BC Man acquitted sexual harassment after blaming ‘Automatism’ on magic mushrooms

On Friday night in March 2019, Leon-Jamal Daniel Barrett concluded that humanity was corrupt and the only means to save it was from being a “sexual Congress” with a woman chosen by God.

The fact is that Barrett took magic mushrooms in a few hours before coming into this realization, later it would prove to be important for them that what happened next, was not found guilty for this.

“He was waiting at his house for the arrival of this woman,” wrote by Judge Timothy Hinkson, a Surrey Provincial Court.

“When she didn’t, she left her house, believing that if she walked anywhere, God would eventually bring her together.”

Drug addiction at the point of ‘Automatism’

Instead of a woman selected by God, Barrett faced a nervous stranger who tried to kiss her on the ground and “broke” her left breast before taking out her clothes, pushed her down a set of steps and tried to draw her jeans.

In A decision was given in March But was posted last week, Hinkson acquitted, broke and entered the barrett with sexual harassment, and after obstructing a police officer, when he put him in an automatism position when he did not make him criminally responsible for his actions.

The case, which the judge called “unusual”, highlights the long and controversial legal history around the terrible acts of violence and the claims of automatism – a word describing uninterrupted, involuntary behavior.

Although the incident took place in 2019, the barrett hearing was stopped, while the Supreme Court of Canada considered another case in which a naked Calgary man defeated a university professor with a broom after taking abundant intake of magic mushrooms and alcohol.

In 2022, the country’s apex court hit a part of the Criminal Code, which was to prevent people from arguing as a rescue for crimes such as sexual harassment, attacks, and breaking and entry.

Section 33.1 has been amended since, but the new rules have not been applicable to the barrett.

‘She can make her tongue as hard as she’

According to the ruling, “There is no doubt about what Mr. Barrett has done or not, there is no doubt about it.”

A double -citizen barrett from the United States and Canada, living in a basement suit of his aunt’s basement and working for a landscaping company, while resting after work, decided to eat some magic mushrooms after an hour or an hour after smoking cannabis.

The 30 -year -old, who was suffering from depression and social anxiety, claimed that the Canbis “seemed to help with his mental health” and “watched videos to believe that magic mushrooms could help them in their depression.”

“The first time he used him, Mr. Barrett swallowed the mushroom in a tea,” Hinkson wrote.

“He found that when he ate him, the effect he had, it is how he saw him on other occasions. Mr. Barrett was less experienced with magic mushrooms, as he was with Canbis.”

The 49-year-old Barrett’s victim shouted and shouted repeatedly to stop her as she pulled her to the ground.

The judge wrote, “She was pulling on her pants, attempting to get her out, when she tried to kiss her, she repeatedly pokeed her face with her key. When she put her tongue in her mouth, she cut her tongue as much as she could,” the judge wrote.

“During this incident, she was cutting her lips. After bite, she felt blood, but did not know if it was coming from Mr. Barrett’s tongue or cut on her lips.”

The woman eventually survived, and the barrett returned home, where she “stabbed herself after pledging to take her life so that another version of herself could be reborn and rebirth and then perhaps they could save the world.”

According to the verdict, he left home again and went in search of another woman. Instead, he faced the police, who said that naked, warm and blood -covered man appeared to be “oblivious” for pain because a dog of authorities fought him.

Protect the ‘morally innocent’

Public resentment on protecting extreme intoxication Explosion occurred in 1994 When the Supreme Court of Canada overturned the sentence of a Quebec person, who sexually harassed his wife’s partially Pangu friend after consuming a bottle of brandy and several beer bottles.

In response, Parliament launched Section 33.1 of the Criminal Code, which stopped anyone from arguing that extreme intoxication inspired them to crimes like sexual harassment or attacks such as sexual harassment or attack.

But in 2022, Canadian Supreme Court Hit the section In the case of Matthew Brown, as a unconstitutional, a Mount Royal University student-athlete, who broke into Professor Janet Hamnet’s house after one night and a night of taking magic mushrooms.

The witnesses said that brown was naked and “screaming like an animal” when the police found it. He expressed repentance and apologized twice, in court and outside, after being acquitted.

The apex court stated that Section 33.1 was fundamentally erroneously flawed because “presents the risk of misunderstanding” by punishing an accused in a situation where no reasonable person could predict that whatever they were taking could provide them an automation.

“It violates almost all criminal law principles that the law morally depends on protecting innocent,” the court said.

“This enables confidence that the accused worked involuntarily, where the accused did not have a minimum level of mistake, and where the crown has not proved beyond a proper doubt that an accused is accused for the essential elements of the crime.”

In response to the brown decision, Parliament amended Section 33.1.

The government said, “The new provision ensures a person who harasses another person, while criminally responsible in extreme intoxication … If there is a risk, they may lose violent control over their actions … and they failed to take sufficient care to stop that risk,” the government said on a website about the change.

‘Very bad you had to face that huge, violent shock’

In his judgment, Hinkson said that the barrett case came at a time when “the law was developing.”

“This case, therefore, will not open during floods,” he said.

But Isabel Grant, a professor at the Alard School of Law in British Columbia, said the matter was still harassing.

He told CBC News that he was worried that the changes around the extreme intoxication in the recent criminal codes have not changed the result in the case of barrett.

“I don’t agree that the complainant should take full brunt of his decision to connect magic mushrooms with canbis and be drunk,” Grant said.

“What we are saying is that, it is very bad that you had to face the huge, violent trauma that left you with chronic pain – he was morally innocent. I think it is not a great message for the criminal justice system.”

Hinkson said that the woman Barrett attacked “The pain continues to reduce, and these incidents have been frightened and shocked.”

The judge said, “Mr. Barrett would not face a belief in the matter, but he would remain with the knowledge that he made an alternative, resulting in a terrible series of acts against a stranger temporarily lost his brain and made a terrible series of acts against a stranger,” the judge concluded.

“The mark he tolerates will be a constant reminder of these tasks. It is my honest hope that he finds a way to get himself out.”