Jul 09, 2013 2:15 PM

Thoughts on this post here /?? --------------------------------------------------------- LIFE MAY CHANGE AS WE KNOW IT. CHECK OUT QUEBEC AND NO CRIMINAL CODE!!!!!!!! The police no longer have the authority to stop Quebecers. This is what the result of a decision of the Quebec Court of Appeal made this week. It could well have disastrous consequences, even anarchic, across the province.

Due to an overly high level of criminal prosecution by the Queen number, the highest court in the province called it a "querulous litigant." By doing so, the court stated that the Criminal Code is therefore not in compliance with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The decision had the effect of a bomb in the office of the Prime Minister Marois and from the police. Immersed in an elusive legal uncertainty, the authorities now fear no longer have the legal tools to stop the criminals. Minister Marois has expressed its readiness to resort to the Act on Measures to war if the situation degenerated and that the Canadian military was now to consolidate its workforce.

After Lola, Queen

The Montreal wealthy businessman that the media had dubbed Eric in the legal saga "Lola against Eric" is the cause of the bang.

Accused in a case of drunk driving in 2011, attorney Eric had managed to obtain a court decision declaring the "querulous litigant" Queen. For Eric, it was a rather unexpected victory given the overwhelming evidence that was presented against him at trial. Indeed, in a lengthy clip of 2:57 minutes filmed by chance using a video camera forgotten on the table of a bar, it clearly saw Eric put 17 pints of Heineken (20 oz) at a impressive rate.

Also in the field of vision of the camera, we then saw Eric get up from his chair and heading to his shiny Porsche 911. Having joined his vehicle not without effort, he started up a whirlwind backwards through the wall of the bar, stopping a few meters from the camera that was nothing missing from the scene. Moreover, the final plan, we could see very clearly the plate of the vehicle (registered in the name of Eric), which gave evidence for the prosecution, already concrete, reliability bordering on arrogance.

The police had finally put the collar the suspect a few minutes later when it was unloaded from a damaged vehicle, sat in the same chair he had left and ordered another pint of Heineken in the mid-horrified eyes, half-amused the few remaining customers.

Funny fact, the well-known director Podz, which was the unfortunate owner of the camera forgotten on the table in the bar, failed to recover what had now become an exhibit.

A surreal debate

Following the viewing of the video in full hearing, Eric lawyer told the judge he would try something "a bit special legal sense" since his client had no defense, having consumed Heineken and not windshield washer fluid. He then asked what is declared "querulous litigant" Queen, or that is theoretically responsible for all criminal prosecutions in Canada.

His argument was based primarily on the fact that a person can not multiply as broad and abusive judicial proceedings so that the courts do not intervene.

Eric's lawyer was then referred to the case of Mario Small, a man from Saguenay having filed 14 legal remedies in the space of nine months. Its right to take legal action was then suspended in the early 2000s as had been declared vexatious litigant. By comparison, during the same time period, the Queen had filed 17,891 criminal prosecutions across Canada.

Faced with these statistics, the court could not do otherwise than to suffer the same fate to the Queen that he had reserved at the time Mario Small. Indeed, all must be considered equal before the law.

In a 24-page unanimous judgment, the Court of Appeal of Quebec recalls that due to its recent decision to reject the argument Lise Thibault to the effect that the Queen could not continue itself, the Court had Now keep the same logic in treating the Queen as any other individual. It therefore had no right to take the course more than 20,000 lawsuits in a single year.

Wishing to remain anonymous for obvious reasons, one of the judges of the Court of Appeal awarded:

"We acquitted Eric, if we were obliged to pay Lise Thibault. We did not want to pay Thibault, the decision seemed so obvious. It was not made on the spot as it made the Criminal Code unconstitutional and that it prevented the same time the State to prosecute criminals. We learned like everyone else, listening to the chief of police to complain to the issue of Denis Lévesque. This, it was dropped, it's true. "