NEWS RELEASE · 14th February 2012
Two addresses that were home to marihuana grows have been successfully forfeited under the Civil Forfeiture Act. These are the first ever forfeitures in Terrace. Police referred these two files involving marihuana grows to the Civil Forfeiture Office of the Ministry of Justice after charges were stayed on both.
“Terrace’s first two successful civil forfeitures are big wins, in terms of the clear public safety issues they address,” said Justice Minister and Attorney General Shirley Bond. “These add to the growing list of properties we’ve taken out of business, which have ranged from stucco mansions to rural out-buildings – many of them containing hydroponic equipment, dangerous wiring, hydro diverters to steal power and hundreds of marijuana plants.”
On January 27, 2009 police executed two search warrants for marihuana grows in Terrace. The first was at 4740 Soucie Ave. Police located 26 pounds of harvested marihuana bud and a hydro bypass. The second search warrant was at 3515 King Ave. Police located 200 plants and a hydro bypass at this address.
Cpl. Mike Dame, Terrace General Investigation Unit, says, “ We are dedicated to collecting evidence that leads to criminal charges. Unfortunately there are times when sufficient admissible evidence to support criminal convictions is not available. W e refer such files to the Civil Forfeiture Office. The forfeiture of properties and assets is an increasingly successful and effective tool being employed against criminals in efforts to interfere with their ability to continue criminal activity.”
Cases which do not meet the threshold for charge approval or criminal conviction may be pursued through the British Columbia Civil Forfeiture Act (2006). The BC Civil Forfeiture Office, part of the Ministry of Justice, assesses the referrals and, where appropriate, undertakes a civil lawsuit action in BC Supreme Court seeking forfeiture of property that is an instrument, or proceeds, of unlawful activity.
Unlawful activity includes any Federal or Provincial offence including production of marijuana, street racing and fraud. Upon proving the Director’s case against the property, the onus rests with the property owner to prove to a court that it is not in the interest of justice to order forfeiture of the property.
Re: Ed Note
Comment by Mike on 22nd February 2012
Editor writes: "the addresses are listed after the date in the third paragraph you mention so any reasonable reader would se this was three years ago."
So its ok to write stories from the past and put the onus on the reader to pay attention to the dates....I guess the next story we'll see will read "Titanic Sinks! Hundreds Perish!"...oh wait... the fine print says it happened in 1912.
Again, this was an RCMP news release, not a story by our publication!!
Comment by I.J. on 16th February 2012
RE: Homes in Terrace and Thornhill seized...have been successfully forfeited" This headline is preceded by the words :News Release: as if it just happened recently. Only in the third lengthy paragraph does the date Jan. 2009 appear. This is misleading. The home in Thornhill was cleared, cleaned, inspected and resold 1 & 1/2 years ago, after being seized. It has responsible ethical tenants who must be somewhat annoyed to see their address presented this way. Poor journalism again.
ED Note: As you stated at the opening, this was a news release by the RCMP. Journalism has nothing to do with this. Just as the BC Conservatives, BC Liberals, BC NDP and all the others who submit news releases, it is up to the reader to weed through the details. We do not edit news releases.
And the addresses are listed after the date in the third paragraph you mention so any reasonable reader would se this was three years ago.
What is a home?
Comment by Janice Robinson on 15th February 2012
These buildings, used for activities which brought harm to our community, were not homes. They were just tools of crime. Yes, society might as well commandeer them and put them to good use. That is better than the fat, lazy little criminals putting a match to it. That would be wasteful.
A sane person would not think of torching a HOME.
To a human using the building (or car, gun, bags, or other tools of crime) to commit crimes, setting them all ablaze makes good sense. Get rid of the evidence. Torch it. As we all know, this has been done in Thornhill just recently by a loser. Was it a home to him and his family?
(What this has to do with pedophiles living next to schools is anybody's guess. Although, I know some pot growers/dealers who are pedophiles. "Anonymous" will have to enlighten us on that one).
Comment by anon on 14th February 2012
why don't they crack down on real crime instead of this??? really this is silly.
Comment by martin on 14th February 2012
The BC Civil Forfeiture Act is an end run around our criminal justice system. Like with other Administrative Penalties introduced by the govt in Victoria, 'guilty beyond a reasonable doubt' is a 'quaint and obsolete' concept.
Talk about a slippery slope; the door is now wide open for political repression through the threat of financial ruin.
it's a sad day when..
Comment by anon on 14th February 2012
pedophiles get to keep their homes near schools while people who grow a weed get their homes taken away.