Eighty-four police witnesses, eight weeks of trial, four defendants. By stubbornly proving a conspiracy at all costs, regardless of the delays, the Crown has exceeded the limits, decides a judge. Result: the alleged head of a cannabis production and distribution network gets off without consequences due to unreasonable delays, thanks to the Jordan decision.
“Even knowingly, knowing that deadlines have been exceeded, [la Couronne] maintains its initial, rigid position, ignoring the state of the law on the issue. The times are no longer for willful blindness in terms of deadlines, ”chastes Judge Joëlle Roy in a decision rendered Wednesday at the Montreal courthouse.
Charged with conspiracy and several offenses under the Cannabis lawMitchell Lifshitz, 46 – the alleged leader of the network -, Ashleigh Vanessa Nielsen, 32, Shane Tanny, 44, and Golan Waiser, 44, thus benefited from the stay of the legal process under the Jordan judgment, given the unreasonable delays.
The PRESTIGE project of the Service de police de la Ville de Montréal led to the dismantling of this network which was raging in the west of Montreal.
A member of the network held a license to legally produce nearly 300 plants, but sold the contents illegally, a scheme frequently used by organized crime.
The network was trafficking significant quantities of drugs, since two searches in 2020 in Laval and Saint-Lazare led to the seizure of a hundred pounds of flowers (cocottes) of cannabis, 80 pounds of cannabis leaves and tens of thousands of dollars, indicate court documents.
Eight weeks, 87 witnesses
Accused in December 2021, the four co-defendants were due to undergo their eight-week trial in September 2023. However, this period exceeds the ceiling of 18 months set by the Supreme Court between the accusation and the conclusion of the trial.
Judge Roy severely blames the Crown, represented by its Serious Crime Bureau, in this case. According to the judge, the prosecution chose to present “laborious” evidence – 87 witnesses – to prove a conspiracy, and this, by interpreting a new law.
The Bureau of Serious Crime is testing a theory of a law that, according to its own words, it has little understanding of. This attitude has the concrete effect of taking the judicial system hostage, by fixing an unnecessarily long trial.
Judge Joelle Roy
According to the magistrate, the trial of the four defendants could have “easily” been divided to take place more quickly. Moreover, she points out, the Crown has done so for certain co-accused, who have already admitted their guilt (Magdalena Wosik, Bryan Sternszus and Gaétan Larivière). “Alternatives are possible,” insists the judge.
“The Pursuit maintained a backward-looking and indecisive attitude, while its duty required it to review its initial positions, because the situation allowed it. On this essential aspect, she had control, ”added the judge.
“Notorious and recurring” shortcomings
The Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions (DPCP) argued two exceptional circumstances to justify exceeding the deadlines, namely the complexity of the case and the “backlash” effect of the pandemic. In this regard, Justice Roy criticizes the Crown for having remained “passive” and for having taken “for granted the largesse of the courts in terms of delays”.
A former assistant to the coordination of the criminal and penal division testified to detail the evils that afflict the judicial system: lack of judges, lack of court clerks, problem with detention, lack of special constables.
However, these shortcomings are “unfortunately notorious and recurrent” and are even part of the “daily landscape” of the courthouse, argues the judge. Thus, they cannot be qualified as exceptional circumstances, she concludes.
If taken up by the judiciary, this interpretation could have important consequences this fall in other cases that have exceeded the limit set in the Jordan decision. For months, trials of a few days in Montreal have been set 12 to 15 months later, which sometimes borders on the 18-month deadline.
Me Chantal-Andrée Morin and M.e Vicky Anik Pilote represented the public prosecutor in this case. “The DPCP is analyzing the reasons in support of this decision in order to determine whether the judgment should be appealed,” said DPCP spokesperson M.e Patricia Johnson.
The story so far
2019
The SPVM is launching the PRESTIGE project, an investigation targeting a cannabis production and distribution network.
December 2021
Several defendants are the subject of an arrest warrant for conspiracy and various offenses under the Cannabis Act.
July 19, 2023
Judge Joëlle Roy declares a stay of the judicial process under the Jordan decision in the case of four co-accused.