TURMEL: Burrows & Roy Reply to Crown Nix on MJ Exemptions JCT: Stephen Burrows and Robert Roy were Left-Outs of the Allard relief, Robert by expiry of only 3 days! 3 more days and his Possess Permit would have validated his Grow Permit but now hes stuck with only his Grow Permit! And Stephens been stopped from curing his cancer. Justice Phelan dimissed their Interim Exemptions for insufficient evidence of medical need!!! Couldnt believe they had ATPs like they swore in the Affidavits, had to see them. Couldnt believe their doctors had checked their medical files, had to see them too. So theyve appealed and shown the next court their ATPs and Medical files backing up their affidavits the judge below refused to believe asking how they help? But they need their exemptions back. Here is his affidavit: STEPHEN BURROWS AFFIDAVIT I, Stephen Patrick Burrows, residing at make oath as follows: 1. I have cancerous tumors on my groin for which no local doctor would prescribe me marijuana. 2. In 2011, Dr. Rob Kammermans of Ontario came to do a clinic in Nova Scotia and signed my Authorization for marijuana after examining my tumors. 3. Ex. 1 is the Oct 1 2012 letter from Health Canada revoking my exemption because the good doctor had not returned to Ontario where he was registered to practice but had signed my Authorization in Nova Scotia. Health Canada revoked the exemptions for medication to thousands of patients and condemned me and others to death for this same non-medical reason. 4. I found a doctor in B.C. to sign after a Skype interview. Having been signed in the right province, that medical opinion was judged valid by Health Canada. It cost me $400 for my appointment. 5. Ex. 2 is my Authorization to Possess to Jan 13 2014. 6. Ex. 3 is my Designated Person Production License. 7. On Jan 13 2014, my exemption permits expired and I lost my Designated Grower. I could not apply to renew under the MMAR because: 1) any new crop reaped would have had to be destroyed on April 1 2014 upon the Health Canada Directive; 2) it would have been a waste of another $400; 3) I could not afford to apply under the MMPR for the high- priced product sold by a Licensed Producer. 7. Ex. 4 to 6 are pictures showing the reduction of my tumors over time. 8. On Mar 3 2014, having been out of affordable marijuana for months, I filed a Statement of Claim in Federal Court for repeal of the MMAR based on 16 identified constitutional violations, of the MMPR based on 20 identified constitutional violations, and of the prohibitions by striking the word marijuana from Schedule II of the CDSA. 9. I also filed Motion Record for an interim exemption for Personal Medical Use with my Authorization To Possess Number in an Affidavit attesting to my need of marijuana for my cancers. 10. On Mar 10 2014, my motion was stayed pending the Mar 21 2014 decision of the motion for interim relief in Allard v. HMTQ [T-2030-13]. 11. On Mar 21 2014, Justice Manson ruled in Allard that all Grow Permits were grandfathered to Oct 1 2013 but not Possess Permits. Only those with current ATPs would continue to be exempted. I was Left-Out of the Manson relief. 12. On Mar 31 2014, my motion was once again stayed upon a motion by the Her Majesty in Default of filing a Statement of Defence for a stay of my Action pending the final decision in Allard v. HMTQ (T-2030-13) on the basis that I am seeking relief which is substantially similar to that being sought by the Allard Plaintiffs due to the 4 issues in common whose resolution would significantly narrow the issues I am raising. 13. On the Apr 29 2014, the Crowns motion for the stay was heard by Justice Phelan. At the hearing, I explained why my ATP was not current and I had been left-out of the Manson relief and why I had no reason to be waiting to see what remedy they would receive which I could not share in. 14. On Jun 4 2014, Justice Phelan stayed my Action pending the final decision in Allard and dismissed my motion for interim exemption for Personal Medical Use ruling: [28] In addition, the motions materials are inadequate to grant any relief. Although the motion record contains an affidavit portion which contains different degrees of personal information, each fails to plead sufficient evidence regarding the claimants personal circumstances to warrant any relief. While some claimants have indicated an ATP permit number, most have failed to provide a copy of that permit or to indicate whether it was relevant on the relevant dates. [29] The Court notes that the claimants were given an opportunity to remedy certain deficiencies in their motions materials following the May 7th order; no claimant took advantage of that opportunity. 15. I had a copy of my ATP and pictures of my tumors at the hearing. But if I had known the judge would dismiss my doctors authorization as insufficient proof of my medical need, Id have dropped my pants and shown him when I had the chance. 16. Exhibit 7-9 are CDs of my medical records should my doctors authorization be judged insufficient evidence without it. APPELLANTS WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS 22. My Affidavit attested that I have medical need for marijuana for my cancers and included my ATP qualifying me to use marijuana. Why would the Court need to see a copy of the ATP when I had one. What purpose would it serve? Does the Court really need to see the ATP, really need to see pictures of my cancer for me to sufficiently show I have cancer when the doctor already said so? Given the Crown has not disputed that fact, the court should not have either. If I had known the judge thought my doctors authorization was insufficient proof of my medical need, Id have dropped my pants and showed him. ROBERT ROY AFFIDAVIT I, Robert Roy, residing at 55 Pleasant St. Kingston N.S. make oath as follows: 1. I have herniated discs, degenerative disk disease, pinched nerves, emphezma, high blood pressure and am being treated for suspected diverticulitis that runs in the family. It took me since 1991 when I was injured at work till 2012 to get a specialist to sign & then it took another 4 months to find a doctor to sign & receive my license. And my doctor that signed my paperwork just passed away! 2. Ex. 1 is my Authorization to Possess to Mar 18 2014. 3. Ex. 2 is my Production License..... 6. On Mar 21 2014, Justice Manson ruled in Allard that all Grow Permits were grandfathered to Oct 1 2013 but not Possess Permits. Only those with current ATPs would continue to be exempted. I was Left-Out of the Manson relief by 3 days. I could not apply to renew under the MMAR because: 1) any new crop reaped would have had to be destroyed on April 1 2014 upon the Health Canada Directive; 2) it would have been a waste of another $400; 3) Im on social services disability pension long term and could never afford to apply under the MMPR for the high- priced product sold by a Licensed Producer.... CROWN REPLY A template-to-Parker Appeal The Court has no jurisdiction that doesnt deal with any personal medical need at all. BURROWS (SB) & ROY (RR) REPLIES APPELLANTS REPLY 1. The Crown has written a boiler-plate response from the appeal of Terrance Parker that ignores our medical predicaments and focuses on one issue of jurisdiction to grant us an interim exemption for Personal Medical Use. All other issues raised have been ignored. SB: 2. This Court has been provided with the pictures of the cancer whose diagnoses by two doctors qualified me for an MMAR medical exemption after my first doctor could do nothing and had sent me home. My doctors attested I was dying. I was healing with an exemption. Now Im back to dying again. For insufficient evidence of medical need? RR: 2. This Court has been provided with the medical evidence for diagnoses by my doctor that qualified me for an MMAR medical exemption. My doctor attested I was sick. The cannabis was helping. It details how my Possess Permit expired 3 days before the Allard decision leaving me Left- Out. From legally needy to not legally needy because of 3 days? Now Im back to sickly again. For insufficient evidence of medical need and 3 days? A) Whether the attestation by my physicians on my expired ATPs was sufficient evidence of my medical need? 3. My doctors attested to my medical need to the satisfaction of Health Canada. What but proof of their attestation should be sufficient evidence? The court below has no better medical expertise to judge my medical file than my doctors. This court has been provided the medical evidence demanded below for the exemptions but does this court have any better medical expertise to judge than my doctors either? B) Whether the stay below was justified. SB: 4. Resolution of the Allard appeals for valid ATP holders helps me not when Ive been Left-Out with an invalid ATP. I could be dead before the Allard appeals are over and then Im still Left-Out with a valid Grow Permit but no valid Possess Permit! For what is the court making me wait? Wheres the justice in the deprival of my healing medication until appeals get resolved that do not affect me? RR: 4. Resolution of the Allard appeals for valid ATP holders helps me not when Ive been Left-Out with an invalid ATP by only 3 days.... B) Whether an exemption for Personal Medical Use is appropriate remedy? 5. It does not follow that because an interim exemption without limitation was deemed inappropriate for the Allards that the previously reasonable remedy of Interim Exemption for Personal Medical Use is now to be deemed inappropriate for us. Regardless any technical arguments of inappropriateness the Crown may make, other courts have always granted Interim exemption without any other limitation than Personal Medical Use and it is the only remedy that can save my life with the MMAR-MMPR regimes so out of reach. 6. Despite all the Crowns many legal arguments why I should not get interim exemption, they offer no argument on why I should not be allowed to finish curing my cancer. To my proven medical need, the Crown has no answer. Only No jurisdiction to let me survive once one judge below has condemned me to death. 7. The Issue should be my Right to Life-saving medication, SB: Curing my Cancer, not protocol on jurisdiction! This higher Court can disagree with the refusal of interim relief below and should I lose my appeal and my continued healing be later deemed inappropriate, the Court can take it away. 8. This Court has the power to do anything that is just and there is no alternative to letting me die than an Interim Exemption for Personal Medical Use. JCT: So that has now landed on the desk of a Federal Court of Appeal judge right after the Terry Parker asks for the protection he should have had and they never yet provided. But do tell why Paddy should stop curing his cancer, My Lord?
Posted on: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 11:26:05 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015