The document said the defendants claimed that the PHO was too vague.
“The defendants did not specify which portions of these enactments they were claiming were too vague. Their own vagueness in this regard is unhelpful. It is not the Court’s role to hunt through the law to try to find a defence for an accused,” the document read. It noted that the judge tried to find whether or not there was any merit to those claims, but it said the argument of unconstitutional vagueness was dismissed.
The judgement addressed a list of other arguments made by the defendants, but ultimately the defendants’ application to exclude evidence was dismissed. “That evidence clearly establishes that the defendants committed the offence with which they are charged. None of their other arguments have been made out. I therefore find the defendants guilty as charged.”
FREEDUMB
Health Health Latest News, Health Health Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: globeandmail - 🏆 5. / 92 Read more »
Source: sudburydotcom - 🏆 6. / 89 Read more »