Caught - court - conviction? Examples needed.

[Biscuit]

I just discovered MDMA is NOT schedule 1 under Queensland law. So it is considered less serious by the Qld government.
Amazing - whilst the amounts were likely to be different across Australia I would have at least thought that all common illcits were scheduled the same.

For Queensland legislation: http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/CURRENT/D/

It appears the 2 thresholds are 2grams and 200grams for meth, cocaine and heroin. So quite a large difference from WA.

MDMA did NOT have a higher threshold - PCP did - who trafficks PCP? Perhaps Phase_dancer can have a stab at the Qld situation?

Sadly it seems the states vary greatly. It may have somewhat devalued my post a little - to be honest I did not realise this was the case. However it may also encourage interested people to seek out answers for themselves for their own area.
I am more than happy to ATTEMPT to interpret any pieces of legislation people have difficulty with.

 

[Urbanhog]

Just curious, for example, you got busted with personal amounts, and while you "wait" for your first court appearance, usually is few months or weeks after the date of your bust, and if you "volunteer" to see a "drug counseller" (sp?) and keeping seeing that counseller while you are waiting for your trial/court appearance, will that make the judge give you a lesser sentence because you have seeked "help" to your "drug problems", even if you are not a hardcore drug whore just "now and then user" and bullshit everyone all the way, and end up having the drug counsellor at the court speaking on your behalf at the court? Will having a lawyer telling the judge that you have been going thru "drug counselling" while awaiting for the trial????

What ya reckon? any advice/opinions on this idea? Or a waste of time?

Cheers :D

 

[Biscuit]

Thats a hard one.

I think seeing a drug counsellor is definitely a positive and will be viewed by the Judge, or in simple possession cases the Magistrate, as a good thing.
However it may depend on the circumstances how far you take it. And also what your lawyer advises.
If you have never had a conviction in your life and you were caught with 2 pills on NYE an attempt at painting the situation as a stupid mistake never to be repeated may be preferred.
However perhaps if it was a greater amount, or maybe if it was a drug of addiction like speed or heroin, or you have had previous drug convictions, then going the drug problem strategy and definitely voluntary counselling may be recommended.

As I said it depends on the circumstances and the lawyer is the best person to judge that - of course they will never lie for you, and nor should you in Court, so you may have to decide just how big your drug problem is prior to you advising your lawyer.

It is a good point though because it has become clear to me several times that a few judicial officers just do not understand that some people use drugs recreationally. I guess because they see the dark side of addiction so often that they are "schooled" to believe this.

What you really want is a hip, young Magistrate with half a clue - imo in that case a simple possession charge of a few pills is likely to get a fine or a community order with perhaps a counselling requirement.

I am not aware of sentencing regimes in other states. But in WA two common ones are the COMMUNITY BASED ORDER and the INTENSIVE SUPERVISION ORDER. They all have requirements that the offender must complete (for drug offences likely counselling) but as the name suggests the latter is more serious and has far greater involvement and intrusion in your life by Correctional authorities than the former.
If you went to counselling on your own volition then the CBO is likely to be given as you have demonstrated an ability and foresight to address the problem on your own without any governance.
Whereas if you appeared to be in disarray and the Magistrate decided you needed help and was not convinced of your ability to cease drugs the ISO is far more likely.
So in that sense voluntarily addressing the "problem" prior to Court is a very positive thing.

 

[phase_dancer]

^^Agreed. As a requirement for eligibility for the Qld court diversion system, the person must admit dependency. In other words if your drug use is only occasional and non-problematic, you need to lie to avoid being charged in the traditional manner. So if this were to be the desired course of action, as Biscuit mentioned, any self directed help will likely be viewed positively.

Yes MDMA is in schedule II in Qld. I'm not sure whether this actually makes much difference if facing a big supply or trafficking charge. The penalties seem to be much the same when quantities are large.


Thanks for the great posts Biscuit. I've spent much of the morning chasing the amendments in Qld, so I've got some reading to do. I thought I knew the present situation but there's been several amendments since I last looked, although some of these merely include appointments of regional courts to the diversion program.

 

[Biscuit]

Sorry i may not have been clear - a CBO and an ISO are penalties in WA along with CROs, fines, suspended sentences and immediate imprisonment.

They are available for every type of offence.

They are not diversion programmes - so what I was saying is you are likely to get a lesser penalty in WA in most cases (i.e. the CBO rather than ISO) if you showed that you were addressing some sort of problem independently.
I think counselling in the sense of "education" is something a person convicted should definitely do. You may not need counselling for a "drug problem" but if you attended some whack seminar on the dangers of drugs etc etc like they often send people convicted of cannabis offences to, it will go a long way imo.

We have the Drug Court here as a diversion programme - similar to Qld no doubt - and yes, that definitely requires a drug dependency, regular counselling and drug tests.
However our Drug Court is aimed at not just drug offences but non-violent offences as well. So a person who commits a home burglary due to a drug addiction may be eligible for the Drug Court which means he or she will not go to prison but must adhere to a strict regime of getting and staying clean with regular appearances in the Drug Court and if this is completed successfully prison will not be imposed. I think possibly for some stellar "patients" no penalty will be imposed at all.

Obviously not likely to be relevant for most Bluelighters purposes.

 

[kooky77]

Very Lucky

About 3 years 1 ago now, I was pulled up in my area and had my car searched, and removed from my car at gunpoint. The reason I was pulled up, a 24 service station in my area was just held up at gunpoint.
At gunpoint, I was told to get out of my car and lie on the footpath. I was pinned to the ground, shoes,socks and beanie removed. and searched while other detectives searched my car.
I work in an industry that probably does the best metal processing of any, the day before this, a friend gave me to gun barrels (his fathers antiques) to be "blackfast". A black metal finish that looks very good. I forgot to take these into work on monday and was pulled up that night.
The search of the car found these 2 gun barrels and another search of my bum bag revealed I had 9 MDMA pills.

I was charged with possesion of fire arms
And possesion of illicit drugs.

For me the true helped, i said exactly what was true in court.
In the end it cost me $800 for my barrister.
I got a non-conviction on both charges, and didn't even have to pay court costs
I also got a 12 month good behavior bond.

one thing that pisses me off now is that everytime I get RBT'ed I'm questioned by the officer about that charge.
It also became a hassle with work when we had federal police checks, out of 150 people my police check come back last.

at least i got a non conviction and can still travel O/S.

 

[phase_dancer]

at least i got a non conviction and can still travel O/S

Have you ever seen an application form for a passport, visa, or residency/citizenship?

The usual question is 'Have you ever been charged with an offence' Followed by 'If so, give details'

I'm not saying such a non-conviction would restrict your travel - but it could.

Back in '97 I had to urgently obtain Aus citizenship (nothing sinister). Problem was, a couple of years previously I had my only encounter with the law in Australia which resulted in, among other equally serious charges, a charge of assaulting a police officer causing harm. To cut to the chase, in representing myself, for all charges I received a non-recorded conviction with just a fine and restitution, much to the amazement of the jaw dropped police prosecutor.

Anyway, despite the thing being non-recorded, it will still show up on background security checks. Why? Simply because it would be potentially dangerous and irresponsible to send a police officer to my house without knowing of such a history. Maybe that's why they are so nice when visiting in response to noise complaints

Here's an example where your charge could cause problems. I'm not sure about other states, but the Blue Card security check system is in place in Qld, requiring that any person, prior to working with children or adolescents, must first be checked out. However, in order to protect the individual, only brief details are supplied.

The case I know of involves a guy who applied for work on a community based outreach group that intervenes in situations involving kids on the street. The Blue Card check came back saying he had been charged and prosecuted for a firearms offence. Naturally this raised a few eyebrows, but as with most such organisations, the applicant is given the chance to explain. In this case it turned out to merely involve shooting a rabbit on private property, adjoining that for which he had a permit for. It was deemed an innocent mistake, got the job and AFAIK still works there.

But he had the advantage of being able to explain his situation in person. It might turn out though, that some forms of application don't off that luxury [?]. Visa knock-backs don't often reveal the reasons for refusal.

I don't want to scare you unnecessarily kooky77, but it may be worth finding out ahead of time if you intend to visit some far away land.