Posted on 01/31/2003 3:28:07 PM PST by MikalM
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:41:45 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
A federal jury Friday found Ed Rosenthal, the author of how-to-grow books on marijuana and how to avoid the law, guilty of marijuana cultivation and conspiracy charges.
Deliberating for a day, the 12-member jury concluded that Rosenthal, the self described "Guru of Ganja," was growing more than 1,000 plants, conspiring to cultivate marijuana and maintaining a warehouse for a growing operation. He faces a maximum life term when sentenced June 4.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Thanks.
If you think you can win converts by being strident, nasty and insulting, you are mistaken.
Normally I would be on your side, but I don't take well to the tone you have taken with me. Don't bother replying. I have put you in the 'ignore' file.
"We must all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately." - Ben Franklin
Nope. He was being tried on a federal charge and the state law was irrelevant. The judge instructed counsel for defense not to introduce state law during the trial. That lawyer ignored the court's instruction in an attempt to prejudice the jury. He and Rosenthal's peanut gallery turned this trial into a circus and I'm surprised that he wasn't cited for contempt.
As well as the 10th Amendment and the right of Jury Nullification and so much for fully informed juries too. The 17th Amendment sure did wonders for this Republic Oligarchy.
Absolutely -- I did business with him for years as a bookseller and publisher. He is kind and honest.
...which only kicks in, legally, when a federal appeals court or the USSC says so. This was, afterall, a legal proceeding.
"...and the right of Jury Nullification..."
The jury was free to nullify anytime it wanted to. Guess what? It didn't.
"... and so much for fully informed juries too."
I know you meant to say, "fully prejudiced juries." Until the USSC says that Congress has no right to pass drug legislation and strikes those laws down, they stand. And they also take precedence over state and local law, laws that were not relevant to this federal proceeding. To mention them would only have been prejudicial.
If, and it's a big if, the judge ruled that the evidence of acting as an "officer" of the City of Oakland (in what capacity, I wonder?) is "immaterial," then the issue is not whether this fact was the man's best defense, but rather that the claim is not a defense to the charges at all. In other words, "I know I got caught growing a 1000 plants, but I work for the city" might not be the best example of legal reasoning.
Worse.
Jailed for growing a plant that GOD created.
These WODers are anti-God. They DARE substitute THEIR Creation for His.
Evil lives.
It was free to if it knew to. But the judge lied to them.
Until the USSC says...
In other words your respect for the Constitution is nil. You're arguing for acceptance and adherence to law regardless of its origin. Either the Constitution is the supreme law of the land or it is not. To say that the 10th Amendment is irrelevant unless the USSC says it's relevant is to say that the Constitution is relative. The "Living Document" argument. The same legalistic moral relativism that gives us forced abortion laws.
Thanks for clarifying where you stand.
They OBJECT to us humans possessing a PLANT that God created.
And yet they try to claim the mantle of righteousness.
Poison Ivy is pretty dangerous. It affects most people that come in inadvertant contact with it. I see no legislation.
Do you understand? They are trying to REWRITE Creation.
Be very wary of 'Jihadists' and their followers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.