In practice, however, both the Crown and the courts deal with such charges of possession for trafficking with a lot of common sense. If the quantity involved and the circumstances of the
such that the Crown feels able to accept the possession are admission for own consumption, it will inform the court and ask
for
conviction for simple possession.
Convenient
and
this
Crown's
is
However, the
decision is normally left to the officer-in-charge of the case because he is the one who knows the most about the background.
it time
might be, saving though
unsatisfactory because the court's function is being usurped in that whether an accused, who theoretically could be convicted of possession for trafficking, is to be so convicted or convicted of the lesser offence of simple possession is not left to the
decision of the court. Where the Crown refuses to accept the admission for own consumption (which is really a plea to simple possession), the courts hitherto had no choice but to rule that there was a case to answer on possession for trafficking: which
the accused it up to
possess for trafficking.
then leaves
prove
court
to
that he did not
Many factors are relevant when the
has succeeded in his accused an considers whether
rebuttal; none
important than the single factor of the
quantity of drugs involved because the smaller the quantity, the
easier for the accused to rebut and vice versa.
an accused's
S.46 gives rise to other ancillary and consequential
during Often,
the court that he has had
concern. cause
one or
matters which
rebuttal, he makes known to more convictions for simple possession. This is for the purpose of shewing that he is a dangerous drugs addict and therefore his contention of being in possession for his own consumption is
31