Medical Marijuana Trial: Feds Try to Bar “Sick Looking” Witnesses
Jury selection has begun in the trial of medical marijuana dispensary operator Charles Lynch, reported here on Tuesday. In a lengthy cover story on the medical marijuana battles on California’s Central Coast, New Times San Luis Obispo mentions a small fact from the trial that sums up these federal medical marijuana prosecutions in a nutshell.
Not only have federal prosecutors successfully barred introduction of evidence showing that the marijuana Lynch provided was for medical purposes, they actually filed a motion to keep “sick looking” people from being allowed to testify. Fortunately, the judge turned down that request, but the jury will still never be told the basic facts of the situation. And that says more about the morality of this case than I ever could.
Tagged with: California and DEA and dispensaries and Medical Marijuana and victims by the author
7 comments
What can we do to help this man? I am in GA writing my rep would not do and good especially considering it Saxby is there anything that we can do petition maybe send letters to the judge if you would provide address.
I filed a motion to appear as amicus curiae on Monday. It was added to the docket today. A copy is available on my web site:
http://www.iowamedicalmarijuana.org/pdfs/amicus_07689_cacd_20080720_v2.pdf
if the marijuana in cases such as this one is grown in state, sold in state and used in state then the “interstate commerce” clause, the lynchpin of the drug laws, does not apply in these cases and it is a matter of invoking the tenth amendment to the constitution which arrogates all powers not given to the federal government nor forbidden to the states to the states and the people.
[...] facts of the situation. And that says more about the morality of this case than I ever could. Medical Marijuana Trial: Feds Try to Bar “Sick Looking” Witnesses — MPP Blog __________________ 420 Magazine.com Take Action Now! [...]
@sarmichael:
Unfortunately, that is not correct. The Supreme Court has held that marijuana grown in California, even when not part of any commercial transaction whatsoever, is a part of interstate commerce under a theory that even personal, non-commercial production of a crop affects the interstate market for the crop as a whole, and therefore can be regulated by the federal government. Riach v. Gonzalez, 545 U.S. 1 (2005). This particular theory of interstate commerce was first developed in a case called Ekert, in which a farmer challenged Great Depression era laws regulating wheat production on the grounds that wheat he produced for his personal use was not part of interstate commerce.
Thus, this particular travesty of justice will not be solved by the Constitution.
Would patent #6,630,507 which was awarded not by, but to the US Dept of Health and Human Services, which states that cannabinoids are useful in the treatment and prevention of a wide variety of diseases including stroke, trauma, auto-immune disorders, Parkinson’s, HIV dementia, and Alzheimer’s, bolster the position that cannabis does indeed have currently accepted medical use for treatment in the United States?
@kpj
Yes, sadly that is true.
The US Government has granted itself sole possession of a plant that cures cancer.
Leave a Comment