The practice on judges deciding cases based on what they now call “reasonable hypotheticals” has been with us now for almost 40 years.
It started with a case involving a man who imported a large amount of cocaine into Canada, but the judges didn’t decide to throw out the mandatory minimum sentence against him based on the case of Edward Smith, they invented a new case and decided on that.
I couldn’t tell you how many times judges have done that since, but I have documented many cases of this over the last decade and detail three in this video.
Here are the links.
LILLEY: Supreme Court wildly off base in child pornography ruling
LILLEY: Supreme Court issues conflicting, ridiculous rulings on mandatory minimum sentences
LILLEY: Supreme Court ruling on child luring sentencing all politics\
