The Vancouver Province is reporting that John Nuttall was misrepresented in court again. In the surveillance video from the hotel room the RCMP agents took him to and forced him to come up with a plan John states “I hope they die, my father and my stepmonster,” to the agent. “That’s how you call your mother, stepmonster?” asks the officer. “Yes, I hate them,” replies Nuttall. “They used to abuse me all the time and beat me. They’d lock me in my room for a week at a time.”
Clearly he did not say he hates his mother. His mother and grandmother were in court supporting him and he was glad to see them. He was referring to his step mother and his biological father who his real mother claims was abusive. John's statement on wiretap would confirm that claim.
John and Amanda lived with John's 90 year old grandmother in that basement suit. She is a sweetheart and they are good people who shared their suit with his mother's mother until she moved out right before the bust because they were afraid some Mr Big terrorist was going to kill them. John's grandmother said John and Amanda were the perfect couple. They would never argued or fight. They always got along with each other.
The police agents took them to hotels in Squamish and Kelowna to pressure them to come up with a plan to impress Mr Big. All they did was do drugs, play video games. The police agent was mad and said we've spent a lot of money on you. Mr. Big isn't going to be happy. You guys have to come up with some kind of plan. That's when they made up some nonsense when they were stoned that they had absolutely no ability to carry out. They didn't even have a car to pick up the pressure cookers on the shopping list the police agent gave them. We still have to go over the legal definition of entrapment.
having watched the videos on the newscasts the main thing I notice is that the two defendants always appear to be "under the influence" of something. It is quite beyond me given their "mentally impaired" state why this is going ahead. It maybe chief jihadist harper wants to demonstrate we need his "anti-terror" bill so he can dismantle democracy in Canada. I really don't get this whole trial.
ReplyDeleteNow if the argument is going to be they were too impaired to form intent, I could see that, but you'd think the Crown would have gone over that. But then, why would the RCMP actually pursue a "set up" like this if even over the newscasts you can tell the defendants are "under the influence". Usually people in that state get arrested for being drunk in a public place. Oh, well welcome to B.C.