cannabisnews.com: Marijuana Grower Convicted in Jury Verdict





Marijuana Grower Convicted in Jury Verdict
Posted by CN Staff on July 11, 2002 at 21:07:58 PT
By The Associated Press
Source: Associated Press
The first federal criminal case involving a cannabis buyers' club to reach a jury ended Thursday when jurors convicted a Chico-area supplier of illegally growing marijuana he said was for medical use. Prosecutors said Bryan James Epis planned to grow as many as 1,000 marijuana plants for profit. The production was illegal under federal law that supersedes California's medical marijuana law, prosecutors said. 
Epis, 35, faces a sentence of at least 10 years in prison. He helped establish and supply Chico Medical Marijuana Caregivers, a cannabis buyers' club, but insisted he did not profit and sought only to help sick people with doctors' recommendations, in compliance with state law. The trial was delayed several times due to clashes between medical marijuana supporters, the judge, the defense and the prosecution. Before it could get underway, U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. excused an entire panel of 42 original potential jurors after learning that some of them received a flier explaining how jurors are manipulated by judges. Damrell accused Epis of being responsible and had him briefly arrested. He set an Aug. 1 hearing to determine whether Epis is guilty of obstructing justice. Pro-marijuana activist Jeffrey Jones was also cited for a misdemeanor attempt to influence jurors by handing out the fliers outside the courthouse. He was released pending trial. Controversy continued during the trial when protesters were barred from their station outside the federal courthouse. Complete Title: Marijuana Grower Convicted in First Cannabis Club Jury Verdict Source: Associated Press Published: Thursday, July 11, 2002 Copyright: 2002 Associated Press Related Articles:Medical Defense Slips Into Pot Trial http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13375.shtmlLawyer Asks Judge To Throw Out Two Chargeshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13296.shtmlLegal Gaffe No Barrier To Pot Trialhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13284.shtmlMedical Marijuana Trial on Hold http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13247.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #12 posted by goneposthole on July 13, 2002 at 07:07:16 PT
In Fraud We Bust
The forty-four point nine million dollar Chataeu de Triomphe in Dallas, Texas must have been a real scorcher.
Talk about something fishy, that fire is something fishy. A forty-three thousand square foot 'home' has a cost of one thousand dollars per square foot. Somebody needs to get a life. Was it drug money that built it? Was it drug money that burned it?Those gawd dammed fockin' drugs. When people only need cannabis, we have the pharmaceutical companies pushing the worst kind (the legal ones) on everybody and his brother, mother, sister, father, uncles, aunts, grandmothers, grandfathers, you name it. It sucks big time more so than the legal drugs themselves. Oh well.True administration of justice is a thing of the past in the USA; it's a free country, don't cha know, hey.In God We Trust, my behind. In Fraud We Bust.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by Zero_G on July 13, 2002 at 04:11:58 PT
Another voice for Paul
Yes, thank you - your life and livliehood on the line, and you show the courage and conviction of your ideals.We all should aspire to no less.Thanks again.Zero_G 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by dddd on July 12, 2002 at 22:17:01 PT
..Yes...Thank You Paul Peterson..
....You are an inspiration to us all!...Keep on keepin' on.......Sincerely..dddd
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by ekim on July 12, 2002 at 20:55:05 PT
Glad to hear from ol Paul
Can you get someone at Cable Access to catch your meeting. Will anyone from Opras hear you out. In past pieces here at CN Professon Don Braskin at the Il.Univerisity was interviewed on growing Hemp at the Univerisity. Someone there might be interested in the Med. use. I think it was Sen. Evelen Bowels or something like that. She is allmost 80 and full of fire, dam shes good. Please look her up. With all the press the MPP has gotten from both DC and NV they should be byen you lunch and ck out the Unitaiarians position we keep reading about. Most of all thank you for all you are doing and what you have had to indour, like reading this fractured attempt:)~~~~~~~~
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by paul peterson on July 12, 2002 at 19:19:58 PT:
APPEALABLE ISSUES
In answer to your question, I believe the federal government only has jurisdiction to try people for matters which validly fall under the "commerce clause" of the US Constitution, which reserves all police and welfare issues for state control, EXCEPT, where the matters "affect Interstate Commerce". Therefore, the mere "possession" of Cannabis does not confirm jurisdiction for the feds. Where they come in, is because (unlike for the gun sales cases, where you actually have to PROVE INTERSTATE SALES), for "methamphetamines" at least, even the INTRASTATE SALES ARE PRESUMED TO "AFFECT" MATTERS OUTSIDE OF THE BORDERS. (TISOR 96 F. 3d 373, I forgot the year). In that case, which clearly involved commercial sales, tapes, conspiracy, etc., even though they didn't clearly prove interstate sales, the wide commercial venue tended to justify intervention. (Even though the federal statute does provide that mere "possession" still affects commerce, etc., the feds know full well that they can't tread there anymore, lest they have the whole statute declared unconstitutional (what with the strong state focus to control that area otherwise). That is why they will only try the cases with at least a hundred plants, lest they start to lose turf, rather than gain turf (by the clearly "propaganda" value of a clear conviction).In another case, U.S. v. Carvell, (74 F. 3d, 8,1st Circuit 1996),a guy got busted in Maine with some 468 plants, and did a plea bargain. Then he tried to appeal on the basis of lack of jurisdiction and the court disallowed the appeal. You see, he testified (and the court accepted his statements as true, that he used the pot mostly for himself to treat his depression and suicidal tendancies-he only sold some at cost to a friend or two that used it for valid medicinal purposes.-If he had withdrawn his plea in time, that would have likely been a ground-breaking case, since his so-called "commercial" contact was so minor as to be easily proveable that there WAS NO EFFECT ON INTERSTATE COMMERCE).My guess is that there will absolutely be an appeal here-This guy can absolutely PROVE LACK OF "EFFECT" ON INTERSTATE COMMERCE-WHY? 1) The only evidence the feds will have (I think), is that the only sales proven were under the California 215 proposition-by definition none of those people are out of state, right? 2) The medical provisions are rather strict about that "residency" thing. 3) The clear record keeping will come to their aid on this, I hope. 4) Remember, this will need to go through the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (rather liberal, I think?). If nobody screwed up and flipped some bud over the border, this case will narrow rather than expand jurisdiction (Rembember, it's only bud, and not Meth-which truly "commercial" trafficing in will still generate the knee jerk jail em mentality every where).Now, please don't think I am practicing law or something, since I was suspended by the ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT on 12/27/01 on false pretenses, fraud, perjury & mail fraud (because I came forward and tried to get valid authorization to use the ILLINOIS MEDICAL MARIJUANA LAW THAT HAS LAIN BURIED IN THE SANDS OF TIME HERE SINCE AT LEAST 1984!). This is merely my lay opinion as to the general meaning of these cases, and since I still have a duty to IMPROVE THE SYSTEM, ESPECIALLY WHERE THERE IS A RAPID CHANGE IN SOCIETY, AND TO WORK FOR LAW REFORM, I am invoking the "Preamble" here which allows me to comment generally on these things (I hope). I am still researching these matters, but I know that the way around these "distribution" pesky trial stains around the collar is to use what I now call the "NEED, SEED, FEED, WEED, INDEED! program, where the pot never comes into or out of a patient's house. The seeds, soil, water, lights & fertilizer come in, the bud is used on the spot, and the quantities must stay below the state maximum guidelines- Then there is no way the feds can justify any meddling! If the patient is bedridden, you use your clubbers to run errands and come in to "tend" the garden & prepare the medicine for use on the spot (no weed in, no weed out!). It sounds cumbersome, but it seems to work-the only place the feds are actively busting these days is in California, right? That's because those guys are so far ahead of the rest of the country there are thousands of patients that need this stuff, and the best way to provide it was in large quantity grows. Just turn the clubs into information and "service" clubs, pretend that they volunteers are doing a WEED ON WHEELS program-and don't have too many seeds available at any one time-And call me in the morning (and wish me luck in my own travails-I am still fighting these guys to get my license back so I can come out there and help those guys out somehow.My local public library is going to allow me to host a "MEDICAL MARIJUANA SENSITIVITY TRAINING SEMINAR" in a few weeks. Check out my web site for some articles I have written on these subjects. I'll update you guys later on the feedback (who knows, maybe I will actually get some press sometime soon!) PAUL PETERSON 312-558-9999 (getting evicted soon from non-payment of office rent-and by the Methodist Church-talk about callused people!)    
http://IILLINOIS-MMI.org
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by xxdr_zombiexx on July 12, 2002 at 06:05:07 PT
hmmm....
This trial went awful fast once they got the remaining 12 ignorant people who never heard of pot before... This case didnt really set a prescendent over the State LAw, did it?Seems they would have had to try the Law, not some person. California Consitution says the Law stands till Challenged by the Federal Gov't, and that is not what happened in this case.Anybody with a grasp of Law care to comment?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by xxdr_zombiexx on July 12, 2002 at 06:00:18 PT
Paving the way for Martial Law
Not that the way needs paved, but the Bush Administration is on shaky ground and theyve been dying to get a federal ruling in a "medcial pot" case.Do you suppose the DEA and FBI will roll tanks into San Francisco to enforce the Rule of Federal LAw over a State that routinely tells them to shove it?I hate to sound paranoid...i really do..but this is the same brain I use to drive around and I always get home safely.The Stock MArket will flouder terribly, Homeland security will pass and we will have a Miltary Police state before the November elections. Why rig the 2004 election when you have the power to stop everthing.Perhaps there will be an appeal. Perhaps I can get a good deal on thermal wear...and move north.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by dddd on July 12, 2002 at 02:54:10 PT
..again..I'm not a lawyer,,but if I was...
..I would be planning to expose this absurd,and disgusting federal besmirchment of any and all decency !!!!! ... .........But;....it seems to me,,that it's all just part of the new empire!...Of course,,one could easily imagine this sort of thing happening in the Clinton years;(I'm sure it did.)....but there is a real difference since ,Fraud blessed America,with the court appointed pResident...........How bout this chilling article.?...If something aint wrong with this picture,,,I'll move to Utah!!!.............And ..perhaps even more stunning,is to think that there must be people out there,who actually ,,sincerely,,find the things that are said by his Fraudulence, ,acceptable, and commendable!!!!!!....?
 
 
The Washington Times
                                        www.washtimes.comPresident urges concerted voice on securityJoseph Curl
THE WASHINGTON TIMES Published 7/11/2002     President Bush urged members of Congress and federal employees yesterday not to engage in a turf battle over his
proposal to create a Homeland Security Department, as five House committees prepared to vote on their portions of the
Cabinet-level agency.
   Mr. Bush told 3,700 federal workers gathered at the Daughters of the American Revolution's Constitution Hall that they would
play a pivotal role in the consolidation of agencies responsible for domestic security.
   "Twenty years from now, if we're still standing — individually, that is — you can look back and say, 'I was part of not only winning
the war on terror, but I was part of working together to leave behind a legacy, a legacy of a more secure homeland,'" Mr. Bush said.
   "This is a historic moment, a fantastic opportunity. History has called us into action, history has put the spotlight on America."
   The president said no one is to blame for the unwieldy bureaucracy that has evolved, separating crucial agencies and
hampering communication.
   "Despite everybody's best intentions and hard work and sacrifices, there is a dispersal of authority, a lack of accountability, and
the truth of the matter is, a needless drain on critical resources," the president said.
   As Congress begins work on creation of the department, Mr. Bush asked that lawmakers give the agency maximum flexibility
and avoid territorial battles about oversight.
   "Congress, as they work with us, must give us the flexibility necessary to achieve our objectives. I call it freedom to manage. The
new department must be able to get the right people in the right place, at the right time, with the right pay. We need to be able to
reward excellence and ensure accountability for individual performance."
   All federal workers, Mr. Bush said, share a goal.
   "I understand it's hard to make changes in Washington, D.C. I understand that people kind of get set in their ways, want to guard
turf, and I know that. But there is an overriding mission here in America today. And that's to protect our homeland," he said.
   "See, this isn't a Republican idea, this isn't a Democrat idea. This is an American idea that makes sense for all Americans."
   Mr. Bush and congressional leaders have agreed to try to establish the department by the September 11 anniversary of the
terrorist attacks on America.
   Under his proposal, all or parts of 22 existing agencies would be combined into the proposed department, which would have
170,000 employees and a $37 billion budget. White House officials say little additional taxpayer money will be needed to combine
the agencies.
   Mr. Bush assured federal workers that they would keep the same pay, benefits and union representation if they are moved to
the new department.
   House leaders are aiming to have the Homeland Security Department bill ready for a floor vote next week. Democratic leaders in
the Senate say they hope to have a bill on the floor before Congress' August recess.
   Meanwhile, applications for visas that let millions of foreigners enter the United States each year would be screened for terrorist
threats by the department under legislation approved yesterday by two House committees.
   The visa plan was among several changes recommended by House committees, with more panels set to consider other parts of
the proposal today. Mr. Bush had made no recommendation on visas.
   It is far from certain, however, whether any of these changes will remain in the legislation as it moves through Congress.
   • This article is based in part on wire service reports.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by E_Johnson on July 12, 2002 at 00:07:30 PT
Another political prisoner
America has its own collection now.The jurors will be haunted by their decision once they fully understand it.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by dddd on July 11, 2002 at 23:15:15 PT
..One must ask ....
...."Before it could get underway, U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. excused an entire panel of 42 original potential
      jurors after learning that some of them received a flier explaining how jurors are manipulated by judges. "
 
 
..If this judge is concerned with the influence of these flyers tainting the jury panel,,,I aint no lawyer,,but it seems to me,that a case could be made ,,that the Federal government exerted undue influence ,and biased the jury,by saturating the media with erroneous and misleading anti-Marijuana/drug advertisements..
 
...Dont be suprized to see this sort of federal tyranny we've seen in this case,,become more common,and blatant... .The empire is continuing to seize power,and erode freedom...The financial meltdown will continue,,and then,,they will invade Iraq....I think the summer is going to get even hotter!...The latest LA police brutality is going to become a sizzler!.....dddd
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by null on July 11, 2002 at 21:53:44 PT
the utter polarity
Here in the mere span of 24 hours we witness the absolute polarity between the U.S. and the rest of the world. Britain downgrading cannabis on on the way to legalisation. But here... even for medical marijuana: Epis, 35, faces a sentence of at least 10 years in prison. Shamefully sad.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by The C-I-R-C-L-E on July 11, 2002 at 21:46:31 PT
LET THE GAMES BEGIN
Untrucking believable.
That's all I can say- 
from an hours drive away...
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment