United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Montana Judge Refuses To Convict Anyone of Marijuana Possession
Source:
Counter Current News
URL Source: http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/ ... -convict-anyone-of-possession/
Published: Feb 9, 2016
Author: M. David
Post Date: 2016-02-10 15:01:48 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 2605
Comments: 20
This is jury nullification in action, and as a result, a Montana judge has refused to convict anyone of marijuana possession. In Montana, Teuray Cornell was arrested on a marijuana possession charge. But he only had about as much marijuana as it would take to roll a single joint. The police tried to suggest that he was a marijuana dealer – even with this small amount of the plant. Montana is well-known to be a fairly conservative state, but when it came time for the pre-trial jury screening of this man, the judge simply could not find people willing to convict the man. The judge could not find one single person who was willing to convict a man over a small amount of marijuana. The New York Times reports: To seat a 12-person jury, Judge Robert L. Deschamps III of Missoula County District Court had called a passel of Montanans to serve, and 27 had arrived at court on Dec. 16. So far, so good. But after the charges were read, one of the jurors raised a hand. “She said, ‘I’ve got a real problem with these marijuana cases,’ ” Judge Deschamps recalled on Wednesday. “And after she got through, a couple more raised their hands.” All told, five jurors raised questions about marijuana prosecution. Mr. Cornell the misdemeanor possession charge was dismissed out of fear that 12 jurors who would convict in this marijuana-friendly state, could simply not be found. John Masterson, the founder and director of the Montana chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, told the Times that using marijuana “is essentially a mainstream activity” in Missoula. “It’s something that people of all walks of life enjoy responsibly,” Masterson explained. “This was something I’d never encountered before,” Judge Deschamps said. “It does raise a question about the next case,” indicating to the Times that he would not convict people of similar charges in the future. Watch the video report below and help SPREAD THE WORD about jury nullification!
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
This is the death knell for pot laws. They will increasingly find it hard to indict or convict people on pot charges when other states allow it freely and so many people are breaking the law.
11 US Presidents Who Smoked Marijuana
All well and good for a law you don't like. And when it's a law you support? Is this the way to go about it? Why not simply overturn the law? Oh, you don't have the votes?
Judge and jury are the law. Aren't they?
There is a history of juries nullifying laws. This seems to be a modern instance. Now everyone getting busted for pot in Montana will think hard about demanding a jury trial, to force the issue. And some will do it just to push nullification. Montana got very near decriminalizing pot about 20-25 years back as I recall. So this is fertile ground for nullification.
They don't write it. They're supposed to enforce it.
Apparently Montana legalized medical marijuana about a decade ago and it got out of control. Now they're trying to undo large sections of it. Their laws against recreational use are strict.
I think we've crossed the Rubicon on pot laws. Maybe on all the drug laws. After all, legal opiate overdoses kill about as many now as illegal drugs do. The doctor is becoming little more than the pusher of a high-grade product. In this way, both legal pharma drugs and legal pot in some states is sounding the death knell for most drug laws. After all, what are they going to do, close the borders to stop the Mexican heroin and other drugs? Don't make me laugh.
The death knell is due to the lack of federal enforcement. And we'll see what happens when marijuana starts crossing state lines in bulk.
There is a lot of enforcement. Do you or your friends profit from prison industry? Number one in the world?
Nebraska and Kansas have been screaming about that already from the Colorado pot traffic. They don't really want to fill their prisons with users bringing a few buds home from the Mile-High City. So far, everyone is ignoring them. Especially DOJ. Beyond that, haven't drugs been crossing state borders (and the Mexican border) by the truckload for the last 50 years? Let's not pretend the War On (Some) Drugs has ever been effective.
They don't write it. They're supposed to enforce it. --- misterwhite Another idiotic reply by our resident authoritarian/fascist socialist. Judges act as intermediaries between prosecutors and defendants, and see that justice prevails. Juries decide whether a specific law has been broken, by a specific defendant. Neither 'enforce' the law. --- Although misterwhite sure wishes he could.
We're long overdue to realize, once again, that NOTHING will ever stop people from self medicating on one substance or another. Some will abuse these 'drugs' and die. -- Why fight it?
"Judge and jury are the law. Aren't they?" They don't write it. They're supposed to enforce it. And so is POTUS but we all know that that is BS. In the court room it is the Judge that ultimately has the power to decide what the law is or is not. This is especially true for SCOTUS. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
There should be a law against these drug companies advertising a drug on the media that is available only by prescription. I think it is silly to have a patient to ask the doctor if this drug is right for you? The doctor is supposed to prescribe what HE thinks you need. What ever happened to "safe and effective if used as directed"? I don't hear that anymore.
Well, they don't advertise Oxycontin and other opiates on TV commercials, at least not that I've seen. But they advertise a lot of questionable drugs, apparently because they can only sell the toenail fungus pill (despite its advertised dangers) if they hawk it like candy. Some of these drugs are much more dangerous than cigarettes or other items prohibited from advertising. We should return to the rules that prescription drugs may not be advertised at all. The intent of the advertising is to create a demand and a market for those drugs, whether they are safe or effective or not.
And it's only been a year. Who's supposed to stop it? Colorado? Think they care? What about the rights of the citizens of Nebraska and Kansas? They don't want marijuana in their state
Hear, hear. Half the commercial is about side effects anyways.
"The Obama administration’s position will be important because, until now, the Justice Department has looked the other way while states like Colorado, Oregon, Washington, and Alaska…decriminalized the recreational use of marijuana."
0bama is 110% with you.
#2. To: Deckard (#0)
#3. To: TooConservative (#1)
"They will increasingly find it hard to indict or convict people on pot charges when other states allow it freely and so many people are breaking the law."
#4. To: misterwhite (#3)
All well and good for a law you don't like. And when it's a law you support?
#5. To: misterwhite (#3)
Is this the way to go about it? Why not simply overturn the law? Oh, you don't have the votes?
#6. To: A Pole (#4)
"Judge and jury are the law. Aren't they?"
#7. To: TooConservative (#5)
#8. To: misterwhite (#7)
#9. To: TooConservative (#8)
"In this way, both legal pharma drugs and legal pot in some states is sounding the death knell for most drug laws."
#10. To: misterwhite (#9)
The death knell is due to the lack of federal enforcement.
#11. To: misterwhite (#9)
(Edited)
And we'll see what happens when marijuana starts crossing state lines in bulk.
#12. To: misterwhite, A Pole, Y'ALL (#6)
: A Pole (#4) ---- "Judge and jury are the law. Aren't they?"
#13. To: TooConservative, Y'ALL (#11)
haven't drugs been crossing state borders (and the Mexican border) by the truckload for the last 50 years? Let's not pretend the War On (Some) Drugs has ever been effective.
#14. To: misterwhite (#6)
#15. To: TooConservative (#8)
After all, legal opiate overdoses kill about as many now as illegal drugs do. The doctor is becoming little more than the pusher of a high-grade product.
#16. To: U don't know me (#15)
There should be a law against these drug companies advertising a drug on the media that is available only by prescription. I think it is silly to have a patient to ask the doctor if this drug is right for you? The doctor is supposed to prescribe what HE thinks you need. What ever happened to "safe and effective if used as directed"? I don't hear that anymore.
#17. To: TooConservative (#11)
Nebraska and Kansas have been screaming about that already from the Colorado pot traffic."
#18. To: TooConservative (#16)
"We should return to the rules that prescription drugs may not be advertised at all."
#19. To: A Pole (#10)
"There is a lot of enforcement."
#20. To: misterwhite (#3)
Why not simply overturn the law?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]