In the prosecution of the testimony of Articles 9 (c) and 15 of the evidence, it was stated that six packets of the sample were sent to the chemical analyst, while the chemical analyst report stated that he received only two packets from the chemical analyst. Had not been contracted according to the circumstances. Neither the number of packets nor the weight of the marijuana received by the Chemical Analyst sent to it by the Investigating Officer was proved to be the weight of the marijuana sent by the customs officers and the property obtained by the chemical analyst. Sent by the Investigating Officer, who adversely affected the prosecutor's case, if the chemical analyst's report considered the property in relation to the property in the case, then the chemical analysis to find out. There were no reports of the car being safe from the container. There was no evidence in connection with the conspiracy, conspiracy or control over the suspect, and if anyone else had thrown the goods in the way after tampering with the container, they would not have been held responsible for the crime. can go. The prosecution's prosecution did not allege that the export documents were fake or not in the proper order, nor did they allege that the cartons were full. The container at the dry port, which had four cases of prosecution on the contrary, was when the cartons were loaded into the container, then they were in the proper order and according to the export documents as customs officials examined them. He got it Likewise, the container was sealed in perfect order and at this time the ports were not sealed.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
