Skip to content

Drug trafficking case against Duncan woman dropped due to court delays

Unreasonable delays to her trial have resulted in a stay of proceedings for Duncan's Margaret Rose Conrad.
32191880_web1_230323-CHC-Editorial-March23-courts_1
Unreasonable delays to her trial have resulted in a stay of proceedings for Duncan's Margaret Rose Conrad.

Unreasonable delays to her trial have resulted in a stay of proceedings for Duncan's Margaret Rose Conrad on drug and weapons charges.

Conrad was one of three people charged for drug and weapons offences in November 2022 after an investigation by Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit of British Columbia (CFSEU-BC) and North Cowichan/Duncan RCMP.

A police search of her trailer in August 2022 resulted in the seizure of fentanyl, cocaine, methamphetamine, firearms, cellphones, a large quantity of cash, and other items linked to drug trafficking.

Conrad faced counts of possession for the purpose of trafficking and one count of possessing a prohibited weapon (a conducted energy weapon).

In a June 4 decision, B.C. Supreme Court Justice J. Thompson ruled that the trial, which was scheduled to end on Aug. 22, 2025, exceeded the 30-month limit set by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Jordan by more than three months.

Justice Thompson ruled the Crown failed to prove that the defence was the sole cause for the delays and further, that delays in Crown and RCMP disclosure of evidence were of bigger consequence.

“This case does not turn on which party has the onus," wrote Thompson. "The record before me has been meticulously prepared, and I have been taken through it during the thorough and helpful submissions of counsel. It is clear that none of the delay in this case can be properly ascribed to acts of the accused.”

Given there were no exceptional circumstances the Crown could prove that, when subtracted, would bring the case below the 30-month ceiling, Thompson ruled that Conrad's right to a trial within a reasonable time, as set out in section 11(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, was violated and as such, section 24(1) of the Charter justified a stay of proceedings as the appropriate remedy.



Sarah Simpson

About the Author: Sarah Simpson

I started my time with Efteen as an intern, before joining the Citizen in the summer of 2004.
Read more