Cheers for that link newguy, always good to know what's going on in the present. In a case like that, first thing to do would be to turn the court into a court de jure, basically a court with a jury, as is your legal right, and then simply explain how damned daft the whole thing is in something along the lines of "if you stop me growing this 4 ounces of cannabis for myself then 30 minutes out of this court room and i will be buying said 4 ounces from a dealer working the black market, thus creating gangs, violence, civil unrest, dangerous neighbourhoods, further more, instead of spending the £800 saved on said 4 ounces in local shops and resteraunts, it will instead pay for weapons, cars and hollidays and more likely than not, cocaine as it is laundered. Please make your decision on which option is better for the whole of society, as you may stop me growing, but you may not stop me smoking." The judge is a bellend by definition, the jury however are just members of the public, it would be pretty hard for them as human beings to turn around and state guilty, they'd have to have some rather twisted morals and rationales.