This was clearly posted a few pages back...
Quote:
|
The BC Civil Forfeiture Office assesses RCMP investigations referred by IPOC, and where appropriate, forfeiture is requested in BC Supreme Court for property that is either an instrument and or proceed of unlawful activity.
|
Why are people saying this should be challenged in the Supreme Court when it's the Supreme Court that decides if the property should be forfeited in the first place? The RCMP don't make these decisions, politicians or government officials don't make them, a Supreme Court judge does.
Like I said earlier, nobody knows a damn thing about what happened in court, so bitching about it being a stupid law is pointless.
A couple years back I researched various BC laws for a case I was thinking of going to court on (civil lawsuit). When I read the statutes I was going to abandon the case because in plain English it appeared I didn't have a hope in hell of winning. I went to a lawyer anyway (advice of a friend) and found out the relevant section of law I was reading, while 100% correct, was overruled by another completely unrelated section of law that I never even read (or would have thought to read). So I went to court and won my case. I didn't even take a lawyer as the case was a slam dunk for me. The judge decided in my favor after only 10 minutes, much to the astonishment of the other party who had also read the same section of law as me (they quoted it to me early on in our dispute long before going to court) and thought they were in the right.
Just because you read a line or two of law doesn't mean you know how to
apply it to every specific situation.