Self-Exclusion Litigants
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 6:29 AM

Having self-excluded from blogging while abroad, Vice Squad is behind in all our standard obsessions, including self-exclusion. People who joined self-exclusion lists for casinos in Ontario have filed a class action suit. Their gripe is that the casino regulators were not assiduous in keeping the excluded gamblers away. If the authorities in Ontario catch a self-excluded individual trying to sneak into a casino, that person can be charged with trespassing.

Compulsive gambling experts tend to emphasize the personal responsibility of the gamblers themselves to overcome their addiction, and many self-exclusion programs declare that ultimately, it is the bettor's responsibility to keep away. Nevertheless, successful self-exclusion programs do require a credible threat of enforcement, and casinos may well have to be monitored to ensure that they put some effort into erecting and maintaining entry barriers aimed at those on the excluded list. Self-excluded individuals tend to be heavy gamblers, of course, and hence a very profitable clientèle for the casinos. So gambling establishments might have a financial interest in looking the other way when a self-excluded (former) patron walks in the door.

In other self-exclusion news, remember that fellow who wanted a self-exclusion litigant's name revealed? The court had only released the litigant's initials, and this other guy had the same initials, so people too lazy to look deeply into the matter kept thinking that the other dude was the self-exclusion litigant. (I can sympathize, being frequently confused by the unwashed masses with Japan Airlines.) The court rendered a Solomonic decision: the name of the original litigant would not be revealed (in keeping with the anonymity promised to those who place themselves on New Jersey's self-exclusion list), but the court officially affirmed that the "initial" gambler was someone other than the later complainant.

Labels: Canada, casino, gambling, self-exclusion

 
A NAFTA Success Story?
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 10:39 PM

The Guardian has started a two-part series excerpted from a new book about organised crime. Judging from installment number one, the book seems to be on the breathless side. The excerpt starts with a trucker having his rig searched for drugs at the US-Canada border. We eventually learn that the driver was smuggling 50 pounds of marijuana into the US -- oh the humanity! -- but the border police didn't find it. (Thanks to drug prohibition, fifty pounds of "BC bud" is worth quite a sum (the article mentions $100,000) in the US -- somewhat less in Canada -- but it doesn't take up a lot of space in a truck.) The examination at the border, as described in the excerpt, is thorough though in this case, unsuccessful. Further, the author notes that the elaborate search, which includes making sure the propane tank is really usable for fueling the truck -- is called for: "These elaborate tests were necessary; the only other way he [the border agent] could have established Dan's [the driver's] innocence would be by sawing open the LPG tank." That's one of the features of the drug war: it has replaced the antiquated notion of the presumption of innocence with the presumption of guilt. Don't worry, law-abiding citizens, the presumption of guilt is a rebuttable presumption: if you are lucky, you might be able to establish your innocence.

Labels: Canada, marijuana

 
Canada Customs Polices Obscenity
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 10:56 PM

The long-running legal battle between Vancouver's Little Sister's bookstore and Canadian Customs has centered around the tendency for Customs to seize gay and lesbian literature that is en route to Little Sister's. (The case essentially ground to an end more than a year ago, when government funding was denied for Little Sister's legal expenses; Little Sister's maintains a webpage devoted to the history of the case.) But lots of sexually explicit material is perfectly legal in Canada -- how does Customs know what to seize and what to pass? In part, it seems, they are instructed by a list of titles, with an indication of which titles are acceptable and which are verboten. How do I know this? Because Slate.com was good enough to publish excerpts from the list and the accompanying instructions for the fourth quarter of 2007. The distinctions drawn by the censors suggest a refined development of the casuistrical arts.

If you want to, you can buy Little Sister's for $675,000 (Canadian, presumably).

Labels: Canada, obscenity

 
Anti-Prostitution Laws Challenged in Canada
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 11:14 AM

Prostitution per se is not illegal in Canada, but associated activities like soliciting and living off the proceeds are illegal. It is possible to be a prostitute without breaking Canadian law but hard to legally work as a prostitute. That might change if a new legal challenge succeeds. From this article, published on Friday:

Two Vancouver lawyers will launch a constitutional challenge today of Canada's prostitution laws, arguing they force sex workers into unsafe conditions and infringe a sex worker's right to freedom of expression.

This case parallels an ongoing constitutional challenge to Canada's prostitution laws from Ontario.

Vice Squad has long been amazed at how little influence the carnage inflicted upon prostitutes has had on public policy. Perhaps these lawsuits will alter that situation in Canada.

Labels: Canada, harm reduction, prostitution

 
Is Khat Illegal in the US?
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 11:09 PM

Khat is legal in Britain and, I believe, the Netherlands, but not in much of the rest of the developed world: Khat is illegal in Canada and the US, for instance. Or is it?

A stimulant, khat leaves are chewed like tobacco in social settings in Africa and the Middle East, where it was been used for centuries. Khat technically isn't illegal in the U.S. -- but the cathinone it contains is. That mild stimulant, however, begins to break down into legal cathine as soon as the leaves are picked; and it's nearly is absent 72 hours after harvest.

In this country, the federal court system has little experience with prosecuting khat cases and hasn't yet established guidelines for how the drug should be handled for testing.

In Seattle, according to the linked article, khat charges were dropped against some defendants, apparently in part because it was unclear whether the khat in question could be shown to have enough cathinone to be be illegal. The New York case mentioned in the article resulted in a mixed verdict, so it remains possible to be convicted of khat trafficking in the US.

I was in London last week, where khat is legal. Somehow the British civilisation stumbles along without locking up khat sellers. I managed to pick up -- no, not some khat, but Khat, while I was there. And if you are a British subject travelling to Canada, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has a warning for you:

• Around 650,000 British nationals visit Canada each year. Most visits are trouble free. Being arrested for smuggling Qhat (Khat) is the most common reason that British nationals require consular assistance in Canada. The plant is illegal in Canada. Smugglers are regularly caught and face a term of imprisonment.

Labels: Britain, Canada, khat

 
Betel Nuts in Taiwan
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 11:39 PM

There's a world health promotion conference currently underway in Vancouver. According to this article in the Vancouver Sun, one of the topics that is being addressed is the consumption of betel nuts, especially in Taiwan. Betel nut chewing, which has a stimulative effect, is a popular activity throughout much of Asia; in Forces of Habit, David Courtwright suggests (page 54) that "Something like a tenth of the world's population now indulges in the practice." But Taiwan has developed its own method of distributing betel: roadside booths staffed by underdressed betel nut beauties. And the health effects of betel nut consumption can be severe, as the Vancouver Sun article notes:

The nuts [in Taiwan] are sold at roadside kiosks by scantily clad women and chewing them is a major reason why oral cancers are the third most common cancer (after lung and liver) in that country. In Canada, by comparison, oral cancer ranks ninth in men and 15th in women.

This shocking method of delivering betel nuts -- employing attractive women in revealing clothes inside roadside booths -- would never be used to peddle a psychoactive substance in the good ol' USA.

Labels: Asia, betel nuts, Canada, coffee, Taiwan

 
Lottery Fraud?
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 10:42 PM

Imagine that you and lots of other folks regularly take part in a contest of luck. As it turns out, the organizer of the contest seems to win an awful lot. That would raise your suspicions, no? Well, that scenario has played out in the western Canadian province of British Columbia, with respect to the lotteries operated by the province's agent, British Columbia Lottery Corporation, and some of the retailers who sell lottery tickets.

An Ombudsman's report (142-page pdf here) issued in May details some of the problems; the report makes for sobering reading. Whether a lottery ticket was a winner, and of how large of prize, was frequently determined by a machine under the control of retailers and not easily verifiable by the customer. So if a patron handed a lottery ticket to a retail employee to check to see if the ticket were a winner, an opportunity might have arisen. The retailer might have been able to misrepresent a winning ticket as a loser to the rightful owner, and then claim the winning prize him or herself. If the customer expressed suspicions, the retailer might have been able to backtrack, claim that an error had been made, apologize, and pass over the winnings or the winning ticket. Surely, though, such theoretical opportunities for malfeasance would not be taken advantage of in practice.

Page 25 of the Ombudsman's report summarizes some scenarios of British Columbian lottery retailers who were very, very lucky:

 • A retailer that won 13 times in 2000/2001. This retailer also won three times
in 1999/2000, two times in 1998-1999, one time in 1997/1998. The winnings for
this retailer totalled in the range of $175,000.

 • A retailer winning 11 times between 2001 and 2007. All but one of those wins,
were in excess of $10,000 and included 4 wins in 2003/2004 and four wins
2005/2006. The winnings for this retailer totalled in the range of $300,000.

 • A retailer with multiple Keno wins. In 2005/2006 there were 120 major Keno
wins. Of the 120 major Keno wins, 15 were won by retailers (1.3 per cent of the
population won approximately 12.5 per cent of all major Keno wins in
2005/2006). Of the 15 major retailer Keno wins, three were won by the same
retailer. That means that one retailer won 20 per cent of the 15 retailer Keno wins
in 2005/2006. This retailer was a joint winner and had 10 wins between 2003
and 2007 for a total win amount of about $100,000.

Wow. And people are worried that those unscrupulous offshore internet casinos might cheat their customers.

Labels: Canada, gambling, lottery

 
Big Brother Won't Fund Little Sister's
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 5:31 PM

Little Sister's Bookstore in Vancouver, Canada, keeps having some of its gay erotica seized at the border by Canada Customs on the grounds of obscenity. Little Sister's has been challenging the seizures in court, and has secured a couple of judicial victories. But yesterday the bookshop lost on its claim that its legal fees should be advanced by the government, under the terms of a now-repudiated policy that provided public funding to groups making Constitutional challenges in significant cases. So it now appears that Little Sister's will have to forego further legal action, and tolerate the occasional seizure by Canada Customs.

The last time Vice Squad checked in with Little Sister's (in July 2004), the bookstore had won, at the trial level, the right to federal funding for its lawsuit. That decision was later overturned upon appeal, and the appelate ruling was upheld yesterday by the Supreme Court of Canada. Those who support laws that provide for government censorship of obscenity should keep in mind that what the official enforcers will deem to be obscene will not necessarily be the same material that the law's supporters have in mind.

Labels: Canada, pornography

 
The Heroin Equivalent of the Red-Headed League
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 1:22 AM

Chris Rock once said "Drug dealers don't sell drugs. Drugs sell themselves." So it should be no problem to distribute free heroin, right? Well, those who are organizing the Canadian experiment with heroin maintenance are finding out that if you impose enough conditions, it's hard even to give the stuff away:

Addicts must have been on heroin for at least five years, must have tried methadone twice without success -- and must be older than 25.

Also, the addict cannot currently be on methodone [sic]-- and cannot have a criminal record.

The researchers aim for 157 participants, but so far, have come up with only 21 eligibles.

Here's the original Red-Headed League.

Labels: Canada, heroin, treatment

 
Canadian Visa Policy Changes
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 4:55 PM

Back in July, ever-vigilant Vice Squad noted Canada's policy of providing temporary work permits for exotic dancers -- as well as the surprising preference for dancers from Romania. The whole program, Romanian preference and all, is now going by the boards; indeed, it was a specific Romanian preference that crumbled the edifice:

The Canadian government, under fire because one of its ministers has been accused of giving preferential treatment to a Romanian stripper, said on Wednesday it was scrapping a program that handed out temporary work permits to foreign-born exotic dancers.

Now I knew that Canada was small, but I didn't know that public policies require unanimous consent: "Human Resources Minister Joe Volpe said it was clear that not all Canadians supported the program, which granted permits to around 660 foreign strippers to work in Canada last year."

A hat tip to this shockingly-named blog for the pointer.

Labels: Canada, dancing, sex

 
Foreign Stripper Controversy in Canada
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 6:08 PM

Now I might be misunderstanding something here, but here goes. I've read a couple of other things on the web but mainly I am distilling my frenzy from this article. Some foreign women are interested in entering Canada with the intention of working as exotic dancers. The Canadian immigration authorities are concerned about possible exploitation and trafficking of women, so they request proof that the women are experienced exotic dancers; some of this proof includes stage photos. A Toronto tabloid embellished the tale, it seems, with talk of immigration officers poring over nude photos. The Canadian government has responded with the claim that nude photos are never requested, though perhaps some are submitted -- especially by women who are applying for their Canadian visas from Moscow. Whew. I'll close with another surprising detail:

Eighty percent of the 850 exotic dancers granted visas obtained their document from the Canadian embassy in Bucharest, Romania.

Authorities have found dancers there speak English and French, Canada's two official languages, are less likely to be involved in the vice trade than other countries and return home promptly when their jobs are over.

Labels: Canada, dancing

 
In Canada....
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 1:16 PM

.... "Individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their pockets," according to the Supreme Court of Canada. So the police can't go fishing through your pockets for drugs, just because they have reasonable suspicion to briefly detain you in a criminal investigation. Imagine!

Labels: Canada, drugs, search, Supreme Court

 
Why is Marijuana Illegal?
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 12:37 PM

Pete Guither at Drug WarRant has an excellent essay explaining how marijuana became illegal in the US -- but why has it remained illegal? Alcohol Prohibition, after all, only lasted 13 years, and we have had national marijuana prohibition for some 67 years now.

The recent news out of Canada offers a partial explanation, though. It's not a matter of principle, of course, it is a matter of numbers. Alcohol prohibition was rescinded in part because alcohol use was popular with something on the order of 1/2 of US society -- and probably at least 1/2 of the legislators and police officers who were enacting and enforcing the anti-alcohol laws. Marijuana use, by contrast, remains a distinctly minority pursuit, with perhaps 5% of the population using it in the past 30 days. (Marijuana prevalence statistics might be significant underestimates of true usage, but even accounting for that possibility, only a small proportion of the population uses marijuana.) Maybe usage will have to rise before some sanity is brought to our drug laws. Alcohol prohibition, for instance, was enacted when alcohol consumption had been falling -- and falling almost monotonically for 80 years, actually. It began to rise three years or so into Prohibition. But sacrificing hundreds of thousands of users annually to the criminal justice system is a very costly method of bringing about reform.

Labels: Canada, Drug WarRant, marijuana, Prohibition

 
Little Sister's Saga Continues
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 4:11 PM

For nearly 20 years now, a Vancouver gay and lesbian bookstore has been in litigation with Canada Customs. The latest news is that the bookstore, Little Sister's Book and Art Emporium, will be able to have its court costs fronted by the very government that it is fighting.

The battles with Customs are due to the fact that Customs is in the habit of impounding some of Little Sister's intended future inventory on the grounds of obscenity. A 2000 Canadian Supreme Court decision took Customs to task, and noted that gay and lesbian erotica was singled out by Customs agents. While limiting the time in which Customs could impound material without a court review, the 2000 decision left in place the border checks. Hence, more material has been seized, and the parties are back in court.

The singling out of gay and lesbian erotica by Canadian Customs serves as a strong argument for anti-censorship feminists in their own debates with feminists who support the censorship of pornography, by suggesting that any power to censor is likely to be directed at marginalized parts of society, not at mainstream (male heterosexual) pornography consumers.

Little Sister's maintains a web page that provides a lot of background concerning their litigation.

Labels: Canada, litigation, obscenity, pornography

 
The Benefits of Math Knowledge
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 3:36 PM

For one thing, if you learn enough math, you will not have to rely upon others to convert your kilos of cocaine into ounces for sale:

Confused about how to divide "kilos" of cocaine into ounces for sale, two teens from a Saanich [British Columbia, Canada] private school turned to their math teacher for help, provincial court heard Monday.

Thanks to ever-vigilant Friend of Vice Squad Dima Masterov for the pointer.

Labels: Canada, cocaine, teens

 
Helping Homeless Alcoholics....By Giving Them Wine?
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 6:21 PM

The Seaton House homeless shelter in Toronto was pretty progressive. Most shelters would not allow someone to enter if he had a bottle of alcohol on him. As a result, the homeless men would chug the bottle dry just before coming in -- a solution that was good neither for the drinker nor the shelter. So Seaton House set up a system where they would take alcohol for safekeeping, returning it to its owner when he left in the morning:

But as the staff collected bottles of Listerine, rubbing alcohol and cooking wine, they kept wondering whether they should return it in the morning.

So The Annex and The Fiddle was born. That's the name on the room where about 45 litres of wine are handed out every day. It opens at 8:30 in the morning and closes at 11:45 at night and each man is allowed up to one drink an hour if he can tolerate it, and a couple of smokes if he needs them.

The "pub" is part of a unique health program for homeless men run jointly by Seaton House and staff from St. Michael's unique inner city health program, the only one of its kind in Canada.

"People thought it would be crazy to let them drink in here — the staff wouldn't be safe," Manuel says. "But just the opposite happened. They took great ownership of having a place to go. When you let them drink here, the drinking goes way down."

And the risk of poisonings via the consumption of rubbing alcohol is greatly reduced.

Thanks to friend of Vice Squad Dima Masterov for the pointer.

Labels: alcohol, Canada, harm reduction

 
Suits Against Big Tobacco Get Go-Ahead in US, Canada
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 3:57 PM

One of my first-rate students informs me that today's Chicago Tribune includes this article (registration required) concerning a ruling against the tobacco companies in their ongoing federal racketeering lawsuit. The ruling allows the US government to proceed in its efforts to force the companies to "disgorge" past profits, to the tune of, oh, $280 billion. The government alleges, among other things, that the tobacco companies were deceptive in their advertising practices. Vice Squad looked at an earlier anti-tobacco company ruling in the same case in mid-March.

Our northern neighbors in British Columbia have a similar lawsuit pending against tobacco companies, though the monetary stakes are smaller: $10 billion, Canadian. The BC government was given the right to proceed when a Court of Appeal ruled that the lawsuit itself satisfied constitutional norms.

Labels: Canada, litigation, marketing, tobacco

 
Arctic Smoking Ban
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 1:23 PM

Overlawyered points us to this New York Times story (registration required) on a public smoking ban (including bars and restaurants) in the Canadian Arctic -- where stepping outside for a smoke can be a chilling experience.

Labels: Canada, smoking ban

 
Cracking Down on Canadian Tourists Who Look Like They Might Be Marijuana Smokers
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 8:27 PM

OK, Vice Squad comes late to this story, which was mentioned by Last One Speaks a couple days ago. But having just read the account in this week's Drug War Chronicle, I can't resist passing along an excerpt:

"Dehler and Gudz were sitting eating a bagel in Cooper Square Park in Manhattan's Lower East Side when they were set upon by undercover narcs who claimed they were smoking marijuana. They were not, said Dehler and Gudz, only having lunch before a trip to the Museum of Modern Art, when two scruffy looking men in civilian clothes rushed them, yelling something about smoking marijuana. Thinking they were being mugged, Gudz screamed for help. According to Dehler, the undercover cops punched him in the face and threw him to the ground. Although no marijuana was found, both Gudz and Dehler were arrested and jailed at the 9th Precinct for nearly 24 hours.

"I got brought in front of this big bull sergeant who looks at me and says, 'Do you like to fight with cops up in Canada?' I said, 'I don't know what's going on. I'm willing to apologize to the arresting officer,'" Dehler told the Ottawa Citizen. "He interrupts me and says: 'If that was me arresting you, you would be in the hospital right now.' He said, 'Take him in the back and strip search him and give him the whole nine yards.'"

The NYPD strip-searched Dehler and Gudz and repeatedly blocked their efforts to contact friends, family, or attorneys, Dehler said, but a good Samaritan who witnessed the encounter contacted the Canadian consulate. Gudz was charged with resisting arrest and obstructing justice, while Dehler was charged with attempted assault, resisting arrest, harassment and disorderly conduct. All the charges have since been dropped, but the couple is out $5,000 in legal expenses and has, for good reason, developed a jaundiced view of the Big Apple and the United States."

Labels: Canada, marijuana, New York, policing

 
Reducing Harms of Teen Streetwalking Through Decriminalisation?
- posted by Jim Leitzel @ 5:49 PM

Adult prostitution per se is legal in Canada, though streetwalking is not legal. (And of course, the sexual exploitation of children and youths under 18 is prohibited.) A youth-issues advisory body to the Quebec government has issued a call, however, for the decriminalisation of streetwalking as a method of improving the living conditions for young adult prostitutes. The current criminalisation of streetwalking pushes that activity into areas with less police presence, saddles young prostitutes with criminal records, and also promotes a bad relationship (or worse) between prostitutes and the police. The report, by the Conseil permanent de la jeunesse, is available here, in pdf format and en francais.

My own state of Illinois is taking a different tack-- the state house and senate are considering sealing the criminal records of those "convicted of some less-serious felonies such as drug possession and prostitution..." How did these activities ever become felonies?

Labels: Canada, harm reduction, Illinois, prostitution, teens