Countries With Harsh Cannabis Laws

While most fair people will argue that the laws against marijuana possession and distribution are harsh in the western world, perhaps we should be thankful for small blessings! While in many countries cannabis seeds and the fully grown crop are perfectly legal, there are many countries with far more authoritarian control that have been known to pass the death penalty for cannabis users, so if you plan on getting high anytime soon, you may want to avoid the following oppressive countries if you value your life!

Used to Have Death Penalty

The Philippines used to enforce the death penalty for a period of 4 years between 2002 and 2006. To qualify for this harsh punishment, you would need to have been carrying over 500 grams of cannabis or over 10 grams of cocaine, ecstasy, morphine, opium or heroin.

Occasional Death Penalty

Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Dubai and Borneo have all sentenced with the death penalty for marijuana related offences in the past. Although the majority of these punishments were for trafficking offences, it would still be considered unwise to bring in any cannabis to the countries even if its intended for personal use.

Dubai has earned special recognition for its zero tolerance approach to drugs. Earlier this year a 25 year old man was sentenced to four years in prison for a 0.003 gram speck of cannabis found on his shoe, and another man was detained for possessing 3 poppy seeds that had fallen off the top of a bread roll! The country uses incredibly sophisticated technology that can detect trace amounts of various drugs and the mandatory sentence is 4 years, so be especially careful if flying to Dubai!

Frequent Death Penalty

Malaysia, Thailand, Singapore and Peoples Republic of China all still use the death penalty for varying quantities of drugs including cannabis. Thailand made the headlines when it undertook its war on drugs in which 2,275 people were killed, according to Human Rights Watch and many of these were believed to be extrajudicially executed. For its part, China is estimated to kill 500 people per year over drugs offences according to Amnesty International.

As a bonus nation, heres a surprise inclusion: the USA. While it has never actually been law, in 1996 Speaker Newt Gingrich proposed a mandatory death penalty for second time offences of smuggling 50g or more cannabis into the country. The proposal failed. The 1994 Crime Act states that a possible death sentence for marijuana offences would involve 60,000 kilograms of the drum or 60,000 plants, or bring in a profit of more than $20,000,000 per year. Regardless, the Supreme Court has held that only murder and treason constitutionally can carry the death penalty.

So the next time you want to moan about your government allowing the distribution of cannabis seeds but making it illegal to grow them, just remember that more draconian governments can make your life far more difficult sometimes by ending it! If youre planning on travelling to the Far East, you should think twice before packing the bong and the marijuana!

Waco Criminal lawyers for best legal help

We live in a highly litigious society. At the same time the laws and regulations have also become so complex that we may need legal help at any point of time. Waco law is a civil litigation attorney. The Waco law is situated in Waco and deals with various legal aspects which the citizens may face in a day to day life.

Often people wonder about how to find affordable legal help. In current time of recession paying a criminal lawyer for civil litigation rights can be a matter of concern. The criminal lawyers at Waco law have rich experience in handling cases of internet and technological laws. With thousands of man hours spent on critical cases the criminal lawyers are just the best to handle any kind of cases which they may have to solve to help the clients.

Handling a case needs zealous advocacy and along with that interpretation of the client problems and intricacy of application of law in different spheres. From another angle not only individuals but also the corporate and other organizations need legal help. Especially related to the employment and legal laws the companies need expert help. The Waco criminal lawyer has expertise in handling cases of major corporate entities.

The Waco criminal lawyer has a very good reputation in handling cases from various sectors in different segments of jurisdiction. Hence if you are looking for expert legal help then it is worth considering the Waco Criminal lawyer.

It is very crucial to select and depend on a criminal lawyer to get a good result and without any doubt the Waco criminal lawyer can provide this to their prospective clients. Getting a good criminal lawyer who can understand the problem of the client would not only save the time but also would help to protect the rights of the clients and a lot of pain can be avoided.

AUTHOR

John Brite Looking to find the Criminal Lawyer in Waco Please visit www.criminallawyerwaco.com

Theft, Non-fatal Offences, Criminal Law Elements Of Proof

Our introduction to this topic will include the basics, which will be followed by a more in depth look at this topic.

THEFT AND NON-somber OFFENCES, legal AND general-LAW sign IN CRIMINAL LAW luggage

> Theft and allied Offences

Theft says s.1 Theft Act 1968 is the dishonest appropriation of another’s chattels with the purpose to deprive the other of it enduringly. The actus-reus of it is in s. 3 ‘appropriation’ (‘any assumption of an vendor’s right’) as can be varying cost-labels to pay minus: R -v- Morris 1983, or such ‘borrowing’ of a period-permit in a way as makes it of no or little regard: R -v- Lloyd 1985 (‘chattels’ being, s.4, all chattels counting money and equipment in action, but pure equipment as paper and not abstract equipment as data imitative from it: Oxford -v- Moss 1979, limitedly on brutish-emergent plants [numinous uprooted] and on plants-fruits-grass [numinous for auction]; ‘belonging to another’ is by another owned or in permitted possession or inspect of another, e.g. pleasing lacking payment from repairer: R -v- Turner 1971). The menstrual of it is ‘dishonestly’ in s. 2 (lucid in language of: s. 2(1)(a) numinous s/he believes it right in law to do so or s. 2(1)(b) that the vendor in the circumstances would consent if knew or s. 2(1)(c) that the vendor could not by reasonable steps be discovered), regarded as a two-perform trial of mundane orthodox of reasonable man and data of it: R -v- Feely 1968 & R -v- Gosh 198; also ‘purpose to enduringly deprive’ as in Lloyd.

Going through the final part of this article, we will see just how important the subject can be too many people.

The Theft Acts display also for other offences.

Obtaining chattels by fraud is in s. 15 of the ’68 Act, as theft but ‘by any fraud’ -by bogus lexis or tricky behavior: R -v- Bernard 1837 (pretending as concern inducing investment & give of cargo) R -v- Gomez 1993 (unentitledly in Salvation host attire collecting money).

Obtaining army by fraud is s. 1 of the ’78 Act -it is as for chattels in the prior Act.

Evasion liability in s. 2 of the ’78 Act is the offence of alike avoiding e.g. debts.

Making off lacking payment (bilking) is s. 3 of the ’78 Act ~e.g. restaurant -lacking paying.

Raid is s. 8 enabling theft by compel or such threats, at the time or before, as would put in fright another of there and then being subjected to it ~theft with assault or sequence -max.: life.

robbery in s. 9 is normally by infringe -by unauthorized door to or to any part of any structure (counting caravans & house-boats lived in), s. 9(1)(a) ‘intending to embezzle or inflict terrible forcibly destroy or raping any being inside it, or burden intermitted dent to it or something inside it as a infringer,’ s. 9(1)(b) or ahead door as infringer lacking such purpose burden or shooting so ~it is can be tried by Magistrates -by a Crown square if involves the purpose to rape or begin terrible forcibly destroy

winning a conveyance lacking consent is s. 12, pleasing, forceful or being in, any thing constructed for shipping people by land, water, or air (excluding pedal cycles) ~it is a abstract offence, routinely, with max. 6 month imprisonment -numinous aggravated by hazardous forceful, or dent to it, or accident causing injury or dent (in the Criminal spoil Act 1971 ‘reasonable prudent being trial’ applies).

> Non-fatal Offences Against the character

Non-fatal offences against the being are in part normal law offences, and in part by bill; and, in order of somberness, they are as follows:-

In Smith -v-Chief Superintendent of Working regulate class 1983 ingoing a plot at night, by looking through a bedroom chance terrifying a lady was an offence under s. 4 Vagrancy Act 1824 ~if intending to assault -lexis lonely are not routinely enough.

Assault is causing apprehension of regulate intermitted pure violence purpose ally or reckminusly -its exciting under s.39 Criminal honesty Act 1998. Threats not competent of being conceded out do not constitute it.

Array is the purposely or recombines subjecting of another to intermitted compel; and, as in the situation of drumming one wit a missile, it indigence not be coupled by assault. This also is in normal-law, exciting under s.39 of the Criminal honesty Act 1998.

In both of these offences the menstrual is purpose: R -v- Spratt 1990, or by subjective reckminusness: R -v- Savage 1991 was deliberate unreasonable jeopardy pleasing, and R-v- Parameter 1991: not if the jeopardy is evident but if nastiness was difficult. While both the actus-reus and the menstrual must exit at the same time, the menstrual can be twisted in the course of the actus-reus: Fagan -v- Metropolitan regulate Commission 1969 -having accidentally ambitious car on policeman’s bottom, refusing to move car when told had twisted it

Sati thingy sign of consent is a defense: R -v- Donovan 1934 (prostitute beaten by a spike for sexual gratification), if the offence is not a more somber one.

Assault Occasioning Actual corporal destroy is a s. 47 offence and it is when sequence, lonely or coupled with normal law assault, the legal ‘assault’ of the Act is so somber that it is prone to interfere with the victim’s shape and comfort -lacking acerbic the total skin, purely such as grazing and concussion: R -v- Roberts 1971, or: R -v- Chan & Folk 1994 as anxious shock in psychiatric language: R -v- Ireland & R -v- Barstow 1997 (a regulate pure tackle is not a entailment, also e.g. silent phone calls may constitute the offence of causing actual forcibly destroy. Its actus-reus is it identity as the consequence by the ‘but for’ trial, the objective trial; it entails this to be coupled with the menstrual in the form of purpose or subjective reckminusness: Roberts (where purpose ally or subjectively reckminusly there was intermitted compel, which objectively occasioned the forcibly destroy). In Donovan consent was not a defense is beginning actual forcibly destroy was beginning ~the character and the notch of the injury it identity being the resolute thing in whether normal assault was the offence difficult -to which only it is a defense, or actual forcibly destroy or superior…

Intermitted hurtful is a s. 20 offence, and it is by any means unpermittedly and maliciously acerbic or inflicting terrible forcibly destroys. In the actus-reus the ‘wound’ is other than a damaged collarbone: R -v- lumber 1830 or interior flow: JJC -v- Eisenhower 1983; it indigence not is somber. But ‘terrible forcibly destroy’ must be somber -though not necessarily enduring or life threatening, nor by a regulate tackle: R -v- Martin 1881. The menstrual of it is ‘maliciously’ (purpose or subjective reckminusness) which useful as transferred nastiness in future drumming in R -v- Latimer 1886; but in R -v- Parameter where ‘neither could have future nor realized injury’, and consent here too was no defense in R -v- tanned & Others 1993.

Hurtful with Intent is s. 18, the most somber of the Act’s offences. It is ‘unpermittedly and maliciously by any means whatsoever to wound or begin terrible forcibly destroy… with intent to do some terrible forcibly destroy… or to resist or stop the permitted apprehension or detaining… of any being’; its actus-reus is as for unpermitted acerbic, but its mens-rea is the purpose to commit the crime, and proof of that is vital, but it can be compact to and dealt with as ‘unpermitted acerbic’ based on subjective reckminusness: R -v- Constanza 1996 : it can be pestering and if silent phone calls begin mental anguish as in R -v- Gelder 1944.

Assault occasioning actual forcibly destroy and intermitted acerbic contain a greatest stretch of five being imprisonment, but acerbic with intent carries, as greatest, life imprisonment.

> The broad mains That Must be Proved before Establishing Criminal Liability

These have to be looked at first, in considering whether any offences may have been committed. Some of these are bill-based and some under normal-law, their development having been greatly unmoral by such pressures as lucrative, party, and following. Regularly reality is the skin of each crime, but there are some normal elements.

One is blameless awaiting ad numinous found in law not to be -excluding in precise-liability situations; this entails screening both that a guilty act was done, as well as that it was purpose ally done.

Actus-reus is the criminal act: e.g., s. 1 of the Theft Act 1968 ‘dishonest appropriation’; or the criminal omission: e.g., s. 6 boulevard passage Act 1988 ‘fails to display a specimen’; or a criminal a territory of contact or affair: e.g., in Wizard -v- Chief Constable of Kent 1983 the price of ‘found drunk in the highway’; or the criminal consequence: e.g., s. 47 Offences Against the character Act 1861 ‘occasioning actual forcibly destroy’-which is a ‘answer crime’ necessitating screening a casual associate in reality or in law.

Causation in reality is determined by the ‘but for trial’. In R -v- fair 1910 the mother’s murder having been from normal begins, poisoning her was not the begin, and it not murder.

Causation of law depends on the contribution of the intervening act. R -v- Roberts 1972 injury of jumping out the car was begin by sexual advances made to the lady in the car; in R -v- Pitts 1842 drowning was begin while escaping from an tackle; R -v- Lewis 1970 damaged leg answered from escaping threats and shot of violence; the reasonable act of the victim in seeking to breach being subjected to a crime was the associate. Contributory negligence of the victim in R -v- Holland 1841 (identity neglect) did not breach the associate, in R -v- Deer 1996 was still the significant hand in the murder -it was murder, a thyroid prepare anonymous to the accused at the time did not change the ‘egg-bomb skull declare’ and one took one’s victim as one found the victim -and R-v- Blue 1975 (refusal of blood-transfusion on pious proof) this applies also in regard to the spiritual prepare of the victim. The sole begin of murder indigence not be the act or the omission and in R -v- Padgett 1983 the ‘instinctive’ fatal shooting by a policeman of a soul-defend was intermitted murder of the accused who had ‘substantially’ begin it; while some reluctance was revealed by the courts in treating intervening checkup cure as breaching the associate and in R -v- Smith 1959 as greatly as by 75% lessening of it by that did not breach the associate, in R -v- Jordan 1956 obviously wicked checkup cure was the regulate and the regulate begin of murder, from R -v- Cheshire 1991 it is lucid that the associate can be damaged.

Menstrual is the defect-intensity of the accused in the act or mission; it is regularly included in the definition of somber crimes e.g., ‘with nastiness aforethought’; it is ‘the guilty brains’ by purpose, reckminusness, or foul-negligence.

objective, for most somber crimes, has to be reality ally revealed, by a subjective trial deemed by the jury to have been display, R -v- Maloney 1985: in the form of insight of, R -v- Hancock & Shank land 1986: the probable consequences, willfully and deliberately conceded out ~or in R -v- Natick 1988 with virtual certainty of the probable consequences -which may be purpose: Scale 1955.

Reckminusness in sis. 47, 20, 23 Offences Against the character Act 1861 (actual forcibly destroy, terrible forcibly destroy, rape) show main purpose; it can be subjective: leaking ripped off gas-gauge killed in R -v- Cunningham 1957; or objective: R -v- Caldwell 1981 (flammable by drunk) -s1 (2) Criminal spoil Act 1971: as to whether life would be endangered.

Negligence can be menstrual in non-precise-liability offences of e.g. Factories Act 1961 -but only as a last remedy; but foul negligence, regularly, is sufficient menstrual in murder situations: Atomic 1994

precise liability does not entail menstrual e.g. Food & Drugs Act 1995 -in Mea -v- Roberts 1977 of the unfitness of taste for soul consumption the accused was blameless yet still guilty ~but in Warner -v- Metropolitan regulate Commissioner 1969 (hazardous drugs situation) ‘one cannot be in possession the inside of a embalm when he/she does not know what it is’.

When we begin to bring this information together, it starts to form the main idea of what this subject is about.

Employment Lawyers Nycupholding The Law, Safeguarding Your Job

Great working relationship must be practiced by both employer as well as employee in every company or organization. In this partnership, the employer and worker must make the most out of it. The employer will generate more profits by way of their employees’ services, of which should be given just salary in return. This sounds ideal. Nonetheless, but this isn’t the situation in all workplaces.

Work conflicts can be prevented if the employer and the employee will adhere to labor or employment law. Sad to say, there are people who don’t care about the law as they only think of what’s great for them . If an employment law is breached, then somebody’s right is also violated. If one is caught in this situation, it is essential to hire a professional and well-experienced nyc employment lawyer.

Work-related issues usually occur because of variety of reasons. This is because of the fact that employees are not all alike. They’ve got various views and religious beliefs and also personality and characteristics. Failure to give salary and abuse of powers is another cause why personnel file a case against their employers and superiors. Experienced nyc employment lawyers can handle the case regardless how intricate it is, particularly if the rights of their client is clearly violated.

What Roles does an NYC Employment Attorney Play?

Wrongful termination and unjust payments are the most common work-related issues that result in litigation. There are also lawsuits filed in court by employees due to acquiring physical injuries from work due to insufficient safety procedures and has been sexually harassed by their boss. Retirement plans and benefits of staff members which have not been processed are brought to the court. Engaging in a legal fight requires a considerable amount of time, money, and patience. With the guidance and representation of reputable nyc employment lawyers, employees can conquer this challenge easily.

The experts in this field will make their clientele aware of what their employment rights are. In order to give clients with a sound legal advice, they will analyze the case totally. The attorney will attempt to mediate between the employer and staff if the dispute is still negotiable. Nonetheless, they’re always ready to represent their client at court if lawsuit is the sole method to settle the problems.

Employees will have great possibilities of winning their case through the help of employment attorneys. They will cautiously assess documents and contracts to be able to finding any problem that could assist strengthen the case. The employment lawyers will use preventive lawyering’ if they are representing the company or the employer. This is a technique in making company policies that are in accordance to local and federal/state employment laws.

Employment lawyers believe that there are a few employment cases which can be solved outside the court. Given that filing a lawsuit is laborious, these professionals find other means to deal with it in a different way. Filing a lawsuit will make the issue more complex and hard to deal with by both employer and employee.

It is necessary for every nyc employment lawyer to have outstanding oral and written communication skills so that they can defend their clients, employer or employee, effectively. It’s also best to make sure that the attorney is specializing in employment laws, and has stayed abreast with any modifications in the law. Lastly, he should be analytical yet sensitive at the same time. If they possess all these traits, then the odds of winning the case is bigger.

Injured On The High Seas Call A Cruise Ship Accident Lawyer Today!

Cruising is the fastest growing segment of the travel industry. Once reserved for the wealthy, cruise vacations are now affordable and fun for everyone. How did this happen? One simple explanation is that the ships got a lot bigger. The superliners of old would look like dinghies compared to the cruise ships of today. The difference isnt only about length, but also gross tonnage, i.e., how much weight a ship can support.

The most famous superliner in history was RMS Titanic, which could accommodate 2,500 passengers, sans life rafts! Many of the modern cruise ships safely carry between 3 and 4 thousand passengers on each trip. One of the largest modern ships, the Allure of the Seas, which is owned by Royal Caribbean International, can accommodate 6,300 passengers. But even more important than the passenger capacity is the gross tonnage, which tells us how much stuff the ship can carry. Most modern ships have a gross tonnage of two to four times what the RMS Titanic had.

What does this mean? In short, it means that there is a lot more to do on these ships than there was on the superliners of old. Modern cruise ships are basically floating cities that have restaurants, lounges, fitness clubs, pools, casinos, shopping malls, hotels, and much, much more. Even when they visit exotic ports of call, there is really no reason to ever leave these ships, since there is so much to see and do on board. There is, however, one drawback. As cruise ships get larger and more crowded, more passengers are getting injured on them.

As we mentioned, cruising has become a major global industry. More than 13.5 million travelers booked a trip on a major cruise line in 2009. Most of them embarked from ports in Florida. The Sunshine State is the capital of the cruise world. More than 8 million passengers board cruise ships in ports in Palm Beach, Port Everglades, and Miami each year. The most popular cruise lines have week-long itineraries that stop at exotic ports of call in the Caribbean. Injuries are a common occurrence on these crowded passenger ships.

How do they happen?

The most common accidents involve slip or trip and falls. There are also diving accidents and health issues. Because they cook for thousands of passengers each day, chefs and servers sometimes make mistakes. Cases of food poisoning or sickness from food allergies are fairly common on cruise lines.

Should you call a cruise ship accident lawyer?

Most of the major cruise lines insert provisions into their passenger contracts or tickets that put limits on the time injured guests have to file suits against them. Most limit the time to only one year, while suits for other common accident injuries, such as those sustained in car accidents, can be filed up to four years after the accident. In other words, time is of the essence. If you want to find out about your legal options, you should contact a cruise ship injury attorney as soon as possible. For a free initial consultation with an experienced cruise ship accident lawyer, simply search for an advisor on the internet. A cruise ship injury attorney will not receive payment unless you recover damages.