The 3rd day’s afternoon session was lit up when Mohan raised an extremely valid point asking: “What is the prejudice that the defendants have suffered in preparation for this matter? They had 10 months to read the annexes and if of course if something emerges during the course of the evidence, which is inadmissible or otherwise objectionable, they can object to it at that stage.”
As the state is making excuses about their timelines and lack of preparation, “Plaintiffs have really tried to get the parties together” said Mohan
The state only delivered the trial bundle to the FOGFA team after the start of the Trial, and they only have had today to dissect 100’s of documents and 1000’s of pages. The state’s notion that FOGFA submitted too much evidence is purely unfound.
The state called FOGFA’s response as abuse and vexatious. Mohan makes it clear that they are not raising concerns about the state’s submissions being stricken off the roll, unlike the state’s request to strike FOGFA evidence, and expert witnesses off the roll. It was merely pointed out that the state’s evidence submitted does not compare to the level of science that needs to be delivered in testimony by the very authors of their studies. This is scientific medical ammo that the state simply does not have, and any studies they referring to that’s worth their weight, will not have their author’s here to deliver testimony, unlike the cannabis expert witnesses that did their homework, right.
Watch Wednesday’s afternoon session:
At the end of the day, the state was “found guilty at the very complaints, they [state] raised” against the FOGFA legal bench.
The judge overruled the state’s objection.
Mohan from FOGFA described the amount of communications and filings that occurred since the application was started. One of the complaints of the defendants is that they have to go through all the articles to make sense of the evidence. Mohan admitted that the evidence delivered is even “above his pay grade and level of understanding” and that it’s for scientists to understand, like the expert witness scientists Fields of Green for All flew in from over the world.
After picking apart the timeline of submissions and invitations for meetings before the trial started, Mohan went on to state that:
“Their complaint is that we gave them [the state] too much notice”.
Mohan argued that the facts and the raw data to the studies should be provided. “Scientists are no stranger to these things”. It may be that the court is inept to deal with the scientific literature provided by FOGFA. It’s clear that the state troopers are very anti-scientific as their own scientific admissions are mere claims to foreign studies done with no raw scientific data attached. If they understood how science worked, then they would have been able to put a scientific argument together.
Doctors for Life should know better, working in the medical fraternity with scientific studies of very similar nature.
The validity of the state’s evidence was contested as their studies they have referenced do not contain any substantial scientific basis, nor are their summaries of such studies, scientific in nature. Their authors will also not appear in court to deliver testimony. Mohan went on to illustrate that the state’s submissions are weak to the extent that: ‘A study by who, a study conducted by people around a campfire?’
Evidence that will get delivered with testimony includes studies like “Cannabis has been shown to assist with HIV sensory neuropathy”.
State Adv reminded the judge that the Cape Town High Court judgment has been confirmed as appealed at the constitutional court set to showcase 07 Nov 2017 for a final decision on the Cape Town personal use at home matter.
The claim that the “Plaintiffs want full decriminalization of the case” is not what The Dagga Couple’s case is about. It simply comes down to “the present regime is unconstitutional, and let Parliament regulate it in a fashion that is constitutional.” as Mohan went on to state.
“The fact that there are therapeutic benefits, the current legislature need to take into account.“
The state asked if the day can be adjourned so that they can prepare for tomorrow as the day didn’t go according to their plan.
The state troopers never expected to get this far, and that is clear in their months’ overdue submission of evidence. Evidence, which does not test well against scientific merit.
Court starts 09:30AM on Thursday.
The irony of advocate using judgment allowing Stransham Ford to die… to argue against dagga ..when he was the first legalise dagga lawyer.
— katharine child (@katjanechild) August 2, 2017