Judge Keeps Tight Rein on Pot Trial (Judge takes over questioning of witness from the defense)

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | Jan. 31, 2003 | Bob Egelko

[Wolfie]

References to medical uses quickly squelched in federal court.

The Bay Area's first federal medical marijuana trial ended Thursday with a bizarre touch that symbolized the entire case: The judge took over questioning of a defense witness to make sure he didn't refer to the medical use of marijuana.

[Roscoe]

"But Prop. 215 sifted into the case, with demonstrations by taped-mouth supporters outside the courthouse, pretrial questioning of jurors about their views on the measure, and incessant defense efforts to slip words like "medical" and "patient" into questioning or testimony, which generally drew rebukes from Breyer."

Sounds like Rosenthal's street theater allies wanted to misrepresent Proposition 215 to the jury.

[headsonpikes]

Someday a representative crew of these soi-dissant "law and order" triumphalist bast*rds will be put on trial, themselves.

They may sulk, but they will probably be grateful for the fact they get a trial. ;^)

[Roscoe]

I don't think we have to worry about a Kanadian takeover.

[jeremiah]

Libertarians are the way to go, with the opposition of the libs(Ds and Rs) we would have balance for once.

[vin-one]

the whole case is grounds for appeal,
Jury nullications sounds like a possiblity here!!!!!

[jimt]

Can you say KANGAROO COURT! I know you can.

[APBaer]

Watch your mouth, bipedal!

We kangaroos have ethics,
unlike the JBTs and Judge Breyer!

[Roscoe]

One of the prosecution's star witnesses is a guy who is doing the same thing, even as we speak, that Ed is on trial for.

That "guy" was a patient, wasn't he?

Is Ed?

This was how Proposition 215's supporters sold the measure to the voters on the actual ballot:

"Proposition 215 allows patients to cultivate their own marijuana simply because federal laws prevent the sale of marijuana, and a state initiative cannot overrule those laws."

Argument in Favor of Proposition 215

[Wolfie]

No the "guy", Bob Martin, openly operates several marijuana dispensaries.

Regarding Martin, the prosecutor, George Bevan, told the jury:

"You could say he's violating the law, why isn't he on trial? Well that's not for you to consider."

[APBaer]

You seem to be following this in the local press.
Is there any doubt that at least several people on the jury know what the case is about, i.e., the referendum, etc.?

[Roscoe]

Former club employee Robert Martin, who was forced to testify under a grant of immunity, alleged that Hayes drew down the club's accounts to pay for his exile. Bills went unpaid and the power was shut off. Martin, who now runs another medical marijuana club, began covering expenses out of his own pocket, but testified that he wrote Rosenthal bad checks for his plants because he believed Rosenthal was attempting to take over the operation. The prosecution then produced an unsigned letter to Rosenthal, seized from Watts' computer. The letter suggests that Rosenthal was selling bug-infested plants as an act of ''willfull sabotage'' to infect other growers and corner the medical marijuana market, a charge Rosenthal denies.

Rosenthal's Federal Drug Trial Turns Surreal

Quite a pair.

[Wolfie]

It would be hard to think that nobody on the jury knows about Prop. 215, but then again, you never know.

[Orbiting_Rosie's_Head]

What happened to state's rights?

Destroyed by the fedgovs with the complicity of the robertpaulsens and Roscoes of the nation.

[Lurker]

""You cannot substitute your sense of justice, whatever that is, for your duty to follow the law." "

This is a lie, and the judge should be impeached for uttering such drivel to a jury.

L

[Roscoe]

The Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the United States Constitution mandates that federal law supersede state law where there is an outright conflict between such laws. See Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 (9 Wheat) U.S. 1, 210, 6 L.Ed. 23 (1824); Free v. Bland, 369 U.S. 663, 666, 82 S. Ct. 1089, 8 L.Ed.2d 180 (1962); Industrial Truck Ass'n, Inc. v. Henry, 125 F.3d 1305, 1309 (9th Cir. 1997) (state law is preempted "where it is impossible to comply with both state and federal requirements, or where state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purpose and objectives of Congress"). Recognizing this basic principle of constitutional law, defendants do not contend that Proposition 215 supersedes federal law, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a). Indeed, Proposition 215 on its face purports only to exempt certain patients and their primary caregivers from prosecution under certain California drug laws-it does not purport to exempt those patients and caregivers from the federal laws. One of the ballot arguments in favor of the initiative in fact states: "Proposition 215 allows patients to cultivate their own marijuana simply because federal law prevents the sale of marijuana and a state initiative cannot overrule those laws." Peron, 59 Cal.App.4th at 1393, 70 Cal.Rptr.2d 20 (quoting Ballot Pamphlet, Proposed Amends. to Cal. Const. with arguments to voters, Gen.Elec. (Nov. 5, 1996 p. 60)).

Facts aren't your forté.

[Orbiting_Rosie's_Head]

You forgot the bold tags!

complicity - 1. participation in wrongdoing, esp. in a crime.

Cut-and-paste examples of nefarious judicial opinions are a poor substitute for the constitution and common sense. It's a little like listening to the ravings of an Islamofascist Imam rather than hearing the word of God in your own heart.

It seems your own thoughts are suffering from shrinkage.

[Orbiting_Rosie's_Head]

Facts aren't your forté.

They surely don't seem to be yours, since that is a judicial opinion you just cut-and-pasted. Or are judges issuing facts now?

[Roscoe]

nefarious judicial opinions

This was how Proposition 215's supporters sold the measure to the voters on the actual ballot:

"Proposition 215 allows patients to cultivate their own marijuana simply because federal laws prevent the sale of marijuana, and a state initiative cannot overrule those laws."

Argument in Favor of Proposition 215

Facts aren't your forté.

[Orbiting_Rosie's_Head]

I see you remembered the bold tags. Nice going!