Grand Manan Five await jury's verdict on riot charges Last Updated: Friday, November 17, 2006 | 2:40 PM AT CBC News
The fate of five men charged with arson and weapons offences in a brawl on Grand Manan last summer is now up to a jury.
Carter Foster, Matthew Lambert, Michael Small, Lloyd Bainbridge and Greg Guthrie are accused of carrying out a vigilante-style attack on a reputed drug house owned by Ronald Ross in the small Grand Manan community of Castalia, N.B., last July 22.
There is no disagreement on either side that the five men charged with burning down the house of a man they believed to be a drug dealer took the law into their own hands.
The jury has heard two weeks of evidence in the St. Andrews courthouse that suggests Ross was a dangerous man and feared in the community, and that the men felt they were acting out of necessity.
But defence lawyer David Lutz hopes the jury will see the actions of the men, known as the Grand Manan Five, as justified by the fear and intimidation that surrounded the alleged crack dealer, and the comings and goings at his small house.
Lutz has portrayed the five men as a kind of mobile neighbourhood watch, but prosecutors have warned jurors that no matter what they think of the man whose home was destroyed, the five islanders had no right to bypass the criminal justice system. Continue Article <A TARGET="_blank" HREF="http://ad.doubleclick.net/click%3Bh=v8/34a0/3/0/%2a/m%3B54077116%3B0-0%3B0%3B11710720%3B4307-300/250%3B18967215/18985110/1%3B%3B%7Esscs%3D%3fhttp://ad.ca.doubleclick.net/clk;55920369;14709343;n?https://www.tdcanadatrust.com/TheGMCard/gm_solstice.jsp?product=MG0"><IMG SRC="http://m.2mdn.net/1036091/GMCard_Q406_Speakers_300X250.gif" BORDER=0></A>
Crown prosecutor Randy DiPaulo says the actions of the accused were reckless, dangerous and criminal, and they had other options than to take the law into their own hands.
Justice Hugh McLellan said in his charge to the nine women and three men on the jury that they must weigh the evidence directly related to the charges, and ignore the opinions or sympathy expressed by the lawyers.
McLellan said it was up to the Crown to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the men were not acting in self-defence.
"I want to tell you that our law does recognize self-defence against an unprovoked assault," he told the jury.
"It does recognize you don't have to run away from your house. It recognizes the right to prevent people from trespassing on your property if they plan to shoot holes in it. It recognizes all people have the right to arrest without warrant someone who is committing an offence."
While I understand the emotions involved, getting drunk and bringing guns and gasoline to a house isn't a good idea. How no one got killed that night including the gentlemen charged is nothing short of a miracle. While jail probably isn't required, the charges were. Anarchy can't reign.
4 comments:
Grand Manan Five await jury's verdict on riot charges
Last Updated: Friday, November 17, 2006 | 2:40 PM AT
CBC News
The fate of five men charged with arson and weapons offences in a brawl on Grand Manan last summer is now up to a jury.
Carter Foster, Matthew Lambert, Michael Small, Lloyd Bainbridge and Greg Guthrie are accused of carrying out a vigilante-style attack on a reputed drug house owned by Ronald Ross in the small Grand Manan community of Castalia, N.B., last July 22.
There is no disagreement on either side that the five men charged with burning down the house of a man they believed to be a drug dealer took the law into their own hands.
The jury has heard two weeks of evidence in the St. Andrews courthouse that suggests Ross was a dangerous man and feared in the community, and that the men felt they were acting out of necessity.
But defence lawyer David Lutz hopes the jury will see the actions of the men, known as the Grand Manan Five, as justified by the fear and intimidation that surrounded the alleged crack dealer, and the comings and goings at his small house.
Lutz has portrayed the five men as a kind of mobile neighbourhood watch, but prosecutors have warned jurors that no matter what they think of the man whose home was destroyed, the five islanders had no right to bypass the criminal justice system.
Continue Article
<A TARGET="_blank" HREF="http://ad.doubleclick.net/click%3Bh=v8/34a0/3/0/%2a/m%3B54077116%3B0-0%3B0%3B11710720%3B4307-300/250%3B18967215/18985110/1%3B%3B%7Esscs%3D%3fhttp://ad.ca.doubleclick.net/clk;55920369;14709343;n?https://www.tdcanadatrust.com/TheGMCard/gm_solstice.jsp?product=MG0"><IMG SRC="http://m.2mdn.net/1036091/GMCard_Q406_Speakers_300X250.gif" BORDER=0></A>
Crown prosecutor Randy DiPaulo says the actions of the accused were reckless, dangerous and criminal, and they had other options than to take the law into their own hands.
Justice Hugh McLellan said in his charge to the nine women and three men on the jury that they must weigh the evidence directly related to the charges, and ignore the opinions or sympathy expressed by the lawyers.
McLellan said it was up to the Crown to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the men were not acting in self-defence.
"I want to tell you that our law does recognize self-defence against an unprovoked assault," he told the jury.
"It does recognize you don't have to run away from your house. It recognizes the right to prevent people from trespassing on your property if they plan to shoot holes in it. It recognizes all people have the right to arrest without warrant someone who is committing an offence."
Just for the record? I'm hope that I'm wrong in this one.
The drug problem is huge in New Brunswick and I pray the individuals charge are found not guilty.
The Government sure don't show support towards the drug problem in this Province so what other choice do we have???
I hope everything turns out fine!!!!
While I understand the emotions involved, getting drunk and bringing guns and gasoline to a house isn't a good idea. How no one got killed that night including the gentlemen charged is nothing short of a miracle. While jail probably isn't required, the charges were. Anarchy can't reign.
8: 25
Agreed but the guy charged; He sure ain't a gentlemen !
Post a Comment