Posted on 02/03/2017 6:37:14 PM PST by george76
DENVER -- The man accused of fatally shooting his wife while investigators said he was high on marijuana edibles pleaded guilty to second-degree murder ..
Richard Kirk, 50, had pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, citing marijuana intoxication, in September to a first-degree murder charge in the death of his wife Kristine.
Under terms of the plea, Kirk, who had been charged with first-degree murder, will be sentenced to 25 to 30 years in prison and fined $5,000 to $1 million.
He will also give up parental rights to the couples' three children to Kristine Kirk's parents
...
The family did not want the case to go to trial given the personal and emotional toll family members have already suffered.
...
Kristine Kirk called 911 on April 14, 2014 and said her husband was asking her to shoot him and “totally hallucinating.” She was on the phone for 13 minutes while police responded to the home ...
Richard Kirk ate a marijuana edible just before the shooting, and investigators later found a partially eaten pot candy and an untouched joint in the house. The couple's three children were inside the home at the time of the shooting.
During a preliminary hearing in August 2014, lead Det. Troy Wisgaard testified that Kristine Kirk first told 911 operators her husband was acting irrationally and that he was on marijuana.
...
A wrongful death lawsuit has been filed against the marijuana store and manufacturer that sold the edible to Richard Kirk. Attorneys for Richard Kirk claim the marijuana edible karma candy orange ginger caused his “delirium and psychotic-like symptoms.”
The lawsuit claims marijuana retailer Nutritional Elements and manufacturer Gaia’s Garden recklessly failed to put “warning labels, instructions or recommendations” on the bite-size edible.
(Excerpt) Read more at kdvr.com ...
Not sure, but somebody tried the “twinkie defense” once. Didn’t work.
CC
No, it is not. A drugged society is not a healthy society.
I’m going to call you guys the “What is Aleppo??” contingent here on FR, lol!
It’s harmless.
It’s a plant.
It’s medicine.
It’s never killed anybody.
I don’t believe he suddenly turned violent. He probably was abusive for years. The marijuana helped but he was most likely a bad man to begin with. I had a relative who blamed Vietnam and alcohol for his wife beating. Horse manure. He chose to torment my cousin until she finally escaped.
If true, that's unconscionable. Due to slow onset of effect, it's easy to unknowingly consume an eventually mind-shattering amount. Legalizing states need to take a hard look at edibles and their regulation.
That said, there has been a big problem with edibles. They are typically sold in a package or product with multiple doses and initially were often poorly labelled. There was a college kid from Wyoming who overdosed and went off a hotel balcony.
The packaging problem has been addressed and dosages are more standardized, but there is still a problem because I am told the stuff tastes like, well, candy, and people are tempted to overdose anyway.
Still, this is the only case I've read about where a guy who OD'd on MJ became violent toward others, so I'm thinking he probably had mental health and/or anger issues also.
This is a terrible case. The youngest kid watched his mother die. The grandparents adopted all the kids, but the family is wrecked forever.
I don't use the stuff and just because it's legal nobody has to.
“This thread seems to be bringing out the marijuana libertarians who see nothing wrong in a lot of people strung out on dope.”
It’s always interesting how prohibitionists talk like progressives when it comes to cannabis. They use the same Alinksy tactics they otherwise condemn outside of the issue of cannabis.
Put down the bong please. Alinsky tactics, lol!
“Put down the bong please. Alinsky tactics, lol!”
Yes, Alinsky would be proud of prohibitionists. Also, asserting I need to “put the bong down” is another great example of Alinsky at work. Ad hominem attacks are the hallmark of most progressive arguments.
Supporting the Constitution does not equal “it’s okay for people to be strung out on dope.” Neither does supporting individual liberty or being against the gov’t nanny state.
I always forget the founders put in an amendment for the bong. I suppose that came from The Lost Federalist Papers File discovered in a Colorado attic.
And I guess you should tell the owner of this site you like abortion as well - ‘cause as we’re told - that’s in the Constitution too.
“I always forget the founders put in an amendment for the bong. I suppose that came from The Lost Federalist Papers File discovered in a Colorado attic. And I guess you should tell the owner of this site you like abortion as well - ‘cause as we’re told - that’s in the Constitution too.”
Your use of pretzel logic is noted.
Abortion is murder. Using cannabis as medicine or recreationally is not. Committing murder while stoned is just as illegal as murdering someone while drunk or on doctor prescribed opiates.
The fact the abortion is founded on some “imaginary” right “found” in the Constitution is irrelevant the issue of individual liberty, especially since it abortion denies the right to life of the unborn baby. States legalizing medical cannabis or outright full legalization is in keeping with the 10th Amendment.
Oh, sure, it’s found in the 10th! And I’m sorry, if you believe that, you also believe abortion is covered in the 14th! And, please, go back to your marijuana pretzels.
I will pray for you at Mass today. Hope you feel better asap. Have a great day :)
It’s probably a sin to abuse marijuana. Hope you confessed that.
It’s a sin to abuse anything.
So your thinking is: we already have a bad problem with alcohol-related deaths, why not add legal cannabis and its attendant problems to the mix?
Project much do you? No, That’s not my thinking. It’s simply human nature. A man can kill someone stone cold sober. We’ve had a drug war in America for a hundred years. And for that long it’s been a losing war. What is the standard for failure?
The Tenth Amndment reads, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Please point out where in the body of the Constitution the power is delegated to the federal government to regulate or prohibit any within-state growing, selling, buying, or using of marijuana.
We'll wait.
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.