Festival promoter charged with allowing cannabis use, but no cannabis arrests
Phil Stovell
the festival, yet the organiser is being charged with allowing cannabis
use. Obviously plod are bored with harassing tourists and photographers.
Surely, with no evidence of cannabis being used, as there were no busts,
then there can be no evidence to convict him?
This seems like deliberate harassment.
Facebook group:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=wall&gid=196155751860
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/local/crook/4779162.Future_of_festival_in_jeopardy
Future of Thimbleberry Music Festival in jeopardy after allegation that
cannabis was smoked at event
9:31am Saturday 5th December 2009
comment Comments (1) Have your say » Photograph of the Author By Rachel
Wearmouth »
THE future of a festival once dubbed the “Glastonbury of the North”
was in jeopardy last night after its organiser was charged with a drugs
offence.
Andrew Norman, who stages the crowd-drawing Thimbleberry Music Festival,
has been charged with permitting people to smoke cannabis at the event.
It is alleged this happened between Thursday, September 24, and Monday,
September 28, as hundreds of revellers gathered for the festival at his
farm, near Stanhope, County Durham.
The 51-year-old will face Bishop Auckland Magistrates’ Court on Friday.
A spokesman for Durham Police made a short statement yesterday: “On
Friday, police charged a 51-year-old man with permitting the smoking of a
class B drug on his premises. He is due to appear at Bishop Auckland
Magistrates’ Court next Friday. The offence is said to have taken place
between September 24 and September 28, this year.”
Officers arrested him shortly after the three-day festival, which sees
hundreds of music lovers from across the UK camp at Thimbleberry Hall Farm
twice a year.
It is not yet clear if Durham County Council bosses will grant Mr Norman a
licence for next year’s event should he be convicted of the offence.
This casts further doubt over whether the event will go ahead next year.
It recently emerged organisers are struggling to raise cash to fund the
£30,000 event, which has prompted more than 1,000 people to sign up to
the Friends of Thimbleberry Music Festival Facebook group. Supporters have
begun donating equipment and planning benefit gigs in the hope enough
funds can be drummed up.
In its seventh year, Thimbleberry, said to be held on an old Viking
settlement, has established itself as a platform for unsigned bands with
four stages covering genres from drum and bass to indie, jazz and reggae.
Usenet Nutter
So do they need to prove he actually "knew" that it was being smoked
...might that not be difficult?
Joe Lee
I suspect they don't & that all they have to show (or demonstrate) is that
he did nothing - or rather nothing of any effect - to prevent or deter the
offence from being committed, hence "permit".
Of course there would need to be evidence of "the consumption" of the
substance on his premises.
--
Joe Lee
Phil Stovell
> I suspect they don't & that all they have to show (or demonstrate) is that
> he did nothing - or rather nothing of any effect - to prevent or deter the
> offence from being committed, hence "permit".
There were "no smoking" signs all over the place.
> Of course there would need to be evidence of "the consumption" of the
> substance on his premises.
There were no arrests for cannabis possession. Even if there were, that
doesn't mean that any was actually smoked.
johnmids2006
manager or occupier of premises might be held liable for what goes on
therein as regards illegal drugs activities:
http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1969/1.html
Phil Stovell
That did come up in the facebook support group. I also found this, which
appears to be similar:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jul/14/drugsandalcohol.law
"But in the appeal court judgment, published last week, Lord Phillips, the
lord chief justice, ruled that the offences of conspiracy to aid and abet
and counsel the production of cannabis were "unknown to law" and had to be
quashed. "There can be no conviction for aiding and abetting, counselling
or procuring, unless the offence is shown to have occurred," he said. "It
is not an offence to attempt to aid and abet, counsel or procure the
commission of an offence.""
As I understand it, there were no arrests for drugs at all, therefore
there can be no evidence of drug use, so even if they had placed a sign
saying "smoke spliffs here" (they actually had "no smoking" signs
everywhere) they cannot show that the offence occurred.
Culex (The Infamous Culex)
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jul/14/drugsandalcohol.law
>
> "But in the appeal court judgment, published last week, Lord Phillips, the
> lord chief justice, ruled that the offences of conspiracy to aid and abet
> and counsel the production of cannabis were "unknown to law" and had to be
> quashed. "There can be no conviction for aiding and abetting, counselling
> or procuring, unless the offence is shown to have occurred," he said. "It
> is not an offence to attempt to aid and abet, counsel or procure the
> commission of an offence.""
>
> As I understand it, there were no arrests for drugs at all, therefore
> there can be no evidence of drug use, so even if they had placed a sign
> saying "smoke spliffs here" (they actually had "no smoking" signs
> everywhere) they cannot show that the offence occurred.
Therefore the magistrates will probably decide he is guilty.
-- -
Culex -- the Infamous Culex
Svenne
<the....@googlemail.com> wrote:
>Therefore the magistrates will probably decide he is guilty.
The gathering was of such a nature that persons attending were of a
kind amongst whom cannabis use is prevalent therefore organising such
a gathering was in effect bringing together cannabis users and thereby
facilitating and allowing the use of cannabis.
Guilty.
10 years.
The Rt. Hon Svenne, KFC, R.Sole