cannabisnews.com: Convictions and Conviction Convictions and Conviction Posted by CN Staff on June 05, 2003 at 07:03:51 PT By Debra J. Saunders Source: San Francisco Chronicle Shame on U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer for sentencing medical- marijuana maven Ed Rosenthal to one day behind bars -- time already served -- followed by three years' probation. In doing so, Breyer sent the dangerous signal that if you don't like a law, you don't have to obey it. Readers of this column are aware that I believe medical marijuana should be legal. Truth be told, I think marijuana should be decriminalized. But there's something wrong when a federal judge allows a convicted criminal to basically get off because Rosenthal disagrees with the federal law. Some background: In 2002, the feds arrested Rosenthal for growing marijuana for the Harm Reduction Center in San Francisco. During the trial, Breyer stymied defense attempts to bring up Proposition 215, the voter-approved state medical marijuana initiative, as well as the fact that Oakland officials may have deputized Rosenthal to carry out the city's medical marijuana program. When jurors learned of Rosenthal's "Deputy Ed" status after they convicted him, they were furious. As Rosenthal told me before his "sentencing" that Breyer had kept jurors from learning "the whole facts." But Breyer was right to try to prevent "jury nullification" -- that is, jurors ruling "not guilty," because they don't like the law. Too bad the good judge then decided that, rather than sentence Rosenthal to 21 months as the court probation office recommended, he could jiggle the facts so that he could do what he wouldn't let a jury do. Defense attorney Dennis Riordan faulted news reports for characterizing the case as battle between federal and state authority. Au contraire, Riordan told the court, the defense was based on a "highly sophisticated argument" (if he did say so himself) that Oakland created an "immunity exception" when it deputized Rosenthal. Breyer disagreed -- but then told the courtroom that Rosenthal, "as a member of the general public" couldn't be expected to know that the deputization had no force under federal law. Snipped: Complete Article: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/06/05/ED106681.DTL Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)Author: Debra J. SaundersPublished: Thursday, June 5, 2003 Copyright: 2003 San Francisco Chronicle - Page A - 23 Contact: letters sfchronicle.comWebsite: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/Related Articles & Web Site:Ed Rosenthal's Pictures & Articles http://freedomtoexhale.com/trialpics.htmMarijuana Grower Sentenced To One Day in Prison http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread16535.shtmlMedical Marijuana Activist Free http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread16533.shtmlOne Jail Day for Marijuana Felony http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread16532.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #8 posted by FoM on June 05, 2003 at 11:38:27 PT SFC Editorial A Brave and Right Decision Thursday, June 5, 2003 U.S. District Court Judge Charles Breyer should be commended for infusing his court with an air of common sense Wednesday when he refused to imprison Ed Rosenthal on a federal marijuana conviction. Snipped: Complete Article: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2003/06/05/ED120827.DTL [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by BigDawg on June 05, 2003 at 10:01:17 PT I agree with the disparate sentencing issue. I am happy that Ed is free, but I can't call this a win. He was convicted and sentenced. Unless this is overturned on appeal, we just have more confusion. But the wall does seem to be crumbling.And the part about the Judge being right in NOT ALLOWING jury nullification is really scarey. [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by WolfgangWylde on June 05, 2003 at 08:47:50 PT She does make... ...one good point about disparate sentencing. I'm sure Bryan Epis would agree. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by Truth on June 05, 2003 at 08:38:03 PT here's the letter I sent Debra Debra,To compare Ed's actions (helping sick folks feel better)with Rudolphs (blowing up people) shows what an idiot you are. You can change, though, even ignorant people can show compassion.Have a heart.Mark [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by kaptinemo on June 05, 2003 at 07:57:28 PT: Amen, Doc, amen... These short-sighted comments lead me to believe that this person probably is heavily dependent upon inside contacts in LE for her scoops, and had to make an obligatory 'law & order' noise to satisfy them that she is still on 'their side' and continue to get tossed crumbs of information from them. History, social consequences of bad policy, and just plain human misery caused by those policies...they don't register with such as these.One question I love to ask antis when they are foolish enough to think they can debate what they think of as an addled pot-head is "When is it immoral to follow a law?". The obvious reasons can be disposed of quickly, leading to the simple conclusion that when the consequences of a law are more immoral and damaging to society than the behaviors they were meant to discourage, then the law is immoral. For people who make such great stock of being on the 'right' side of the issue, I invariably get one of two reactions: A fumingly exasperated "This is different!" or cold, angry silence for having caused them to step outside their comfort zone and give thought to what they have supported.Neither one is a proper, rational answer, of course. But then, antis never have given one...ever. [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by ekim on June 05, 2003 at 07:45:42 PT Amen Doctor Russo You can see a thought provoking perspective on this issue by clicking on: http://www.markfiore.com/animation/protect.html [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by Ethan Russo MD on June 05, 2003 at 07:19:53 PT: Comment on the Nonsense I do not know this woman's background, but I would not want to be in her shoes right now after spewing this nonsense. By her logic we should still have slaves and not allow women to vote. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Ethan Russo MD on June 05, 2003 at 07:18:27 PT: The Rest of the Nonsense "Bunk. Rosenthal is not a "member of the general public." He's an informed activist. He used to write the "Ask Ed" column for "High Times" and "Cannabis Culture." He calls himself the "Guru of Ganja." He knew better. Call me old-fashioned, but I remember when those who engaged in civil disobedience expected to be punished and accepted it. Now they break the law, and their attorneys argue that their clients are so principled, they shouldn't have to go to jail. And I have to agree with Assistant U.S. Attorney George Bevan, who argued that when activists win lighter sentences, it leads to "disparate sentencing." "Disparate sentencing" is the antithesis of "equal justice." I'm happy for Rosenthal and his family. I saw the relief on his face Wednesday morning. Still, there is a price to pay when activists feel free to break laws they don't like. Consider Eric Rudolph, the Olympic bombing suspect and abortion foe who pleaded not guilty to bombing an abortion clinic in 1998. Yes, I know, Rudolph is accused of killing two and wounding others while Rosenthal grew pot. But Rudolph's supporters share with Rosenthal's backers a deep hostility for federal law enforcement, and a belief that their guy shouldn't have to go to jail because his convictions justify what he did. In this country, the courts are supposed to punish people -- or not punish people -- for what they do, not for what they think." [ Post Comment ] Post Comment