Conditional Discharge For 4.6 Grams Of Weed
A 29-year-old man received a Conditional Discharge with probation provisions, after he had pleaded guilty to a charge of possession of cannabis in Magistrates Court this morning [Sept.2].
Magistrate Archie Warner’s decision was taken after hearing submissions from duty counsel Kendrick James and evidence and a submission DPP Prosecutor Cindy Clarke.
The defendant, who described himself as a self-employed carpenter, during a routine Police check, was stopped by Police on 24th April. The Police said that they smelled the typical odour of smoked marijuana coming off his clothes.
An initial search of his clothing turned up nothing, but a K-9 sweep found a small bag of plant material that was in his shoe. On analysis, this turned out to be marijuana weighing 4.6 grams.
Asked by Magistrate Warner if his situation fell within the parameters of the DPP’s policy on small amounts of marijuana; Ms Clarke offered that 3.0 grams was the upper limit recommended in the DPP policy.
Mr James pointed out that the defendant had no previous convictions, of any kind, and that this was his first appearance, as a defendant, in Court; and that he had pleaded guilty to the charge as laid. Magistrate Warner commented that: “Conditional Discharges don’t drop from heaven.”
Duty counsel Kendrick James reiterated that this was a first offence; that he was remorseful; that this was a one-off offence with no indications that it would be repeated; that it came at a point where he was under great emotional stress; and that a Conditional Discharge would allow the offence to be dealt with without causing irreparable harm to the defendant, which would happen if he were to receive a criminal conviction.
Magistrate Warner asked Ms Clarke if the DPP’s office would raise an objection if, in light of the amount of cannabis and the DPP policy on weight, he was to exercise his discretion by granting a Conditional Discharge. Ms Clarke offered no objection.
Magistrate Warner then granted a Conditional Discharge under Sections 69 and 70 of the Criminal Code Act 1907, as amended. This Discharge is for twenty-four months and requires him to be on probation and follow orders and instructions from the Probation service during those two years. At the end of that time, and if he has not run afoul of any probation conditions, the matter will be resolved and the defendant will not have a criminal conviction.
Read More About
Category: All, Court Reports, Crime, News
why do they have to smoke that shti anyway. It stinks up your breath, clothes,house, and makes your lips turn black and crusty….yucky
no, it’s god’s own herb, a natural substance…blah blah blah
Dont know. But the next time you take a bus, ask the driver. BAH HAAAAA
Yeah and why do people have to drink alcohol? It makes your breath and attitude stink. Get over it. Some people dont care if it makes them stink cause they too high to worry about it.
Why do people have to overeat? Why do people drink alcohol? Why do people smoke cigs? Why do people drink caffeine? Why do people drink toxic diet cokes? Why do people eat fried foods? Why do people eat cancer causing sugar? BECAUSE IT IS THEIR RIGHT to put WHATEVER they want into their own bodies. It’s a human rights issue.
Well Done DPP! Why make someone a criminal over…..
24 months probation seems pretty heavy. How much will that cost the public?
Kudos to Bernews for not playing the ‘name and shame game’ when it comes to small quantities of weed for personal use… A lot of young males’ lives have been ruined through an inability to travel and stigma that follows them for what is a misdemeanour in other more progressive countries…
yea because we are one stupid little island that thinks we are different then the rest of the world. The war drugs is a war on people!
They only want us to “legally” do certain drugs because the Governments can make money off of it like cigarettes, alchohol, coffee etc etc.
They will never make weed legal because they make tons more money in the courts fining us for it. Its all about money !! Greedy basterds!
For the people ^^above that love seeing someone in court for small possesions, kiss my A$$!
I wasnt referring to you “Real Talk”..I agree with you!
Time to legalize!! Perhaps we’d see a lot less violence? And use up alot less time in the courts…
Legalize no…decriminalize it…yes I agree.
Moral of the story ; When and after smoking cannabis stay home or wherever the libations is enjoyed . N.b. libations used in jest
First let me say that I do agree with the sentence but I have to wonder what why or who made the difference in this case when you look at many other cases that have been before the courts either with similiar or less amounts is this the new procedure the courts and dpp have adopted or is this another form of different strokes for different folks does it have something to do with the person being in court for the first time as a defendant? Before the defendant was sentenced the judge the nerve to asked the prosecuter if she would object to his sentence and the prosecuter said no after acknowledging that the amount was more than the upper limit of the parameter set by the dpp office’s policy on small amounts of marijauna, just asking I hope they remeber this in the future my guess is only time will tell
He still can’t travel without the get out of Bermy
Card!