cannabisnews.com: Medical Pot Jury May Speak Out





Medical Pot Jury May Speak Out
Posted by CN Staff on February 03, 2003 at 09:50:00 PT
By J.K. Dineen of The Examiner Staff
Source: San Francisco Examiner 
Ed Rosenthal did some things over the weekend that he may not be able to do for a long time: He went to see a matinee with his family and played some ferocious games of Scrabble with his son, Nick.  "We just got back from seeing 'Rabbit Proof Fence,'" his wife, Jane Klein, said from the family's Oakland home. "It's an Australian movie about blindness to human circumstance. The scenery of Australia was beautiful."
Rosenthal's lawyers also had a busy weekend. They spent it writing an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a conviction that could land Rosenthal in federal prison for a minimum of 10 years.  Rosenthal, a 58-year-old medical marijuana advocate who had been deputized to grow cannabis by Oakland city officials, was convicted Friday in federal court for cultivating more than 100 marijuana plants and for maintaining an Oakland building for the purpose of growing pot.  The case has attracted national attention, in part because it pitted the federal government against state and local laws that allow the sick and dying to use marijuana as medicine. Federal law prohibits any use or production of marijuana and Charles Breyer, the judge in the case, repeatedly threw out any testimony or questions dealing with state medical marijuana laws.  Rosenthal faces five years for each charge. His sentencing hearing is scheduled for Tuesday.  After the verdict, several members of the jury expressed regret and anger that they were explicitly forbidden from considering testimony about medical pot and that Oakland city officials who worked with Rosenthal were not allowed to testify.  Juror Marney Craig, 58, a property manager from Novato, said, "it seems like we made a horrible mistake."  "We were made to feel like we had no choice, even though we were residents of a state that has legalized medical marijuana," jury foreman Charles Sackett, a construction contractor from Sebastopol, told reporters.  Sources told The Examiner that several members of the jury are planning to hold a press conference in support of Rosenthal before the sentencing hearing on Tuesday.  "The only way the federal government can get a conviction on a medical marijuana case is to stack the deck to keep the actual issue out," said Bruce Mirken, spokesman for the Marijuana Policy Project. "Can you think of another criminal case where the accused isn't allowed to say why he did it? Ed Rosenthal grew some plants and wasn't allowed to say why."  Mirken predicted that the case may be the "turning point that heads us to the end of the federal ban on medical marijuana."  "His spirits are excellent," said Klein. "He feels his case has opened a national debate and conversation looking not only at medical marijuana but the whole hypocrisy and corruption in the judicial system under Attorney General John Ashcroft."Source: San Francisco Examiner (CA)Author: J.K. Dineen of The Examiner StaffPublished: February 03, 2003Copyright: 2003 San Francisco ExaminerContact: letters sfexaminer.comWebsite: http://www.examiner.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/Green-Aid.comhttp://www.green-aid.com Americans For Safe Access http://www.safeaccessnow.orgEd Rosenthal's Trial Pictures & Articleshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/trialpics.htmJury Left in Dark at Marijuana Trial http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15359.shtmlMedicinal Pot Grower's Case Goes To Jury http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15334.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #17 posted by freddybigbee on February 04, 2003 at 09:34:19 PT:
Jury duty
I too would judge the law unjust and acquit, however... I'd never make it to trial as a juror in a cannabis related case because the prosecuting attorney would remove me from the process long before trial ever started. The fascist pigs have all the bases covered. When you both make the law and apply it, ie when enemies of freedom have taken over both the Congress and the Judiciary (not to mention the "Executive") there is little hope for reform.That's not to be defeatest. We must never give up, but to expect the system itself to be the solution is wishful thinking.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by FoM on February 03, 2003 at 20:47:54 PT
firedog 
Good luck with Jury Duty. It sure will be a good learning experience. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by firedog on February 03, 2003 at 19:48:09 PT
I've just been called for jury duty...
...and I can only hope that I get assigned to a case involving marijuana, medical or otherwise... believe me, I am well aware of jury nullification and I'm not afraid to exercise my rights as a citizen.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by lag on February 03, 2003 at 18:58:24 PT
I'm a wimp
I'll admit it. I am afraid...but not just like they want me to be. If I were on that jury I would not have been cowed by the travesty that was once again made of our legal system. That judge acted like a vigilante...when the people that had the true power, the people, were forced to sit there. It's as if I handcuffed a bunch of cops around a building they were protecting and said "I'm going to take it from here, boys...yea, see." I would have had him acquitted, and I would have gone to jail if the judge wanted it that way, which is unlike me. But it is clear that they would have set a precedent that wouldn't be supported in the Bay Area, at least, and hopefully all over the nation. I am glad to hear the jurors are upset...I just hope they are now willing to take the appropriate action. The judge needs to be taken to court...by a jury of his peers, those in the justice system, those who seek justice.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by mayan on February 03, 2003 at 17:16:55 PT
What?
"Rosenthal faces five years for each charge. His sentencing hearing is scheduled for Tuesday."Wait a minute...I thought the court was only going to decide whether or not to take Ed into custody on Tuesday. Isn't his sentencing hearing in June or July?The way out is the way in -9/11 Prior Knowledge/Government Involvement Archive:
http://www.propagandamatrix.com/archiveprior_knowledge
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by AlvinCool on February 03, 2003 at 16:18:46 PT
Newspaper
I worked for our local paper for two years, hey I needed a job, then quit. They always call me for a fall 3 month special. The editor was in a chineese resturant when, after seeing him eating, I proclaimed loudly to my co-worker that I was taking the fall newspaper special as I needed to start the fires in my fireplace, which is true. I thought he was going to choke to death as he was entertaining some potential customers. I just went on as normal but I could tell he was shooting darts of death from his eyes.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by boppy on February 03, 2003 at 15:57:34 PT
I'm with you p4me
My Sunday edition of the Indianapolis Star laid in the driveway until almost dark yesterday. I only take the Sunday paper. A neighbor asked me if I forgot to bring it in. I told him, "No, I remembered it. I chose to leave it there. I'm in no hurry to read it." If it weren't for the food coupons that we get we wouldn't take the paper at all. When our subscription is up, that's it, we're done. The money we save on coupons, we'll save by not taking the paper. That's too bad but if I can't get ALL the news then I don't need their limited perspective. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by p4me on February 03, 2003 at 15:11:02 PT
When will they p-test the jurors
I think the concept of jury nullification is spreading fast in California and so is the story of strong arming a jury. We are not in the position we are because of informed populace. We are where we are because of relentless brainwashing and a conspiring press, Congress, and incompetent president. The whole system has to change and I only wish there could be war trials for the drug warriors and their conspirators to clear a path for change.A few minutes ago the Charlotte Observer was soliciting for subscriptions. I used to get it for a thirteen-week special and cancel it until they called again with their special. This time I cut the gy off and said I would not want the paper if they gave it to me. I hope that attitude spreads because as long as people support the yellow parrots we are going to have this endless propaganda.I also hope some people are seeing the need to impeach our dickhead the fascists are so proud of and sign all the online petitions for his impeachment they can.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by John Tyler on February 03, 2003 at 13:57:03 PT
Feds looking worse all the time.
It is obvious that the jurors felt pressure and or intimidation by the judge and the court to arrive at a guilty verdict. It looks like the furor this is causing is making the Feds look worse than if Ed had been found not guilty. I hope this "show trial" gets overturned on appeal.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by Duzt on February 03, 2003 at 13:37:46 PT
driving with cannabis commercial
I watched that commercial the other day and noticed that they don't even mention accidents or crashes. It says 30% tested on a roadside test or something like that tested positive for marijuana. What does that mean? That when they set up random stops on the road to test for alcohol (like during 4th of July) that 30% of all drivers they tested tested positive for cannabis? If that is the case one could then compare the actual percentage of people involved in crashes and test what percentage of those ONLY had cannabis in their system (which can be tested, here in Nevada they test for nanograms to see if you smoked recently or days before) and compare that to the supposed 30% of drivers driving around with cannabis in their system, which is probably pretty close to being true. I would assume that the number of accidents caused by people with only cannabis in their system would be below 1%.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by TecHnoCult on February 03, 2003 at 13:24:00 PT
Jury Nullification
What I don't understand is, why is it that not one member of the jury knew it's within his or her rights to vote their conscience? All it takes is one!THC
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by Ethan Russo MD on February 03, 2003 at 12:52:14 PT:
On the Subject of This Story
In my more cynical moments, I have been known to say, 
"The truth doesn't matter, it is the semblance of truth you can create." Nowhere does this apply better than to the federal government and our legal system.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by Ethan Russo MD on February 03, 2003 at 12:43:01 PT:
Clarification
The ad FoM cited claims that 33% of drivers in accidents were positive for marijuana. What that really means is that 33% had long-lasting metabolites of cannabis in their systems. This says nothing whatsoever about attributing causation to cannabis. A higher percentage would have meaningful blood alcohol levels, but the government could not say that when the brewmeisters were paying millions for their own SuperBowl ads, no could they?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by FoM on February 03, 2003 at 12:32:08 PT
Videos from AdAge.com
Hi Everyone,I thought some of you might want to check out the videos.DOPE-SMOKING WHITE HOUSE CRASH DUMMIESAnd Other Current TV Commercials of NoteFebruary 03, 2003By Hoag Levins View Videos: http://www.adage.com/news.cms?newsId=36970
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by JSM on February 03, 2003 at 11:41:00 PT
GCW
Nicey stated GCW, it is actions like this that ultimately will bring about change. If the members of this jury are willing to stand up and make a public statement about how they were forced to vote against their conscience and without full knowledge of the truth, then another brick in the crumbling wall of prohibition has just fallen. We are not there yet, but progress is being made a step at at time. The tragedy is, as always, that the bravest and best will suffer the most for their courage. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Celephais on February 03, 2003 at 11:33:44 PT
The jury should be ashamed
What's with that jury? 
I mean they couldn't have been ignorant of the fact that its the Feds stomping all over anyone that resists them, particularly in areas like the use of cannabis for whatever reason. Isn't it likely that at least a few people on that jury voted to get medical marijuana legal in CA in the first place? To think that they'd find Ed guilty knowing what he was really doing, and let the judge's facist control of the information sway their opinions. One of them said that (s)he felt like the judge would go after them if they aquitted Ed and thats why they found him guilty. Cowards! The Feds would have had a hard enough time trying to explain away their railroading attempts if Ed had been aquitted. How would they be able to justify arresting the jurors after? 
Personally had I been on that jury I would have aquitted Ed and welcomed an attempt from the Feds to try and threaten me. An abuse of power like that along with threatening my rights would be the perfect way to show the corruption of the system. But instead the jury cowed out and let Ed take the fall alone, instead of doing whats right and standing up to the government that is waging a war against its own people. The jury should be ashamed, and hopefully Ed's appeal will set right the justice that they failed to show.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by The GCW on February 03, 2003 at 11:08:25 PT
Jury should protest the threats & intimidation.
If the jury IS allowed to vote for not guilty, and the judge says they can only vote one way... then can the jury sue the judge for giving them unlawfull instructions? If the jury was feeling threatened and intimidated, could they claim such and have a mistrial?Are they in fact allowed to vote their mind? And were they led to believe otherwise?The jury is clearly unhappy with the way the government treated them and should file charges.Can the jury put out a public statement and make an issue of the farce enough to turn around the guilty verdict?The fact that this issue may grow to include full on cannabis Re-legalization awareness is way big.If You can brew a bunch of beer, it is inhumane to cage humans that grow cannabis.The government must be forced to be humane.We need to control the Fed. Gov. like the plague.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment