Bad-Faith Raids 

Bad-Faith Raids 
Posted by CN Staff on January 02, 2006 at 08:14:57 PT
Editorial - The Monitor View 
Source: The Monitor 
Calif. -- It is something of a mystery why federal Drug Enforcement Administration agents raided HopeNet, a medical cannabis dispensary said to serve about 30 patients a day in San Francisco, on Dec. 20. It followed a series of raids in San Diego on Dec. 12 that closed 13 cannabis dispensaries.No arrests were made in any of the raids, but some patients are concerned that these raids are a prelude to a major effort to close down cannabis clubs statewide. But we could wait quite a while for another shoe to drop.
The backdrop to all this is the fact that California law and federal law are different regarding the medical use of cannabis, or marijuana. Especially since the Supreme Court ruling last June in Raich v. Ashcroft, federal law prohibits growing, possessing or using marijuana completely, even for medical purposes, and even if such activities occur entirely within the borders of a state that authorizes the use of marijuana through the recommendation of a licensed physician, as California has since voters passed the Compassionate Use Act in 1996.After last summerís Supreme Court decision, DEA officials said it was unlikely they would pursue patients using marijuana in accordance with state law. "The reality is, we donít have the time or resources to do anything other than going after large-scale traffickers and large-scale growers," McGregor Scott, U.S. attorney in Sacramento, told reporters in June. The rule-of-thumb guideline has traditionally been that the feds are interested almost exclusively in sites with 1,000 or more plants.In Northern California, the DEA began with a raid in the Sonoma County town of Penngrove that turned up 217 plants, which led to a raid on the San Francisco home of Steve Smith and his wife, Catherine, proprietors of HopeNet, at which 122 small plants were confiscated. When DEA agents then went to HopeNet in San Francisco, the manager asked to see a warrant, which the agents didnít have. The DEA, presumably having secured a warrant, returned at night, kicked in the doors and seized what they claim were 500 plants and club records. As we noted, nobody has been arrested in either the San Diego (which was a joint state-federal operation) or San Francisco raids.We hope this is the end of the story rather than the beginning of a concerted effort to disrupt Californiaís medical marijuana laws. As Dale Giereinger, head of the California branch of the National Organization for Reform of Marijuana Laws, said, there are now probably too many small-time medical growers and dispensaries in California for the feds to have a serious impact on the implementation of Californiaís law.To be sure, the feds have the legal authority to arrest casual users and patients with a single joint. But it would be an enormous and unpopular waste of taxpayersí money.Source: The Monitor (TX)Published: January 02, 2006 Copyright: 2006 The MonitorContact: letters themonitor.comWebsite: http://www.themonitor.comRelated Articles & Web Site:California NORML The Dark - San Francisco Bay Guardian Returns and Raids SF Marijuana Club Marijuana Provider Raided
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help

Comment #10 posted by FoM on January 02, 2006 at 11:08:54 PT
I dropped a note to Matt about the stats for December. It should be higher then it was. It's like Mapinc. stats should be my stats and vice versa. Thanks for any help.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #9 posted by FoM on January 02, 2006 at 11:00:47 PT
Something I Don't Know
Over the holidays I mentioned to my sister about drugs online and I thought people could get scripts that way and she was surprised. Am I wrong on that? From my observations which are limited it seems people are partying on different pain medicine like OxyContin or one of those drugs. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #8 posted by FoM on January 02, 2006 at 10:21:55 PT
I thought they were cracking down on pain medicine abuse? Maybe they stopped online buying of prescription drugs but I never got anything from a pharmacy online so I don't know. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #7 posted by FoM on January 02, 2006 at 10:18:12 PT
I noticed the time stamp. I think CNews is running about 10 minutes behind though. I noticed that on New Years Eve when it was midnight and I posted a Happy New Year. I could be wrong though and maybe it is working ok now.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #6 posted by Sam Adams on January 02, 2006 at 10:13:21 PT
Can we call it lying now?
"After last summerís Supreme Court decision, DEA officials said it was unlikely they would pursue patients using marijuana in accordance with state law"What exactly is "pursue"? In the recent dispensary raids they accosted the legitimate patients coming in the door, detained and interrogated them. Which part of "freedom" do you file that treatment under?I used to think that LEO's illegal raiding & beating-down of medical MJ individuals was just they fight to stop reform of all MJ laws. I'm starting to see things a little differently.More likely, this is a warm-up for the day when they start "raiding" patients of ALL pain-relieving medicine. When they start busting in the doors of CVS and Walgreens. Right now the mainstream media and national Democratic party are quite complicit in this level of tyranny. The next step will be going after the Percocet and Oxycontin distributors who are just a little out of line....maybe the ones that are known for helping really desperate, sick people with no where else to go....maybe just the ones that look a little French...
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #5 posted by observer on January 02, 2006 at 10:10:50 PT
Turn On, Tune in
Comment #44 posted by FoM on January 02, 2006 at 09:34:02 PT Comment #2 posted by observer on January 02, 2006 at 09:34:42 PT We posted the same article within 40 seconds of each other! Interesting! 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by FoM on January 02, 2006 at 09:47:54 PT
News from Canada About The Kubbys
B.C. Court Dismisses Challenge of Medical Marijuana Laws ***Published: Monday, January 02, 2006 VANCOUVER -- The B.C. Court of Appeal has dismissed an attempt by Michele Kubby, the wife of former California gubernatorial candidate Steve Kubby, to have Canada's medical marijuana regime declared unconstitutional.Parliament has every right to criminalize the possession of pot if it wants to, emphasized Justice Anne Rowles in a written decision supported by Justices Richard Low and Peter Lowry."Contrary to the appellant's submissions ... the MMA Regs and section 4(1) of the CDS Act (today) constitute valid legislation," she concluded.Rowles weighed the legal effect of two important Ontario decisions.In the first, called Parker, the Ontario Court of Appeal in 2000 declared invalid the section of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act that placed a total ban on the possession of marijuana because it did not provide for medical access to the drug.Snipped:Complete Article:
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by FoM on January 02, 2006 at 09:43:22 PT
You must have missed it. Here it is.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by observer on January 02, 2006 at 09:34:42 PT
UPI: Brit. Pot Smokers still Arrested

British marijuana smokers still get busted LONDON, Jan. 2 (UPI) -- Despite a move to downgrade legal penalties, a report shows British marijuana smokers are still being jailed at the rate of three a week. While possession of pot remains illegal, police were advised not to arrest people smoking cannabis. They were told to confiscate the drug and give a warning. The punitive approach still being taken by courts in the face of government advice provoked accusations that otherwise law-abiding people were being needlessly imprisoned. The disclosure comes as ministers agonize over whether to reverse the reclassification of cannabis in January 2004. Prime Minister Tony Blair is widely expected to order an about-turn after receiving medical advice that links regular cannabis use to mental illness, the Independent said. Home Office figures show that 13,302 people were convicted of possessing cannabis -- not supplying or selling -- in 2004. A total of 161 received an immediate custodial sentence.
drugsense news bot - fast breaking drug news
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by Richard Zuckerman on January 02, 2006 at 09:04:02 PT:
Irresponsible government decisions!
Many people only hear the government side, without hearing the other side, before making a final decision on a matter.The D.E.A. and federal drug czar's war against Marijuana is without the benefit of hearing the other side, that this law enforcement costs millions of dollars in pork barrel federal funding, for which we all will pay!!Many people believe whatever the police says should be considered gospel. Actually, the police should not be trusted. Yale Law School Professor Gabriel Chin has edited two sets of book about police. The first set of books, which I have purchased from, about the history of New York City Police misconduct commissions from 1893-1993, concludes that there is a common thread in all of the police misconduct commissions, namely, bribery, excessive force, and frame-ups. I am presently paying for the second set of books he has edited, thru, entitled United States Commission on Civil Rights: Reports on the Police, Buffalo: W.S. Hein, 2005, 3 volumes, which is also about police. At least I can use these texts if my case against the Highland Park Police,, gets to trial. Oral argument in the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey, docket number A-4461-04T1, is scheduled for "some time after the New Year," according to Appellate Division Team 1 Leader Ed Costantini, (609) 292-4822.Even though the people are fed the skewed statistics that there has been a reduction of crime in New York City, some policemen have recently be shot dead, leading to a plan by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg to get illegal guns off of the streets. Whether this will entail more laws, the hiring of more police, it may cause an increase of taxes, it may decrease the housing and other benefits which the poor and middle class would ordinarily receive. Please visit and join I am presently residing in a homeless men's shelter, in New York City. I have had trouble obtaining a room to rent in New York City and New Brunswick, New Jersey. I have also had trouble obtaining employment. One fellow, Walter Finley, a cook who works for ARAMARK, induced me to lend him money by representing that he will receive an equal share in his Mother's Estate and will pay me what he owes me after his dead Mother's Estate house is sold. He handprinted an I.O.U. promising to pay me $5,000 after he receives his share of the Estate House sale. I subsequently visited the Richmond County Courthouse, Surrogate Court Clerk's Office, pulled his Mother's Will, and discovered that she only left him ONE DOLLAR! I filed a Small Claims Court complaint, alleging breach of contract and FRAUD. In the Small Claims Part, defendants are served one copy of the complaint via Return Receipt Certified Mail, and, simultaneously, another copy of the complaint via regular mail. The law in New York provides that the defendant is presumed to have been properly served if the regular mail has not been returned within 21 days, even if the defendant does not sign the Return Receipt Certified mail!!! On December 15, 2005, defendant Walter Finley failed to show up for trial. I presented my case to an Arbitrator, who said he would mail the judgment. I subsequently received a judgment of $5,000, the maximum amount allowable in Small Claims Part. Walter Finley told me he has "proof" in the form of "telephone records" that he was not served the complaint, but has not made any court motion to vacate the $5,000 judgment. New York requires a 30 day waiting period between obtaining the judgment and attempting to execute the judgment. Thus, I have until January 15, 2006, to begin the process of executing the $5,000 judgment, which will include having a certified copy of the judgment filed with the Supreme Court, as a lien on property and to mess up his credit, and to have a City Marshall garnish his wages. Although the City Marshall requires a postal money order of around $80 for the work, this charge is tacked on to the final judgment, which, by the way, is good for 20 years!! If Walter Finley had told me the truth, and not been dumb enough to write an I.O.U., and paid his debt, he would have avoided this lawsuit and my plan to nickel and dime him for the next 20 years!! Irresponsible decision making! This is what the Libertarian Party is complaining about governments!!Richard Paul Zuckerman, Post Office Box 159, Metuchen, New Jersey, 08840-0159, richardzuckerman2002
Diploma in Paralegal, New York University, 2003;
B.A. in Political Science, Kean College of New Jersey [Kean University], 1987.
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment