= wse = se

& @! S42 4 SS BSABASL GH SES FF SY OFF BLT ee SS SF

Webster in court by Chris McCarron

On Jan 9/92, UPEI Professor Gary Webster, was back in court appealing his drug trafficking conviction. Courtroom | was open to the public and the trial took place all morning and after the lunch break continued

until 2:30.

In this portion of the trial the prosecution was stating its ‘‘case’’ against Mr. Webster. Mr. Webster’s lawyer, Mr. MacDougall was allowed to cross exam- ine the crown witnesses but Mr. Webster will not take

the stand until April.

Mr. MacDougall questions the validity of the first crown witness. The first witness described smoking grass with the accused. Mr. MacDougall asked the witness to give specific details and to describe the very first time he had smoked grass. The witness said he could not remember because of his memory loss due to continual use of grass. Mr. MacDougall rested after scoring this point.

The second crown witness was a former acquaintance of the accused who is now a salesman. Defence lawyer Mr. MacDougall tried to accuse the second witness of sharing his own drugs with young children. He accused the witness of lying to the police in the hopes of saving himself. Mr. MacDougall then got quite emotional when he yelled out ‘*my client is facing life imprisonment for these allegations’’.

The third crown witness was an RCMP drug enforce- ment officer. His role was to be known as the drug expert. He gave some information about the drugs being talked about in this case but he didn’t talk about any persons and he was not testifying for any signifi- cant amount of time.

Thus ended the crown’s case against the accused. Judge Gerald Fitzgerald then adjourned the court until 13th of April at 10 am.

This will be when the accused, Mr. Webster, will be able to defend himself.

oma + Pr

IDGE

by Mike Goshko and Rob E.

Unfortunately for the Zo ons, Meir full-scale INVASION of” Carth hap pened

to coincide with the Whippel Frisbee Contest

( CONTINUED FROM PAGE 21 )

constitutes as proof that the university environment is alienating to women (in the manner that Women’s Studies courses are alienating to men). | Affirmative action is a case where the ends (which may not always turn out the way they are supposed to) are used to justify immoral means (anyone who cannot make the distinction between the means and the ends" in this case exhibits the intelligence ofa walnut). As such, with the problems affiliated with affirmative — action, and the facts regarding the numbers of females being hired onto university faculties, we strongly recommend that those on the UPEI faculty who are

UPEI X-P RESS

January 23, 1992