TURMEL: Adrian Stuerm's deal not to appeal medpot conviction

Skip to first unread message


Nov 4, 2017, 10:23:41 AM11/4/17
TURMEL: Adrian Stuerm's deal not to appeal medpot conviction

JCT: Adrian Stuerm was sentenced to a mandatory 6-months for
cultivating 65 plants in his garage. He was released after 19
days pending appeal.

The Crown moved to quash the appeal as frivolous for having
relied on the old MMAR when he was charged under the new MMPR.

That was the constitutional motion that made that mistake. Not
the Quash Motion which cited the MMPR.

But the Crown and Clerk were unaware that the appeal wasn't
based on the MMAR challenge, it was based on the MMPR
challenge and sent it for hearing to a panel of judges.

Adrian handed in written representations explaining that they
were all talking about the wrong motion but the judges ruled
that appealing against the MMAR was frivolous and threw out
his appeal and sent him back to jail.

When came his first hearing by jailers for release after
1/6th, he found out that his complete file hadn't been
forwarded file and so they put it off a week.

Then his lawyer offered him a deal: he was also facing charges
for Possession of what he had been convicted of producing. A
great case of Double Jeopardy. But the Crown would drop that
charge and let him be released if he renounced any appeal to
the Supreme Court of Canada. He signed the document:

NOM DU CLIENT: Adrian Stuerm
DOSSIER: 500-01-152951-171

Je, soussigne, Adrian Stuerm, declare ce qui suit:

1. Je suis l'accuse dans l'affaire mentionne ci-haut;
1. I am the accused in the above-mentioned matter;

2. En date du 23 may 2017, un jury preside par l'honorable
Alexandre Boucher, J.C.S., a rendu un verdict de culpabilite a
mon egard.
2. On May 23 2017, a jury presided over by the Honorable
Alexandre Boucher, J.C.S., rendered a verdict of guilty on me.

JCT: Actually, the jury rendered their decision on May 10. Not
May 23. And he was sentenced on May 18, not May 23. The judge
signed the paperwork on May 23.

3. En date du 25 septembre 2017, l'appel du dossier a ete
3. On Sep 25 2017, the appeal of the case was quashed;

4. Me Serge Raby m'a explique les avantages et inconvenients
d'un appel devant la Cour Supreme du Canada dans mon dossier;
4. Attorney (Me) Serge Raby explained to me the advantages and
inconveniences of an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada in
my case;

5. Je comprends les explications de Me Serge Raby et je
renonce a mon droit d'en appeler devant la Cour Supreme du
5. I under the explanations of Me Serge Raby and I renounce my
right to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Signe a Montreal le 10 octobre 2017
Adrian Stuerm

Solemnly declared before me at Montreal on Oct 10 2017.

JCT: So that's how Adrian was coerced into giving up a great
appeal over a panel of judges who didn't realize they were
dealing with the wrong motion! Har har har har har har. And
put him back in jail after being completely wrong.

Notice there is no Crown Attorney on this shameful document.
It's all a pledge by Adrian being offered for the deal. No
assurance at all from the other side.

On Oct 18, the Crown did drop the other double-jeopardy
possession charge. But at the next release hearing, they again
hadn't forwarded all the documentation so he couldn't be

5 days later, he had third hearing and this time they had all
the documentation necessary to release him.

Looks like they extorted his renouncement by withholding the
documentation and then reneged on part of the deal making him
do almost 3 more weeks.

Gee, maybe he should renege on the deal too?

Just file his Application for Leave to Appeal and let the
Crown introduce the Renouncement Letter proving their
coercion. Har har har. And if they don't use the Renouncement,
no one's going to complain about him reneging.

I don't think this is over. They really should have kept the
deal. Holding back his documentation to keep him in jail to
get their deal and then make him do an extra 3 weeks was a
really stupid move. Hope they pissed him off enough he'll want
to renege and dare them to tell the Superme Court of the
Renouncement they extorted by bureaucratic delays.
Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages