on October 28, 2003 at 14:03:16 PT blame misplaced the theft of hidro, and the the possible dangers have little to do with pot, this is the result of laws against pot.The reason is not to avoid the bill, but the nightmare of becomming the leagal industries required "criminal". After all theft is nothing compaired drug production. Why does anyone think that those employed to stop crime actually want it stopped? And become laid-off? These are the people that "crime does pay" complete with full pension and early retirement. Without the crime, [drug law] ther would be no criminal [anybody] or need for the industry and its self proliferation [example: hydro theft!] [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by Naaps on November 14, 2002 at 22:37:47 PT Not Growing - its Electricity Theft It would undermine the prosecution’s case if defendant Luong hadn’t installed an electrical bypass. The three Appeal court judges specifically cited the danger incurred by the theft, and prosecutor Rowcliffe emphasized the fire hazard and danger to safety officials.I don’t appreciate thievery. Even in overgrowing the government, being the producer of kind bud for cannabists and medical users, the stealing part is unsavory and unnecessary. Pay for your electricity, or generate it – don’t steal it.Cannabis should be grown ubiquitously outdoors. All of the hyped dangers cited by Rowcliffe would be negated. No fire hazards due to electrical bypasses, unsound wiring, plants growing into lights. No violence or home invasions would be due to its prohibition-inflated value, equivalent to gold, as it would be grown abundantly and cheap. Cannabis should merely be an agricultural commodity, as common and available to those that seek it as tomatoes or corn.The Senate committee recommended people be able to grow their own supply. For people who appreciate the convenience, or don’t have the space, opportunity, time or inclination to grow for themselves can merely buy the government taxed varieties. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by freedom fighter on November 14, 2002 at 18:20:27 PT If it was legal? "I doubt the Senate has endorsed the idea of dangerous commercial marijuana operations to be located in residential communities,'' Rowcliffe retorted.If just supposed cannabis commerical operations were legal, would'nt it be safe? This is crazy! Earth to Mary Jane! Did'nt the Senate endorsed the idea of prohibition creating these "dangerous" commerical operations in first place?Last time I checked my history book, there is NO so-called commerical operations back then when the "cannabis" was legal.And do you know why? The plant is "LEGAL".ff [ Post Comment ] Post Comment