JUDGE CAN'T ORDER JURY TO CONVICT, SUPREME COURT RULES

Judges can't usurp the role of jurors by instructing them to convict
on overwhelming evidence, Canada's top court ruled yesterday in
giving pot crusader Grant Krieger a new trial.

The Supreme Court of Canada unanimously voted to overturn Krieger's
December 2003 trafficking conviction, saying jurors were entitled to
vote with their conscience.

The court said Queen's Bench Justice Paul Chrumka erred when he told
a Calgary jury they had no choice but to find Krieger guilty, after
his defence of necessity was dismissed.

"The trial judge unfortunately deprived the jurors of the
responsibility that was by law theirs alone," wrote Justice Morris
Fish, in penning the Supreme court ruling.

Fish cited a proposition raised in an English case more than two
centuries ago which said jurors can ignore the law if they can't
bring themselves to convict.

"It is the duty of the judge, in all cases of general justice, to
tell the jury how to do right, though they have it in their power to
do wrong," Fish quoted from the English case.

Doing so "is a matter entirely between God and their own consciences."

UNANIMOUS VERDICT

In the Krieger case two jurors asked to be dismissed after telling
Chrumka they couldn't abide by his instructions to convict.

The judge ordered them to do so and the jury eventually handed down a
unanimous guilty verdict.

The Supreme Court's ruling was applauded by Krieger and his Calgary
lawyer, John Hooker.

"Ultimately I want a trial by my peers, not by a judge," said
Krieger, who used his Compassion Club to distribute marijuana to
those, like himself, who needed it for medicinal purposes.

"That's the only way laws change, through the general conscience (of
citizens)," he said.

Hooker said the ruling goes to the heart of our democracy. "It really
does reaffirm the right to a jury trial," Hooker said.

A new trial isn't expected until sometime next year.