BURN VICTIM ACQUITTED OF DRUG ALLEGATIONS

Judge Says Crown Did Not Prove Man Started Fire While Cooking Drugs On
Stove

This much is known:

* James Robin Peterson was in the house in Dieppe when it caught fire
on June 29, 2004.

* He was close enough to the flames that his face and upper body were
badly burned.

* The fire started because someone was cooking marijuana oil on the
stove and the volatile mix of cannabis and fuel burst into flames.

These are the unknowns:

* Did Peterson live at the house or was he merely a visitor?

* Did he have anything to do with the drugs, or did they belong to one
of the several other people who occupied the rental home?

* Was he cooking the marijuana oil when it burst into flames,
practically destroying the old house, or was he simply in the line of
fire?

These facts were weighed during Peterson's recent trial on charges of
drug possession and production. Judge Anne Dugas-Horsman heard the
case and yesterday she ruled there was not enough evidence to convict
the defendant.

She made her decision based on the fact the Crown presented little
evidence on who actually lived in the house. There was nothing to link
the residence to Peterson and there was at least one other individual
in the home at the time of the fire.

"Clearly a serious fire took place in that residence as evidenced by
the photographs entered into evidence," said the judge. "However, at
the end of the day, I cannot conclude to possession of drugs, nor can
I conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the only explanation to
explain the burns of Peterson is that he was the one who was directly
involved in the production of cannabis resin and that there was no
other rational explanation for those burns.

"While the evidence would suggest that Peterson was no stranger to
what occurred at that residence in June of 2004, I find I cannot
convict on such scanty evidence."

The fire broke out shortly after 6:30 p.m. in the house on Orleans
Street, which is just south of Veterans Highway, in Dieppe.
Firefighters arrived and found a man wandering the street in boxer
shorts, with bad burns on his face, neck, arms and upper body.

A second person, Michael Gallant, escaped the home by jumping out a
second storey window, onto the top of the front porch and then down to
the ground. He told police someone else in the home had banged on his
bedroom door to alert him to the fire.

Firefighters were told the occupants had been cooking French fries and
a grease fire erupted.

As Fire Chief Charles LeBlanc walked through the residence, he found
two ignition points, only one of which was in the kitchen. Also, no
evidence of grease was found, only a pot on the stove that looked like
it contained water.

The bathroom area was badly damaged and a bowl was found face down on
the bathroom floor, near another point of ignition.

LeBlanc returned the next day with Codiac RCMP investigator Roland
Cormier and they found two large jugs of a "green plant substance"
that appeared to be marijuana-related. The scene was secured and a
search warrant was obtained.

During the trial, the court heard expert testimony that the substance
in the containers was a combination of marijuana and fuel. Both
substances were also found in the bathroom.

The court heard that when the marijuana and fuel mixture is heated,
the chemical reaction transforms it into cannabis resin. But it's also
highly volatile and can explode if heat is applied directly.

Placing it in a bowl and then placing the bowl in a boiling pot of
water, as was found at the residence, is a technique used for
producing this drug.

The Crown's theory was that Peterson was cooking the mixture and when
it caught fire, he tried to dispose of it in the bathroom and was
burned, dropping the bowl. This would explain his burns.

But defence lawyer Lisanne Maurice contended the Crown failed to prove
he was in possession or control of the marijuana. She also argued the
fact he was burned was not enough to convict him of producing the drugs.

As Dugas-Horsman said while delivering her verdict yesterday, "The
fact he is burned does no more than place him inside the residence and
does not amount to control over the drug inside the containers found
at that location."