OUTLAW EAGLE MANUFACTURING

[Dano]

It just amazes me how the government can justify the money spent on all these new RCMP boats so they can go out and suck money out of the pockets of good people. What is there something like 25 vehicles stolen every stinking day in Edmonton alone from scum bag crack heads and the cops can't catch and shut down these criminal activities? Give me a break.

[boosted]

Well the only thing that we can do is to start sending the RCMP a message back. As long as you are perfectly legal do NOT agree to any search and remind them that if do it any how that it violates our rights doing it and that they may have complaints/charges filed on them for doing so. The main question when they stop you is to find out why they are stopping you. If they say just a routing stop make note of the date and time. Ask them questions regarding boaters. Try and see if they will tell you that the boaters are the target or something to that extent. Then remind them that they cannot use routine traffic stops to target a certain demographic. After a bit they will start to get the picture that we are not just a bumch of dummies letting them do what they want.

The best way to do it would be to just talk to one of the cops when they are just patrolling around in there car at the launch. If you are walking you don't have to have any ID so they really don't know who you are.

Again this only works if you are perfectly legal and a bunch of us start doing it.

Xero what do you think of that idea as you are our resident expert.

[Xerophobic]

Im certainly no lawyer or expert, just someone whos never been satisfied to have someone else "tell" me how something is without doing a little investigating myself. I've fought a few rediculous tickets, mostly on principal because god knows its more costly and time consuming than to just pay them. I won a triple ticket case once in Ontario where this rookie female cop gave me a bunch. That was a learning expereince and a half. JP was livid with me by the end, crown was actually extremely good and did their job with a great deal of professionalism, exactly the way it should be done. They withdrew two of the charges and the third was my word against the cops, I won that one too

Highlight of the case was while I was on the stand I started refering to some things a 2nd officer had said to me on the scene, the female JP imediatly got all mad and started lecturing me about how I couldnt talk about that because he wasnt here to testify etc etc I opened my three ring binder, flipped to the correct tab popped the rings and said "funny you mention that your worship because he's SUPPOSED to be here" as I produced a summons I had obtained from a judge for that officer. See nearly DIED when she saw that hahahaha (lesson one BE PREPARED) The officer didnt show which in itself is a crime. I think in the end she just wanted me the hell out of that courtroom lol

Ive never filed a charter motion but have a very good idea how its done. Its one of the few times you DO have to give the court/judge and crown advanced notice so they can prepare in advance. Dont just show up and try to argue one, they will get very annoyed with you.

Anyone whos really curious how this stuff all works should really start at the beginning with R vs Stinchombe . Thats THE landmark case for determining the rights you have when it comes to disclosure of evidence. You'd think this was determined a loooong time ago but oddly enough it wasnt set in stone by the courts untill 1991! Also funny it is also based out of Calgary(whats with this city?) Parts of that case put a lump in my throat, realy powerful words and really give some great background into how strong the system is when its administered properly. The description of the crown attorneys job is also interesting as most people dont fully understand their true role in the courts

http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1991/1991canlii45/1991canlii45.html

[towman]

Sorry to reopen this can of worms but yesterday, while stopped on shore a couple of us had a pair of conservation officers pull up. I did have a few refreshments on board in a cooler and after a short conversation I was asked to empty the four beers I had in it. That's fine by me, the fellow was fairly reasonable but the thing that was confusing to me is I was told that" no alchohol can be within reach of ANY occupant while in the boat and that by simply transporting it I could be charged." Not sure what the charges he referred to would be, but he was adamant about this as I did ask him about it to clarify the "any occupant" thing. So, I guess if you are taking a cooler with you it must be stowed.

[boosted]

Yes from what I understand you cannot have access to the booze. Not sure about anyone else but it would make sense. I wonder if you don't have room to store it out of reach of the driver if you put a padlock on it and stored the key would work for them?

[Xerophobic]

The wording of this will be under the Alberta Liquor Control Act, or whatever they call it out here, but that case i referred to earlier which I won in Ontario the law specifially stated the alcohol must be EITHER sealed OR inacessable to the occupant of the vehicle. Thru my testimony, the officers testimony(stupid officer admitted under oath she hadnt even bothered to check to see if they were open) and my evidence photos the crown conceeded that I had met not only one of the conditions but in fact probably BOTH. Thats where a diligent and honest crown plays such a pivotal role in the system. Note the crown did NOT withdraw the charge after the officer testified that she had not checked if the containers were open, despite that being an essential element to the offense. They will likely leave it to you to bring it up in the hopes that it slips thru. (It often probably does) A judge or justice "shouldnt" enter a conviction with such a glaring error but I bet they often do strictly because the crown/police have an assumed respect in court(even when they often probably shouldnt) A crown needs to prove ALL elements of an offense to obtain a legal conviction. A conviction is deemed to not be supported by law when something like that occurs, and it happens....alot.

This is why so many people lose when representing themselves. You must establish exactly what elements of a case the crown must prove and attack them and them alone. Too many people get side tracked in irrelavant nonsense, like how an officer spoke to you, or that he was speeding to catch up to you etc etc
Draw into question the essential elements of the case and thats what wins cases.

I doubt an officer has any right to search your cooler under most circumstances however I wouldnt argue this or even attempt to if you are literally sitting there drinking at the time. Im sure that gives them far broader powers in itself and you are likely hooped. Losing a few beers isnt that much to worry about at that stage. If you werent drinking or any alcohol was visible they had zero right to ask you to do that

Quick search revealed....

Consumption in vehicles

84 Except as otherwise provided for in this Act or in a liquor licence, no person may consume liquor in a vehicle unless, when the liquor is being consumed, the vehicle is a temporary residence.

1996 cG‑0.5 s81

I dont see the section about transporting liquor, Ill look more later

Cheers

p.s. my gut feeling tells me the guy doesnt know what hes talking about and is just banking that you dont know either. I cant see how transporting sealed containers in a boat would be any different than driving home from the liquor store with a case of beer on the passenger seat

[Xerophobic]

Transportation of liquor
87.1(1) Liquor may be transported under section 83 of the Act
only in accordance with this section.
(2) Except as otherwise provided for in the Act or in a liquor
licence, no person may
(a) transport liquor unless the liquor is in a container that is
capped, corked or otherwise closed, whether or not the
container has been previously opened;
(b) transport liquor in a vehicle if the liquor is within easy
access of an occupant of the vehicle.
AR 173/96 s3;251/2001[/b]

[Arthur]

In my experiance you can transport liqour as long as it has NOT been tied into......I've had many-a-run-ins with this and from what I know if the case isn't opened or the bottle isn't cracked, you're good. If its in a cooler I find its really up to the officer to decide if they want to wreck your day.....I guess it depends on circumstances and consumption on how they'll procced.

[Xerophobic]

Yea A2 its sorta surprises me that act is wriotten that way. At first glance it appeared to be the same as Ontario but now it seems to not be an "either or" case but both.

In the situation mentioned the key, as has been stated earlier in the thread, is to deny the search in the first place. When challenged in court an officers "hunch" that there "may" be beer in the cooler is 110% most certainly not acceptable grounds to conduct a warrantless search. This is why you need to be very careful when speaking to an officer in this situation because your words might "give" him the grounds to conduct that search and to do so legally. If he asks you whats in the cooler and you say "beer" then you have essentially willfully given him that knowledge.
Why did they aproach you? what was there intent at that stage? were you free to leave? All this stuff sounds dumb and you're often viewed as being a prick for asking or being like that, frankly the cops hate it. But the reason they hate it is it severly limits their power and negates all the tricks they are taught to gain the ability to further their investigation.

[finally conviced her]

[Hines]

FCH its worked in the past,at least you can transport it due to the intent to camp out overnight.that's what i experinced in the past.

[reeder]

You hit the nail on the head FCH, always carry a sleeping bag!

[Rapidchaser]

Man you certainly can't get away with what I used to
Sleeping bags don't work for me any more, even the cops can't get them up!

[Dano]

The Whitecourt Star had a write up on the Whitecourt RCMP new river boat. They said it cost 150g's Man do they have some kind of high tech skookem bad boy on the river radar in that boat or what?

[boosted]

Yup and somebody has got to pay for that. So be prepared.