Comments on: Texas Medical Marijuana Acquittal

By: Joseph "Ironman" Siler

Joseph "Ironman" Siler — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:29:12 +0000

Medical Necessity. I have Basal Cell Carcinoma,(skin cancer). Basal Cell can prove fatal if untreated,(so I have been told). Not as deadly as Malignant Melanoma, it is however rather annoying,(bleeds rather easily). The surgical procedure required to remove it is, in my opinion, a real pain in the,(in my case), neck, head, and face. I have had six of these procedures done on my neck, head, and face. Never again. I decided, after the last procedure, to try an alternative treatment. I manufactured some cannabis oil, applied it to two of the remaining lesions, covered them with a bandaid, left them on for 12hrs, and repeated the application for six days. The lesions are GONE, CURED. I consider what I have done a “Medical Necessity” to avoid having a doctor stick a needle in my head, and using a scalple to cut me up. The federal government has recently patented compounds in the cannnabis plant for medical use. I am somewhat confused. I thought they maintained that cannabis had NO MEDICAL USE WHAT SO EVER. Well, maybe there are some actual people with a half a brain in politics after all.

By: The Blawgraphy | Texas Man Successfully Asserts Necessity Defense in Medical Marijuana Possession Case

Tue, 01 Apr 2008 23:36:08 +0000

[...] head demands “What’s your authority for that?” to which he answers – Texas Penal Code Section 9.22. Bookmark this Page: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and [...]

By: marc

marc — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 05:27:29 +0000

You can post to Tim’s myspace page.

http://www.myspace.com/amarillotim

By: Clay S. Conrad

Clay S. Conrad — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 17:50:48 +0000

The real question, in my mind, is whether this counts as a jury nullification verdict. And on one theory, I think it does.

Jury nullification, by that theory, does not always amount to the jury giving the judge the finger. It can also amount to the jury giving more weight to certain legal arguments than they perhaps merit, because the equities of the case lie in that direction.

In other words, the defense may argue necessity, even though the elements of the defense are not solidly presented by the facts of the case. Yet by setting up this shadow defense, the jury will have a “peg to hang their hats on” should they wish to vote “not guilty.”

Moreover, the jurors may not even be consciously aware that they have nullified the law in this sort of scenario. It is just that their desire not to convict the poor bastard leads them to sidestep the missing element, add an extra element to the State’s case, or otherwise color their fact-finding.

The scary part is that this “subliminal” jury nullification works both ways — something that nobody in their right mind would advocate. After all, if trial by jury exists to prevent oppression by government (Duncan v. Louisiana), the Government never needs to resort to it. It is free to simply dismiss the case to quit being oppressive.

This is why Kelly Siegler wants to scare jurors: facts be damned, if the jury hates the defendant enough, fears him enough, they will make excuses for weaknesses in the State’s case, or find weak evidence overwhelming and unquestionable. It is pretty reprehensible, but effective.

By: Mark Bennett

Mark Bennett — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 14:10:08 +0000

Melaine, I don’t know. I think the ridiculousness of criminalizing marijuana is something most readers here hold self-evident. So what is it about marijuana that we refuse to confront here?

Tell us, and we’ll do our best not to let you down.

By: Melanie

Melanie — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 08:40:37 +0000

Sounds like you all are smoking dope and looking through the almanac.

What is it about marijuana that people refuse to confront, in this age of Viagra commercials? Even here…where you would expect to find some kind of professional discussion.

By: Gritsforbreakfast

Gritsforbreakfast — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 03:44:22 +0000

While you did get the mileage wrong to Long Island, my family comes from Dalhart originally on both sides, about 80 miles north of Amarillo. It is closer to the capitals of seven other states, if I recall correctly, than it is to Austin.

By: Leviathan

Leviathan — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:47:24 +0000

Perhaps Amarillo is philosophcally miles closer to Long Island.

Los Angeles and Houston are roughly equidistant from El Paso.

By: Bruce

Bruce — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 06:10:45 +0000

Know what you get if you cut Alaska in half? Two states bigger than Texas.

Currently in my 16th year in Alaska after 12 years in Texas. Both great places, but for different reasons. The tex-mex food up here sucks.

I drove my daughter down to Colorado for college last fall. 4200 miles from Anchorage to Northern Colorado.

By: Mark Bennett

Mark Bennett — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:39:29 +0000

I have people call me from out-of-state about cases in El Paso sometimes; I have to explain the distances involved. People in the little tiny states have trouble conceiving of an 800-mile drive in a straight line across a single state.