Jurors claim they were misled in marijuana trial (of pot guru)

Modesto Bee ^ | 2/5/03 | Angela Watercutter

[hoosierskypilot]

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - A marijuana advocate and the jury that convicted him are making an unexpected show of solidarity: Jurors claim they were misled and the defendant says it isn't them he blames. Ed Rosenthal, the self-described "Guru of Ganja," was allowed Tuesday to remain free on $200,000 bail until his June 4 sentencing on federal drug violations.

[hoosierskypilot]

All in all, he was growing a lot of dope.

[rhombus]

All in all, if people are upset they should overturn marijuana laws and stop creating more jobs for lawyers, judges and bored cops. But the trial lawyers associaton wouldn't like that would they?

[Mr. K]

"A bank robber is not allowed a defense that he was stealing money for his starving children, even if he was," said Rory Little, a Hastings College of the Law professor. ..."

This is MOT a good anology... He was growing FOR a state entity, complying with state laws... he was not ROBBING anyone. I used MJ in the past, and do not care to again, but I think it should be decriminalized. There would be NO profit for the drug dealers if it was decriminalized, because you can grow it yourself so easy. I am not say SUPPORT its use, I just say stop making it a crime to use it, unless you are driving while impaired or such...

[MindBender26]

These are simply drug pushers in three piece suits, etc.

Whenever they make teir “states’ rights” argument, they are using the same logic and reasoning the Ku Klux Klan used 50 years ago to keep Black children out of school in the segregated South.

White sheeted night riders, George Wallace and Ed Rosenthal, great pair.

Rather than killing only Black Southern children with billy clubs, bullwhips and bombs in Birmingham churches, these new drug gangsters want to poison all our kids slowly so they can buy another Rolex, sawed off shotgun or stretch limousine.

[Lexington Green]

... Ed took a ride on the Kangaroo Railroad.... he's lucky he wasn't visited by the Government Death Squads

[mg39]

This has nothing to do with trial lawyers. The WoD is the baby of braindead conservatives, particularly self-righteous religious conservatives, who don't want anyone doing anything that they, in their infinite wisdom, consider immoral. Bush & Ashcroft are responsible for this idiocy.

This guy was railroaded -- yet another victim of the moronic war on drugs. The cancer patients, people in chronic pain, and other ill people who relied on the pot he grew are also out of luck, but hey, their souls are clean!

[mg39]

By the way, you know why you never read about the folks at Bacardi killing the folks at Ron Rico, or the folks at Anheiser Busch killing the folks at Heineken? Take a good guess, you drug war cheerleaders.

[Enterprise]

I think kangaroo court pretty well sums it up. This would be more appropriate to the Spanish Inquisition or to the KGB. This is disgusting.

[dirtboy]

All in all, if people are upset they should overturn marijuana laws and stop creating more jobs for lawyers, judges and bored cops.

The people of the State of California did just that by passing a medical marijuana initiative. But the feds refuse to give up their usurping ways - the pot in question would not cross state lines, but the feds insist they can still regulated it and prosecute someone following state law.

[dirtboy]

Whenever they make teir “states’ rights” argument, they are using the same logic and reasoning the Ku Klux Klan used 50 years ago to keep Black children out of school in the segregated South.

That is asinine. First of all, the 14th Amendment does not allow the states to discriminate racially, so the feds were Constitutionally justified in intervening. However, NOTHING in the Constitution gives the feds proper authority to regulate the cultivation and distribution of pot WITHIN a state.

Try getting your facts straight before trying to connect state tyranny (forced segregation) with federal tyranny (the WOD and the usurpation of state powers by the feds).

[dirtboy]

"A bank robber is not allowed a defense that he was stealing money for his starving children, even if he was," said Rory Little, a Hastings College of the Law professor.

A court should allow admission that the defendent was in compliance with state law and operating with the supervision of county authorities in compliance with state law. But the feds can't have those uppity states asserting their 10th Amendment rights now, can they? So the entire concept must be squelched.

[MrLeRoy]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/831245/posts

Did a top DEA agent tell local medical marijuana advocates they would be left alone by the feds? The question was the center of legal skirmishing Monday, as lawyers for marijuana guru Ed Rosenthal filed an appeal in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals trying to force Judge Charles Breyer to allow testimony from Mary Pat Jacobs, a key defense witness. Rosenthal faces up to life in prison for cultivating marijuana and conspiracy.

In a sworn affidavit, Sonoma Alliance for Medical Marijuana spokeswoman Mary Pat Jacobs testified that she had several conversations about medical marijuana with Drug Enforcement Administration Supervisor Mike Heald.

During those conversations, Heald stated, "the DEA was not interested in interfering" with the implementation of Proposition 215, the medical marijuana law passed by California voters in 1996, according to Jacobs' Jan. 16 testimony.

She also said she regularly discussed Heald's alleged comments with Rosenthal, leaving the pot advocate and writer with the impression that he was on solid legal ground in experimenting with the growth of different types of cannabis.

Breyer -- who has said that medicinal marijuana is not relevant to Rosenthal's drug cultivation case -- has instructed the jury to ignore any testimony touching on the medical uses of the marijuana Rosenthal has openly admitted to growing.

[PaxMacian]

Ridiculous! even laughable comparison. It is possession felony charges which have removed the voting rights of minorities all over this country as the drug policing has been well documented as discriminatory.

[society-by-contract]

Were I on the jury, I would have invoked my 1,000 year old common law right to judge the facts of the case, *as well as the law itself* and nullified by voting not guilty.

http://www.fija.org

Prohibitionists are tyrants. By the way, Ed helped me get through school with no Fedgov debt.

[rhombus]

Bush and Ashcroft? Seems like it goes back further than that...

[hoosierskypilot]

I don't think the jurors knew there was any more to the case. That's why some of them felt they were mislead.

[Wolfie]

But the feds can't have those uppity states asserting their 10th Amendment rights now, can they?

I think the Feds will rue the day they prosecuted ol' Ed. Opened up a big can of worms, and gave much publicity to the issue in general.

[mg39]

"Bush and Ashcroft? Seems like it goes back further than that..."

Indeed it does, but they're the ones in charge NOW, so it's up to them to lead; unfortunately, they're leading us deeper into the stupidity that is the WoD.

[society-by-contract]

I don't think the jurors knew there was any more to the case. That's why some of them felt they were mislead.

The jurors knew there was no victim involved. There are a lot of folks like myself who would *never* convict on a victimless crime charge like a gun, drug or tax 'offense.'

[PaxMacian]

"A bank robber is not allowed a defense that he was stealing money for his starving children, even if he was," said Rory Little, a Hastings College of the Law professor.

Actually, if the state had been starving the children and advocating bank robbery this would be a suitable analogy.