FR33MASON
Active Member
I have been arrested a couple of times and even did a 4 month stint in my early 20's. It was because of my lack of knowledge in law (Canada) that I wound up in serving a sentence. After that happened, I decided to never let that happen again. I am no lawyer but an easy counter argument to the "I smelled marijuana" statement is to first ask as to what defines the smell of marijuana. I mean it is fact that marijuana can smell like fruit or candy so when an officer smells blueberries for instance, does that give them the right to further an investigation? I would hope not or all the pie baking grandmas out there are in serious trouble.You talk like someone who has never been arrested, many new lawyers that get arrested learn real quick about bending over.
The biggest thing is not to admit to smelling anything...nada, zip. As soon as you admit to smelling anything (B.O. pets, cooking, etc.) , you are confirming that there is a "smell" present and that is where things get sticky but again, define the olfactory sensations that constitute 'marijuana smell' that allows an officer to further an investigation based off of that 'smell'. What kind of court sanctions action from a criteria with no outlined definition? The ones that are allowed to me thinks.
The people that need to bring up these kinds of arguments are usually too stressed out to figure out the counter arguments and present them. The interpretation that is upheld is usually the one that the prosecutors present because it is rarely challenged.
Cheers.