Justice Anne MacKenzie isn’t a household name in Canada, in fact she was relatively unknown, until now anyway.
It seems Judge MacKenzie has ruled that a full patch member of the Hells Angels who was up on cocaine charges in British Columbia isn’t a member of a criminal organization and she let him walk on the charge that he was a member of a criminal organization.
I’m sorry, but that judge has obviously smoked way too much of that “BC Bud” that is being smuggled into the US by criminal organizations, including outlaw biker gangs like the Hells Angels. She really f***ked up in this case and the only reasons I can think of her making such an outlandish claim that a full patch member of the outlaw motorcycle club isn’t a member of a criminal organziation is because she was high on drugs at the time she made her ruling, or, that the biker gang has her in their pocket. She could also be just stupid and uninformed when it comes to criminal organizations and enterprise in the province of British Columbia and the rest of Canada.
I hope the Crown appeals this case. They should.
If Justice MacKenzie is the type of judge the people of BC have on the bench representing their best interests when it comes to prosecuting criminals, criminal gangs and organizations in BC , then the province that apparently grows the best dope in North America has some serious problems .
British Columbians need to remember that not only are there outlaw biker gangs in that province, but there are other criminal organizations in BC. There are Asian gangs and organized Russian gangs for example, running prostitution rings, trafficking rings, extortion rings, etc., etc., etc.
If Justice MacKenzie doesn’t believe that a full patch member of the Hells Angels isn’t a member of a criminal organization, imagine what her peers in BC might think and rule when it comes to cases involving other members of criminal organizations that come before them.
If I was the president of the Hells Angels in Canada, or the head of any other criminal organization in the country, I would be moving my head office to BC now if it wasn’t already there. With people like Justice MacKenzie on the bench I’d feel pretty confident that I would never be convicted of being a member of a criminal organization.
Justice MacKenzie f**ked up, and her argument that because she found “full-patch member” David Giles not guilty of possessing cocaine she had to find him not guilty of being involved in or part of a criminal organization is retarded, and/or irrational logic. It’s absolute bullshit and her reasoning leads me to believe that this particular judge might be on the take or that the bikers got to her.
The drug possession charge has nothing to do with the second charge of being involved in a criminal organization, other than the fact the charges were laid at the same time and the defendant was wearing his colours when he was busted. Under the criminal code, belonging to a criminal organization is a crime, and any charges laid under that statute deal specifically with that law, not drug trafficking or drug possessions laws.
Think of it this way; if I own a pawn shop and I’m a high ranking member in the mafioso, and I am arrested and charged with possessing stolen goods because one of my employees is caught fencing stolen goods for a friend of his (an associate), and then I am charged with being a member of a criminal organization, should I go free on the second charge if I was found not guilty on the first charge? Keep in mind that, like the Hells Angels in Canada, the mafia is also recognized as a criminal organization.
Like I said, MacKenzie f**ked up.
In Giles’ case he was charged twice; one charge of drug possession and the other charge for being a member of a criminal organization, the Hells Angels.
The fact that Giles is a full patch member of the outlaw biker gang is convincing enough for me, or a somebody sworn to uphold the law, that Giles is indeed a member of a criminal organization as it is defined in the law books. But the judge hearing Giles case doesn’t see it that way.
Like I said, the judge is either on the take or she is being intimidated by the bikers. I can’t think of any other reasons for her absurd ruling.
Law enforcement officials across the country are likely scratching their heads over her ruling and wondering how a sitting judge could be so stupid.
Justice MacKenzie says she had to exonerate Giles on the second charge because she let him walk on the possession charge, too funny.
Giles two co-defendants (associates of the outlaw motorcycle gang) by the way, were found guilty of possessing and trafficking cocaine.
The judge’s ruling in Giles’ case is a perfect example of how stupid and out of touch with reality some judges across Canada can be.
Headline: B.C. judge finds Hells Angels not a criminal organization in B.C. drug case
Sphere: Related Content
9 responses so far ↓
1 m polach // Mar 28, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Just another totally gutless Liberal judge.!
Eventually the people will rise up but for now..her ilk sits arrogantly / blissfully ignorant of their total lack of any moral fibre.
2 Peter // Mar 28, 2008 at 5:02 pm
I just read the article and I am just fuming, but not surprised. BC judges are perhaps the most Liberal in the country, most of which were appointed by the NDP provincially and the Liberals federally. They regularly let bad guys walk and hinder the good guys. It’s shameful.
3 Canadian Gypsy // Mar 28, 2008 at 9:05 pm
The problem with this case is that the two charges Giles were facing were separate. One was for being a member of criminal organization, and the other was drug possession. She didn’t convict him on the drug charge and decided that because she didn’t, she couldn’t convict him on the other charge despite the fact he was a full patch member of an outlaw motorcycle gang.
It was a pathetic and totally inept ruling. I hope this doesn’t go unnoticed or is swept under the carpet.
4 Jake // Mar 29, 2008 at 1:40 am
Justice MacKenzie is either on the take, ingests too many mushrooms or as I believe; on weekends when she’s not on the bench, she rides in the back of a Harley, arms wrapped firmly around a full patch member of Hells Angels.
If we’re going to allow Hells Angels sympathizers to sit on the bench, then who’s next? Al-Qeada?
5 Canadian Gypsy // Mar 29, 2008 at 8:38 am
The “Big Red Machine” member should have been convicted on at least one charge. Lucky him that he got of on the drug charge. He scored a sympathetic judge. The judge might even have a daughter who is connected to the biker who stood before her. Maybe he’s an “in-law” instead of an outlaw.
All I know and in my opinion, the excuse she gave for not convicting him for belonging to criminal organization was effin’ pathetic. One expects that a judge could come up with a better reason than the one MacKenzie gave. Like I said it was pathetic.
Anyway, her ruling won’t become “Judgegate” and that’s too bad. Judges have been able to get away with a lot of shit over the years, and they rarely answer to the Canadian taxpayers. We are quick to rake our MPs across the coals, but when it comes to lawyers in powerful positions, like judge MacKenzie for example, nobody does shit about it.
How many politicians in Ottawa have either studied for their law degree, or in fact have one?
Maybe the judge is planning a foray into federal politics. What do you think, Liberal, Conservative, Separatist or what?
6 S // Mar 29, 2008 at 5:45 pm
I guess by most of the comments I’ve read when a policeman commits a criminal act then the whole department is a criminal organization. Not very logical. Individual people may act in a criminal manner as individuals, not as part of a criminal enterprise. If that were the case then professional sports teams, major corporations, etc., etc., would be held to the same standard. Oh yeah, YOU don’t belong to the organization in question so rules and rights don’t apply.
7 JustAnotherNumber // May 30, 2008 at 7:42 pm
We need some real ‘Boondock Saints’…to whip out these criminals…the justice system has failed…in other countries where the justice system has failed vigilante groups have formed…maybe thats what we need…
8 Canadian Gypsy // May 30, 2008 at 8:09 pm
Boondock Saints, what a great movie. I’ve seen it a couple of times.
I never used to believe in vigilantism but I’m all for it now.
The justice system is failing because of judges like McKenzie, Pitfield and a few other whacked out and out of touch judges. It’s pathetic.
That being said, Charles Bronson made a good vigilante too. Can’t think of the movies off the top of my head, but his character’s name is Paul Kersey, and I have referred to him a couple of times when I’ve ranted about the crime in Calgary.
9 Red Scorpions Busted in Victoria BC, Residents Better Hope That Justice Anne McKenzie Isn’t Sitting On The Bench When Gangmembers Appear In Court // Aug 21, 2008 at 10:36 am
[...] in point, the very f**ked in the head and extremely incompetent Justice Anne McKenzie, remember her, she’s the one that rule that a full-patch member of the Hells Angels [...]
Leave a Comment