NO CHARTER VIOLATION, COURT SAYS

Alleged Hells Angels Associate Could Be Charged Again

VANCOUVER - An alleged Hells Angels associate may be on the hook
again after the B.C. Court of Appeal ruled Thursday a charge against
him under Canadian anti-gang laws did not violate the Charter of Rights.

The ruling against Anthony (Tony) Terezakis -- a 43-year-old
convicted drug boss who videotaped bizarre assaults on his victims --
restores the Crown's broad powers to prosecute anyone who is a member
of a criminal organization.

"When the law was ruled unconstitutional, that took a bullet out of
their gun," said Victoria criminal lawyer Kevin McCullough. "Now,
that bullet has been put back in."

Terezakis had been charged with instructing the commission of an
offence for the benefit of a criminal organization that allegedly
used mobile laboratories to supply crack cocaine and heroin to a
highly organized street-level distribution operation in the Downtown Eastside.

Instruction is the most serious offence in the organized-crime laws,
and carries a maximum penalty of life in prison.

The jury heard that Terezakis videotaped a series of assaults,
including bizarre scenes in which he handed out Bibles and delivered
spiritual sermons as he beat his victims.

He was convicted on three counts of assault with a weapon and eight
counts of assault and sentenced to 11 1/2 years in prison -- largely
on the strength of those videotapes.

But Justice Heather Holmes of the B.C. Supreme Court threw out the
instruction charge on the grounds that it was too broad and therefore
violated Section 7 of the Charter, which guarantees Canadians' right
to life, liberty and security.

In her 46-page ruling, she agreed with Terezakis' defence lawyer,
Matthew Nathanson, who argued that a person who was part of any
organization -- not only a criminal organization -- who instructed
another member to commit an illegal act would be caught by the law.

Nathanson argued that if three members of a baseball team were
growing marijuana, the entire team could be considered part of a
criminal organization.

The federal justice department appealed, and in hearings in March
argued Judge Holmes had erred on "all key aspects of her ruling."

The three-judge appeal panel agreed with the justice department and
said the law was not so vague it would catch people who were simply
part of an organization one of whose members had committed a crime.

Using Nathanson's baseball example, Justice Mackenzie wrote that if
the infielders were growing marijuana, the outfielders could not be
charged under the law.

"The fact that both the infielders and the outfielders are members of
a team that plays baseball does not make the team the group in these
circumstances," he wrote.

"The team's purpose and activity is baseball, not the facilitation or
commission of a serious offence.

"In the result, I have concluded that the instruction offence is not
constitutionally flawed," he wrote.

The ruling could mean another trial on the instruction charge for
Terezakis. McCulloch said he wouldn't be surprised if there was an appeal.

"The message is: don't get tangled up with those groups," he said.