What's new

Prosecutor Defeated by Glaring Stupidity of Pot Laws

DeezyH

Active member
ICMag Donor
A Kansas defense attorney reports:

I had a jury trial this morning on level 3 possession with intent MJ, level 4 possession drug paraphernalia and level 10 no drug tax stamp. During voir dire, my almost all white, middle-class, middle-aged jury went into full rebellion against the prosecutor stating that they wouldn't convict even if the client's guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt -- almost all of them! They felt marijuana should be legalized, what he does with it is his own business and that the jails are already full of people for this silly charge.

Then, when the potential jurors found out that the State wanted him to pay taxes on illegal drugs, they went nuts. One woman from the back said how stupid this was and why are we even here wasting our time. A "suit" from the front said this was the most ridiculous thing he'd ever heard. The prosecutor ended up dismissing the case. Judge gave me a dismissal with prejudice. I'm still laughing my ass off over this one.

I have NEVER seen a full on mutiny by an entire jury pool before. Easiest win ever!

Not quite jury nullification, but close. Something similar happened in Montana a couple of years ago.

Source: http://reason.com/blog/2012/08/14/kansas-prosecutor-defeated-by-glaring-st
 

bootea

Member
Jury nullification

Jury nullification

I love this. This is the wisdom of a jury of your peers. If this became a trend it could go a long way toward ending prohibition; at least on the low end of personal cultivation and possession. Its like tho possibility of many mini courts of last resort That will finish off an unwarranted oppressive law.
 

Mt Toaker

Member
Everyone share this article! People dont even know this is an option. Its legal and it superseeds any written law, look at how they use michigans court rulings to say the law has changed.
 

Stonefree69

Veg & Flower Station keeper
Veteran
LOL, sounds like it could be a Cheech and Chong skit. The prosecutor being Sargent Stadanko's brother.
 
The stupid prosecutor will know better next time and the cops will learn also it's not worth wasting anybody's time or giving someone a record or jail for something that hurts no won.
 

TanzanianMagic

Well-known member
Veteran
" I have NEVER seen a full on mutiny by an entire jury pool before. Easiest win ever! "
This is why they tried to racialise marijuana (hemp) in the first place. If Harry Anslinger had gone to Congress and stated he wanted to ban hemp and made the insane racial statements about hemp, he would have been a laughing stock.

This is how civil liberties are undermined. Prosecutors select a population group that is unpopular or has been vilified in the tabloid press, and then push through legislation that applies to everyone.

When they can't enforce the law against everyone, they again enforce the law selectively against unpopular population groups.

The problem for everyone though, is that the legal precedent has been set, and at any time the law can be applied outside of their original focus group.

This is how the nazis operated, this is how the Chinese Communist Party operates (at all times, everyone is in violation of some law and can therefore be arrested at any time), and it is how the War On Drugs operates.

They criminalize trivial behavior, so they can control the population.

There is an excellent new book by Michelle Alexander called The New Jim Crow, and everyone should read it.
 

Stonefree69

Veg & Flower Station keeper
Veteran
If karma served Harry Anslinger well, he'd be a doped up mental patient right now being tended to by black nurses.
 
N

noyd666

reading toke of town, this morning about doc mollie fry and husband, 5 years jails , bloody disgrace, for any country . i see one court case win though .
 

pip313

Member
Marijuana was made illegal to "keep mexicans under control" what does that have to do with blacks? Specifically big gay black nurses. serious question not trying to start a race argument.

Also by adding the "gay" part in your admitting you do not like the company of homosexuals, your need to add "gay" is a need to make the hypothetical situation "worse". I don't like the majority of gays either, thier need to advertise thier sexuality is annoying and discusting. NO I do not want to hear what you and your partner did in bed last night.

please give me a specific to michigan court rulings superseding written law, usually rulings have to go by the law so I would be interested in reading what your refering to. also I live in michigan
 

paladin420

FACILITATOR
Veteran
It was joke!!!! "gay Mexican nurses with large penises who like to rape chubby white politicians" just does not work so well
 
Top