Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan
My guess is this will go to the BC Court of Appeal in relatively short order. There's a major evidentiary problem here--the BC court has said that where the roadside screening device reads "fail" that sanctions under the Motor Vehicles Act infringe s. 8. This makes sense: where there's a "fail" reading there is a requirement that a breath demand be read and a breath sample taken pursuant to the Criminal Code, which provides for specific penalties upon conviction.
With the greatest of respect for the Court it makes no sense to then uphold the imposition of sanctions on persons who blow "warn" where they've been deemed unconstitutional for people who blow "fail."
|
I will say it in "everyman" terms and risk Law Society sanctions
- the BC judge in question is an idiot... or a political lackey trying to spin things to the liking of his political masters.