Tip to all cops: if you feel like murdering someone, be sure to do it on duty and in uniform

Monday, January 2nd, 2012

In the past couple of years, CopBlock has covered a wide range of stories involving police murder.  John Williams, a half-deaf, disabled, hobbling Native American man was basically executed in the streets of Seattle by on-duty officer Ian Birk. Birk was never criminally charged. Westpoint and Duke graduate Erik Scott was executed at Costco for no legitimate reasons when police were called to the scene. His killer of course was found to have been “justified” in the murder.

Trevon Cole, an unarmed father-to-be was shot and killed in his bathroom during a mistaken drug raid. Grandfather of 12, Eurie Stamps was similarly unarmed and killed during a botched drug raid. Former Marine Jose Guerena was shot multiple times by police during an alleged drug warrant entry by police. He lay dying for over an hour until he bled to death because police refused medical care. Allen Kephart was tasered to death for honking his car horn at police. Douglas Zerby was shot and killed for holding a garden hose spigot which police purportedly mistook for a gun.

The list goes on and on, but a girl can only maintain so many murder victims’ names in her head before going insane. At any rate, without exception, police involved in these murders were found to have acted reasonably or were determined to have been justified in their murder. Even before they were found to have behaved in a “justified manner,” they were not immediately arrested or charged (or ever arrested or charged).

On the other hand, in recent news, one Officer Dayle Long had the misfortune of murdering someone and actually not getting away with it. Long was drunk at a bar when a bystander ribbed him for not being good at playing darts. Long responded, “That’s why I’m a cop, I can do whatever I want to do.” Things got heated, and Long ended up shooting and killing a third man, Sam Vanettes, who was attempting to break up the fight. Surprisingly, Long was actually arrested and held on $1 million bail. This is a good thing. Barely, though (yay! A cop was actually treated like a normal person, for once!)

Long had one part right. Police pretty much can do what they please. They get away with murder with much more success than ordinary people. They certainly get away with more innocuous violations they engage in almost daily, such as driving while talking on cell phones (illegal in California, apparently except for the police), parking in red zones, parking in handicapped zones, speeding, jaywalking, etc.

The part Long failed to take into consideration is that the key to this distinction is the badge and the uniform. People don’t care about murder when it is committed by police in uniform. The response is usually, “well then [the victim] shouldn’t have disobeyed/talked back/drank alcohol/[insert petty violation here].” People most definitely don’t care when police in uniform break traffic laws, because of course police are just “doing their jobs” and “keeping people safe” by speeding, parking in fire lanes, and talking on their cell phones while driving. But when the uniform comes off, to a certain extent, they are viewed once again as regular old losers like the rest of us.

Regular old losers can’t jay walk, speed, or murder with impunity. You have to have a uniform and a badge to do that. Long’s mistake wasn’t murder; his mistake was committing murder out of uniform. And as a side note to all you regular old losers out there, regardless of uniform, never honk your car horn at a cop or challenge his dart skills – someone could end up dead.

Tip to all cops: if you feel like murdering someone, be sure to do it on duty and in uniform is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

Dealing with Anonymous Drug Tip Lines

Saturday, December 31st, 2011

TIPS FOR CANNABIS CONSUMERS AND DISTRIBUTORS

Anonymous tips by telephone are a real danger for cannabis users, and they have to be stopped.

The best way to stop anonymous tips is by calling in bogus or phoney anonymous tips, and often. But doing this is not danger-free, and can lead to your incarceration. The idea is to have the cops go on so many fruitless phoney tips calls that such calls will no longer be trusted, especially by judges issuing search warrants. Bogus tips resulting in call outs cost cops money and waste time. They can also be used in other ways, as you will see. So here are my tips for phoney drugs activity reporting:

1. Contact: ALWAYS USE A PAY TELEPHONE, and NEVER ALLOW YOUR IDENTITY TO BE REVEALED. Pay phones cannot be connected with any individual user, so it is difficult for cops to arrest you for false reporting. Never use a cell phone Do not use a computer. I would even say wipe the phone free of your fingerprints, or do not leave fingerprints at all. Cops even look for footprints if such can be found around phones in question.

2. Time: SPEND AS LITTLE TIME ON THE PHONE WITH THE COPS AS POSSIBLE, THEN LEAVE THE PHONE QUICKLY. Cops trace these calls, and they come very fast. Give out the information needed to be given, and then leave.

3. Content: Tell the cops that suspicious drug activity is going on at; (a) the house or business of a known PROHIBITIONIST or simply somebody you don’t like: DO NOT RAT OUT OTHER CONSUMERS OR DISTRIBUTORS, or (b) an outdoor grow op is being conducted at a REMOTE AND DIFFICULT TO ACCESS PLACE. Even neutral persons are okay to “bust”. Politicians are great! But all cannabis users are on the same side here, so know who the REAL enemy is and spare your brothers. But a bogus call concerning a prohibitionist will cause HIM to have his door kicked down. Sending cops to remote and difficult- to-access outdoor locales wastes their time and money. It will eventually exasperate judges issuing search warrants by casting “probable cause” into doubt in regards to anonymous tips.

4. Details: Always include a few details about the person or locale to be “busted”, to convince the cops that this is not just a prank call. Names work. License plates work. Locations work. Personal descriptions work. BUT DO NOT SPEND TOO MUCH TIME DOING THIS. Tell the cops you have to go, as you think you might have been overheard. Hang up and leave discreetly but quickly.

The more often and the more people who call in such phoney tips, the more difficult it will be to trace these reports to any one person, the more time and money will be wasted by the cops, and the less credibility such calls will have. One must be very careful, as this could get you jail time if you are caught. But it will be a great help to every cannabis user in your area. If enough of this is done, soon judges will not sign warrants based only on “anonymous tips.”

-James Bong
banner pp Dealing with Anonymous Drug Tip Lines

Dealing with Anonymous Drug Tip Lines is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

Christmas Carols at the Local Police Station

Saturday, December 24th, 2011

Several folks from Keene, NH (FreeKeene.com) decided to pay the Keene Police a little visit on Friday, the day before Christmas Eve. Our, yes I was present as well, intention was to bring some Holiday cheer and a message to those at the Keene Police Station.

This holiday season I hope all those who are employed by tax dollars ask themselves one question, “If our job is so important why must the government force people to pay for it via taxation, whether they like the service being provided or not?” And if you come to the conclusion that individuals would pay you (voluntarily) to do what you do now, then quit your job and start your own business – without the government’s permission. Cause all I want for Christmas is a choice, something ALL police officers take from a person when they choose to work for Uncle Sam.

Enjoy the jingles.

Christmas Carols at the Local Police Station is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

Legalizing Marijuana: Police Officers Speak Out (A response)

Saturday, December 24th, 2011

LEGALIZE IT by ShaggyMagic Legalizing Marijuana: Police Officers Speak Out (A response)

Doug Wylie posted up an article Friday over at PoliceOne.com about the marijuana legalization debate and what cops have to say about the issue. What’s most surprising is the poll results he posted about stating that 44% of cops on the site are in favor of legalization or on the fence, which is up from a 2009 poll they conducted that only recieved 36% in favor or on the fence.

It’s best to start with the reason marijuana is illegal in the first place, a history that has much to do with racism, control, and protectionism. For most of human history marijuana has been legal, and it’s use dates back to 7,000 BC. It had many uses, it was used for food, clothes, rope, paper and many other things. As a matter of fact, the Declaration of Independence was written on hemp paper. The first marijuana law in America was enacted in Jamestown Colony in 1619 ordering farmers to grow Indian hemp and you could actually be jailed for NOT growing hemp during shortages, it was even legal to pay your taxes with hemp at this time. The 1850 Census counted over 8,000 hemp farms in the US.

But then came the racism factor. In 1910 the Mexican revolution spread across the border and there started a rash of bad feelings between the smaller hemp farms and the larger ones who were using cheap Mexican labor. The Great Depression followed and when jobs became scarce, California passed a law outlawing “preparations of hemp” or “loco weed” as many Mexicans smoked marijuana.

Utah followed by outlawing marijuana after Mormons who traveled to Mexico were bringing the weed back to the state and smoking it. Targeting Mexican-Americans,  8 other states passed laws outlawing marijuana between 1915 and 1927. One Montana legislator, after the state outlawed marijuana in 1927, was quoted as saying,

When some beet field peon takes a few traces of this stuff… he thinks he has just been elected president of Mexico, so he starts out to execute all his political enemies.

A Texas legislator was quoted as saying,

All Mexicans are crazy, and this stuff [marijuana] is what makes them crazy.

In the East, it was all about stopping the “Negroes” from smoking it, as it was part of the Jazz scene sweeping the Eastern United States. Said most newspapers in 1934

Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men’s shadows and look at a white woman twice.

Alcohol prohibition was written into the Constitution because the view at the time was that the Feds did not have the power to outlaw alcohol and drugs (alcohol is a drug, so that’s like repeating yourself) therefore Congress passed the Harrison Act in 1914 to tax cocaine and opiates. If you did not follow the law you found yourself in a lot of trouble with the Treasury Department. Therefore, in 1930, the Treasury Department created the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, thus starting the all out war on marijuana. The following quotes are attributed to the founding Director Henry Anslinger

There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.”

“…the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races.”

“Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death.”

“Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”

“Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing”

“You smoke a joint and you’re likely to kill your brother.”

“Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind.”

Anslinger then introduced the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, complete with racist remarks and stories of ax murderers who were high on the drug.  The legislation passed and the rest is history as they say.

Going back to the article in question, the debate was brought up after a Border Patrol agent  was fired for telling a coworker during idle chat that cross border violence would cease if the drug war was ended. A belief that isn’t really that uncommon amongst police officers. I know more than one police officer here in my small town that really has no problem with marijuana smokers. I’ve witnessed in person, a cop walk in on people smoking pot and done nothing about it, not even give them a warning.

But can a police officer actually be fired for voicing this opinion? It happens, as the New York Times has reported. Those cops in the story that were fired for their pro-legalization are now likely to win big settlements from their departments.

This revelation may upset some pro-drug war cops, like the ones cited in the PoliceOne article. It shows that alot of cops are actually against the drug war, and the poll numbers found by PoliceOne.com probably would be closer to 50/50 if more cops were not afraid of speaking out. But now that they are seeing they can speak out and win money because of it, you may see this more and more. I’d love to see the poll results in a couple years.

What these anti-legalization cops do not understand, is that their belief kills innocent, peaceful people. Domestic drug law enforcement has killed 48 people in 2011 (as of December 9), the latest being 24 year old Samyr Ceballos of Santa Monica, California. After being investigated by the police, he was followed home and tazed after refusing to get out of his SUV. Cops then claim he reached for his gun and was then shot and killed. Police are refusing to release the names of the officers after threats from a local gang.

Which brings me to my next point, gangs are what they are because of prohibition. Al Capone would have been a nobody had alcohol never been outlawed, and big time notorious gangsters these days would be nobodys if not for drugs being outlawed. When you outlaw something like drugs and weapons, it just goes underground, where lots of shady and dangerous people make a profit off of it. They will do whatever it takes to transport these things to the people that want them because the demand is still there. The more police crack down on drugs, the more dangerous the work becomes for the gangs to get their products to their clients, therefore the price of those illegal products rises.

And to be able to move the products, they have to buy off police officers, which is where corruption comes from. Border Agents, sheriff deputies and local cops everywhere are being bought off by drug cartels in order to look the other way when shipments come in to their jurisdiction. And can you really blame them? These people have families to feed and take care of and who can’t resist a little extra cash? Men are easily corruptible, a lesson I reinforce to my daughter everyday, it’s the danger of having too much power.

The Drug War is also costing alot of money to enforce, it pads the budgets of police departments, which is why a lot of cops are in favor of it. It allows them to get more money from the federal government, which they use to buy more guns and, nowadays, tanks. But police departments aren’t immune from this recession, as departments nationwide have been laying off officers to save money across the board. But Philadelphia found a way to fight back against this, they essentially decriminalized small amounts of marijuana posession and actually saved $2 million.

Michael S. Rozeff wrote a short piece on the Lew Rockwell blog over the summer about the unintended consequences of the drug war,

1. The state forbids something, like drugs.

2. Production MUST therefore be illegal, and production will occur because the demand doesn’t disappear when the drug is made illegal.

3. Going illegal is a necessary condition for all those who are willing to  produce and supply the drug. The profit motive remains, even heightens, and so there will always be people who will go illegal.

4. The people attracted into the illegal business are going to be the people who already have the least inhibitions about doing anything immoral and illegal. They are the ones most willing to take risks.

5. Competition is all within illegality. This means that moral rules that govern peaceful competition do not prevail among the suppliers. They therefore select among any actions and rules that bring them survival, profits, and growth. The most effective means of gaining market share and preventing the incursion of rivals within a situation of illegal rivalry will include a reputation and readiness to kill and maim so as to enforce one’s will.

6. The means include corrupting law enforcement. This is virtually a necessity and always occurs in these conditions. The results include gang warfare. It also includes uneasy peace among gangs and division into territories and fiefdoms.

7. The competition need not lead to the practices mentioned in this article whose aim is to find and groom the most merciless killers. Yet it probably happened in the 1920s gangs that this mode of competition also prevailed as the many stories of Capone suggest. Most gangster movies also depict that the more brutal gangsters rise to the top.

One thing the government is either ignorant about, or just ignores, is that they can’t even keep drugs out of their own prisons, so how they can they keep them out of the entire country? Marijuana, as is the case with most every outlawed drug, has many health benefits. One of the most recent findings is that it may make you a better driver.

An amazing study authored by professors D. Mark Anderson (University of Montana) and Daniel Rees (University of Colorado) shows that traffic deaths have been reduced in states where medical marijuana is legalized.According to their findings, the use of medical marijuana has caused traffic related fatalities to fall by nearly nine percent in states that have legalized medical marijuana (via The Truth About Cars).

And one idea I know officers can get behind is saving lives of cops. How many cops have died prosecuting the drug war?(Don’t believe the medias numbers on this) Being a cop isn’t even one of the top 10 most dangerous jobs, but how much safer would it be if they didn’t have to deal with the dangerous people that get involved with distributing illegal products who are just as armed as the cops?

And finally, the most obvious point, who owns your body? Does a group of strangers have the right to punish you for putting something in your own body? Do you own your body or does the government? The government thinks they do, but just try and tell them otherwise. You, and only you, have the right to make the final decision on what goes into your body, nobody can legally force you otherwise.

image5 Legalizing Marijuana: Police Officers Speak Out (A response)

And I leave you with one final point, made by one of my favorite bands, 311, in their anti-drug war song “Offbeat Bareass”

the war on drugs may be well intentioned
but it falls f—ing flat when you stop and mention
the over crowded prisons where a rapists gets paroled
to make room for a dude who has sold
a pound of weed to me that’s a crime
here’s to good people doin time y’all

Legalizing Marijuana: Police Officers Speak Out (A response) is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

Despite Claims to the Contrary, Officer Deaths Have Not Increased

Friday, December 23rd, 2011

Last week CNN published yet another article claiming that violence against police officers has “spiked”.  The mainstream media continues to publish these claims without doin any research to verify whether or not the claims are true.

Copblock Despite Claims to the Contrary, Officer Deaths Have Not Increased

CNN claims that the number of police officers killed in the line of duty during 2011 has increased by 14% over 2010.  That claim is simply untrue.  According to Officer Down Memorial Page, with 10 days left in 2011, there have been 158 officer fatalities.**  At this time last year there had been 156 officer fatalities.  The total number of officer deaths for 2010 was 161.  Despite claims to the contrary, 2011 is shaping up to be at least as safe of a year for officers as 2010.

One of the few things the CNN article got right was the fact that officer deaths due to automobile accidents decreased in 2011 when compared with 2010.  This drop in automobile accident deaths accounts for the decrease in total deaths.  The article then goes on to insinuate that because officer deaths due to gunfire will, for the first time in 14 years, outnumber deaths due to automobile accidents, violence against officers has spiked.  This again is simply untrue.  Gunfire deaths will outnumber automobile deaths this year, not because there were so many more gunfire deaths, but because there was a sharp decrease in automobile accident deaths.  The number of gunfire deaths so far this year stands at 62***.  The number of gunfire deaths for 2010 was 59.  Hardly the spike in violence towards officers the media would have you believe existed.  The most that can be said from the data is that the steady DOWNWARD trend that has occurred over the last 25 years seems to have leveled off the last few years, but two years of data can not tell us whether or not this stalled decline will continue. (Read more about the data for the last 25 years here.)

Steve Groeninger, senior communications director of the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, asserts that the imaginary sharp increase in death toll can be attributed to budget cuts.  First, as shown above, there is no sharp increase in deaths, but let’s say that there was an increase.  Groeninger does not offer a single shred of evidence that it can be linked to budget cuts. Craig Floyd, chairman and CEO of the fund, makes the outrageous insinuation that violence against officers today can be compared to one of the deadliest decades for police officers, the 70′s. The average number of officers felonious killed each year during the 70′s was 126, more than double the average for the last decade.  There is simply no comparison to be made between those two decades, but Floyd would have you believe otherwise.  Both Groeninger’s and Floyd’s assertions are nothing more than gross propaganda aimed to drum up more support for the police and more public outcry about the budget cuts that they are facing.

But why does it matter whether violence against officers is increasing or decreasing. Isn’t all lost of life due to violence tragic?  Of course.  Death due to violence is a complete waste of human potential and is always tragic in my eyes, but the propaganda that is being fed to the public is also being fed to police officers themselves.  Combine this with the ever increasing militarization of your local police department, a very dangerous situation is being created for us mere mundanes.

It was recently reported that, thanks to a Defense Department program, known as program 1033, local law enforcement agencies were given almost 500 million dollars worth of military gear in 2011.  That is almost double what was given in 2010.  The militarization of  local police departments, a trend that started decades ago, appears to be accelerating.  Police departments are obtaining grenade launchers, helicopters, robots, drones, M-16s, and armored vehicles that the military no longer has use for.

Some police departments are even militarizing their waterways.  The Texas Department of Safety has announced that they now have a Navy, made up of a new armored, swift boat complete with six mounted high caliber machine guns.  The plan is to have a fleet of six of these boats.  There is no denying that the police have been thoroughly militarized.

Of course, the mere possession of this equipment is not necessarily cause for concern.  I frankly wouldn’t care if my neighbor had every single one of the above mentioned equipment. Every individual, including police officers, have a right to defend themselves with whatever equipment they deem necessary. The concern is that police departments all too often use this equipment,not in defense while attempting to bring in a violent criminal, but to go on the offense.  As police departments have become militarized, we have seen a dramatic increase in paramilitary SWAT raids for everything from low-level nonviolent drug offenses to investigating underage drinking.  Over the course of three decades we have seen the number of these paramilitary raids increase from about 2000 a year to more than 50,000 a year.  We no doubt will see even more as police departments look for reasons to use their new military toys.

We have already witnessed this mentality.  Radley Balko reported in September that a column in Tactical Response magazine encouraged SWAT commanders to “poach work” in order to stay active, even if it meant doing warrant service and drug raids. Balko notes that,

The author is actually suggesting SWAT commanders lobby to have their teams deployed in situations for which they normally wouldn’t be to ensure they’re in good practice. Put another way, he suggests they practice their door smashing, room-clearing, flash-grenade deploying, and other paramilitary tactics on less-than-violent people, so they’re in better form when a real threat arises. Never mind that there are going to be living, breathing, probably bleeding people on the receiving end of these “practice” raids.

The author seems to have no problem advocating the introduction of violence into an otherwise nonviolent situation.  You can imagine that police departments will no doubt want to “practice” with all their new toys as well.

Arthur Rizer, a Virginia lawyer who has been a civilian police officer and a military police officer pointed out to The Daily that police officers and the military are two very different things.

If we’re training cops as soldiers, giving them equipment like soldiers, dressing them up as soldiers, when are they going to pick up the mentality of soldiers?” he asked.

If you look at the police department, their creed is to protect and to serve. A soldier’s mission is to engage his enemy in close combat and kill him. Do we want police officers to have that mentality? Of course not.

We already know that innocent people die at the hands of police officers because “officer safety” is apparently more important than the publics safety, but we don’t know how many.  While the Officer Down Memorial Page enjoys a grant from the Justice Department, no such grant exist to collect the number and the names of those needlessly killed by the police.  The Innocents’ Project, created by Clyde Voluntaryist, is attempting to do something about this lack of data by tracking those needlessly killed by the police, using the internet.  Of course, this method has its problem, but even with limited ability to track all cases, the numbers that have been collected are quite troubling. According to the Innocents’ Project, 34 people have been fatally shot in questionable circumstances, 8 people have died after being shocked with a taser, 6 people have lost their lives in accidental deaths due to SWAT raids, and 6 people have died while in or being taken into custody, including the beating death of Kelly Thomas.  How many more died but didn’t make headlines?  How many of these deaths were due to cops that were so hopped up on the “War on Cops” propaganda that they were too quick to make their way up the continuum of force?  How many more deaths will we see in the future as the propaganda proliferates and cops are even more thoroughly militarized?

That is why it matters whether violence against police officers is really increasing or not.  When we combine military tactics, military training, military equipment, and military mentality with the never-ending expansion of things deemed criminal, making it inevitable that more and more people will interact with police officers, then add a big dose of  the endless propaganda about “increased violence” towards cops, we are left with a situation where cops are going to be even more taser, baton and trigger happy than they already are.  It makes for more dangerous streets, not for cops, but for the public.


 

 

**The number of officer fatalities quoted by CNN (166) came from the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, whose stated mission ” is to generate increased public support for the law enforcement profession”.   The Officer Down Memorial Page (ODMP), whose stated mission is to simply “honor America’s fallen law enforcement”, has reported numbers that have been consistent over the years with the FBI’s Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted reports (LEOKA) while the numbers you will find published by the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund have not, so for the purpose of this discussion I use the numbers provided by ODMP as they appear to be more reliable. Also, ODMP has a name and a description of each of the 158 officers that have been killed, while the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund does not have a name and a description for all 166 of officers that it claims to have been killed.

***The number of gunfire deaths that you will find on ODMP for 2011 is 59.  One of the officers that is included in this count was shot and paralyzed in 1986.  He did not die until this year and the claim is that his death, 26 years later, was due to complications from being shot and paralyzed.  While it may be legitimate to claim such a thing, I excluded his death from the total gunfire deaths because his being shot in 1986 does not reflect on the amount of violence police officers are facing in 2011.

Despite Claims to the Contrary, Officer Deaths Have Not Increased is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

Support drug reform? If you do these, you’re not helping your cause.

Tuesday, December 20th, 2011

I spend quite a bit of my free time reading news articles, blogs, and other internet media about the war on drugs. While it’s great that there’s so much support out there for ending prohibition, I can’t help but notice that a lot of my fellow anti-prohibitionists are doing a lot of things that hurt the cause. Here I’ll list three of these things and try to explain why, at least in my opinion, they’re not helping.

Stop making drug reform a partisan issue

One of the biggest things I see – especially on message boards and in comment sections on articles – is well-intentioned Democrats putting all the blame on Republicans for prohibition and for less restrictive drug laws not getting passed. It’s obviously true that Democrats support drug reform at a higher rate than Republicans. I’m not arguing with the results of pretty much every poll out there on the subject. However, the GOP or even conservatism in general is NOT the problem. In fact, both 2012 presidential hopefuls that have explicitly stated their support for pot legalization (Ron Paul and Gary Johnson) are Republicans. Obama constantly dodges the issue when he’s asked about it and even on the rare occasion that he actually answers questions about it he gives a canned answer or flip flops around and changes the subject.

What I’m trying to say is, let the Republicans in on our efforts! If we keep drug reform as an exclusively liberal issue, it will be a hell of a lot harder to get anything done. For one, there are plenty of prohibitionist Democrats out there – just as there are plenty of anti-prohibition Republicans out there. The only thing accomplished by making this a partisan issue is the alienation of a lot of conservatives who would otherwise at least consider supporting an end to prohibition. There are several good arguments against prohibition on both sides of the two-party coin – in fact, I tend to favor the conservative-leaning arguments for reform myself – so why shut out a good chunk of people and arguments that can only help the cause? Getting rid of the liberal “flavor” drug reform has in a lot of people’s minds can do nothing but increase support.

Quit hiding behind medical marijuana laws

This is related to my last point about shutting out good arguments. A lot of people I’ve seen interviewed about medical marijuana (which we should really be calling medical cannabis – I’ll touch on that point later) insist that “we only support sick people having access to marijuana and are completely against personal use!” First off, 99% of the time you pretty much have to be an idiot to actually believe that. Second, people who do support legalization of personal use have an awful lot of explaining to do later on if they use that line. It would be infinitely better for them to say something along the lines of “I personally think recreational use should be allowed, but this particular bill we’re talking about now only applies to medical use.” Medical cannabis laws are a good first step towards full legalization, but it’s a lot harder to get beyond that first step if supporters have already established themselves as only supporting medical use.

Stop calling it marijuana!

This one will seem like I’m just nit-picking at first, so I’ll start off with a simple question: Who uses the word “marijuana” the most? I know it’s not the people who use it, at least not the ones I’ve met. Pretty much every pot smoker I know generally says “weed” or “bud,” with a few saying “herb,” “green,” or “ganja” in casual conversations amongst themselves. Otherwise, “pot” is overwhelmingly the word of choice. In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever heard any Joe Stoner refer to the plant as “marijuana” without a humorous undertone, with the possible exception of legal contexts. “Pot” (and to a much lesser extent “weed”) also seems to be the word of choice among non-users – non-users covering a wide range of demographics, from the guy who would take a toke from time to time if his job didn’t drug test him to the guy who has no interest or opinion on the plant to the guy who thinks all pot smokers are idiots.

So I’ll ask it again – who actually says “marijuana?” The answer is hardcore prohibitionists – the “drugs are bad, m’kay?” crowd. Politicians, prosecutors, police, people in the “treatment” and drug testing industries who want to make a buck off your “addiction” whether or not you’re actually addicted – these are the people who use the word “marijuana.” Why do they call it marijuana? Why not just call the plant cannabis, its actual name? When pot first became illegal in 1937, Harry Anslinger and his prohibitionist cronies used yellow journalism to plant the seeds (no pun intended) of fear in people’s heads. This included getting people to associate cannabis with blacks and hispanics, a problem still seen in the justice system today despite statistics that show drug use to occur at similar levels across races. Below is an example of Anslinger’s taking advantage of his era’s prevalent racism:

“There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.“…the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races.” Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death.”Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.”Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing”You smoke a joint and you’re likely to kill your brother.“Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind.”

In fact, the word “marijuana” has its origin in the early prohibitionist movement. The word was invented not by hispanics but by racists trying to build an association between hispanics and cannabis. If you don’t believe me, I suggest you read up on early 20th century medications. Cannabis was a key ingredient in a lot of these medications, and I can guarantee you that the word “marijuana” is nowhere to be found on the labels. Instead, the labels called the plant what it is – “Cannabis sativa” or “Cannabis indica.” So be careful what words you use when you talk about the legalization movement – the word “marijuana” has a built-in negative connotation that permeates through its little-known origins even today.

I hope anyone who reads this finds it helpful, or at least puts more thought into their conversations about prohibition. Smoker or not, liberal or conservative, professional protester or barely pays attention, it doesn’t matter. As long as you believe the war on drugs is a failure, you can help move things in the right direction. It doesn’t matter if you email elected officials in your state, hold up signs on the capital steps, or even casually bring it up when talking to a friend. Anything that gets people to think is a step forward.

-Cantrell

Submitted via CopBlock.org’s Submission tab.

 

Support drug reform? If you do these, you’re not helping your cause. is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

I’ve Been Raided and All I Got Was This Lousy Felony

Thursday, December 1st, 2011

This post was sent to us via CopBlock.org’s Submit Tab.

This month marks the anniversary of the day my home was attacked in military fashion by my local police, who after breaking down my door and running through my home with automatic rifles while screaming, handcuffed me and took me away to jail while my young granddaughter and daughter watched. Luckily we didn’t have a pet dog or it would have most assuredly been shot. Most know my story but in summary, this dramatic assault occurred for one reason only; I had ordered less than a months worth of some meds online so that I could live, which in theory could be gotten from any doctor. I assure you, there is nothing more to the story as far as why they did what they did and what my “crime” was. It’s a matter of public record.

The attack happened on the 5th of November 2010. To tell you the truth, that day came and went this year without a thought.  Although I didn’t remember on the exact day it actually occurred, it is definitely an event that I will never forget. It was the day my reality was given a huge perspective shift and while not pleasant, it was certainly instructive and cause for growth. I’m a huge fan of growth.

I’ve had a pretty busy year, which included creating a web site full of resources on the topic at hand and also writing and publishing a book. So, I thought in tribute to that life experience, I would list what I’ve learned this past year. Some things I knew about but had not experienced first hand until now.

THINGS I LEARNED THE PAST YEAR

1. If you can’t afford the astronomical cost for medical testing or treatment you indeed do not get tested or treated. The medical system is about profit only.
2. Millions who suffer severe chronic pain do not get relief because of the prohibition/drug war.
3. American prisons are the fullest in the world because of the prohibition/drug war.
4. The wide spread abuse that goes on in our prisons make GITMO seem like summer camp.
5. Constitutional and civil rights are ignored frequently because of the prohibition/drug war.
6. The wide spread corruption seen in law enforcement is because of the prohibition/drug war.
7. Over 150 military SWAT raids a day (over 70,000 a year) happen on nonviolent citizens because of the prohibition/drug war.
8. A great deal of our crime and violence is because of the prohibition/drug war.
9. Asset forfeiture is used and abused constantly because of the prohibition/drug war.
10. Police corruption is at an all time high because of the prohibition/drug war.
11. The reason we have prohibition and the drug war? Corporation profit and mass funding for those who fight it.

It was a very educational year for me, though what was learned was not pleasant. In fact, its downright scary. There are many things in our society that cause a good deal of damage but the War on Drugs seems to trump them all. And the reasons it continues, despite facts and proof of its damage, are the most disturbing of all.

Thousands of law enforcement officers, ex-narcotics agents, judges, lawyers, prison workers etc. speak out constantly and with great integrity against prohibition and the War on Drugs, having seen the damage it is doing and the lives being lost because of it. They know it does not work. They know the huge cost of its failure. They’ve seen men, women and children killed because of it. They’ve lost fellow officers because of it. They’ve seen families torn apart and destroyed because of it. They’ve seen the system so overburdened that they are not able to focus the real crimes because of it.

“Jailing people because they put certain chemicals into their bloodstream is a gross misuse of police and criminal law. Jailing drug users does not lessen drug use, and incarceration usually destroys the person’s life and does immense harm to that person’s family and neighborhood.” ~Joseph D. McNamara, Former Police Chief, 35 years in law enforcement.

There does seem to be a glimmer of hope as more and more American’s are realizing that things are not as they seem and what they have been told is not always the truth. If only social change were not such a slow process. But 40 plus years of lies are hard to undo. Again, I’m a huge fan of constant learning and growth; so, here is to my year of eduction and here’s hoping my next year will bring more of the same. I only hope its of a less dramatic nature.

I am a 52 year old mother, wife of 34 years, voter, student, web designer and author. (Though my “right” to vote has now been stripped away)

Nancy Rector

FinalCB.orgBanner1 Ive Been Raided and All I Got Was This Lousy Felony

I’ve Been Raided and All I Got Was This Lousy Felony is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

Patrick J. Sullivan, 2001 Sheriff of the Year, behind bars in a jail that bears his name

Wednesday, November 30th, 2011

 

According to CBS Denver (CO) Patrick J. Sullivan is being held on $250,000 bail awaiting charges claiming he offered an unknown male meth in exchange for sexual favors. From the article linked above:

The National Association of School Resource Officers gave Sullivan a Lifetime Achievement Award in 2002. At the time the executive director of NASRO, Curtis Lavarello, said of Sullivan, “You are not only committed to the SRO concept, but have truly spent your entire career making every effort to keep children safe.”

Sullivan served in law enforcement for 40 years, beginning in 1962 as a Littleton police officer and dispatcher. He joined the Arapahoe County Sheriff’s Office in 1979 as a captain and patrol division commander. He was named undersheriff in 1983 and appointed to the top job 6 months later.

Sullivan testified before congressional subcommittees on several occasions, weighing in on various law enforcement issues.

President Bill Clinton named Sullivan in 1995 to the National Commission on Crime Prevention and Control. According to a 1995 White House news release, Sullivan was a consultant to U.S. House Subcommittee on Crime and served on two advisory councils affiliated with the Department of Justice.

If you thought it couldn’t be more ironic, Sullivan was also awarded the “Sheriff of the Year” award in 2001 and noted as one of the top cops in the nation. Today, he sits behind bars in a facility named after the infamous sheriff.

This is your time to roll on the floor and laugh. Yes, Patrick J. Sullivan is behind bars at the “Patrick J. Sullivan Detention Center.” Priceless right.

Now that we’ve had our chuckle at the irony of the situation, let’s take a serious look at the matter. What happened here? A man decided to trade one good (meth) for a service (sex). Per the video above, two women stated that men in full riot gear stormed this man’s house and arrested him. There was no victim or violence and this was a consensual interaction amongst people. Does this really warrant the use of a S.W.A.T team? Is it worth the money to lock up Sullivan, or any drug offenders, for consensual decisions?

It appears that Sullivan is about to get some first hand experience of what happened to those he arrested for similar crimes for so many years. Though I wouldn’t pay to lock Sullivan up for these alleged crimes, maybe there’s a little karma going on here.

 

Patrick J. Sullivan, 2001 Sheriff of the Year, behind bars in a jail that bears his name is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

Driven By Drug War Incentives, Cops Target Pot Smokers, Brush Off Victims Of Violent Crime

Friday, November 25th, 2011

By Radley Balko via Huffington PostCHICAGO — As Jessica Shaver and I chat at a coffee shop in Chicago’s north-side Andersonville neighborhood, a police car pulls into the parking lot across the street. Then another. Two cops get out, lean up against their cars, and appear to gaze across traffic into the store. At times, they seem to be looking directly at us. Shaver, who works as an eyebrow waxer at a nearby spa, appears nervous.

 

“See what I mean? They follow me,” says Shaver, 30. During several phone conversations Shaver told me that she thinks a small group of Chicago police officers are trying to intimidate her. These particular cops likely aren’t following her; the barista tells me Chicago cops regularly stop in that particular parking lot to chat. But if Shaver is a bit paranoid, it’s hard to blame her.

A year and a half ago she was beaten by a neighborhood thug outside of a city bar. It took months of do-it-yourself sleuthing, a meeting with a city alderman and a public shaming in a community newspaper before the Chicago Police Department would pay any attention to her. About a year later, Shaver got more attention from cops than she ever could have wanted: A team of Chicago cops took down her door with a battering ram and raided her apartment, searching for drugs.

Shaver has no evidence that the two incidents are related, and they likely aren’t in any direct way. But they provide a striking example of how the drug war perverts the priorities of America’s police departments. Federal anti-drug grants, asset forfeiture policies and a generation of battlefield rhetoric from politicians have made pursuing low-level drug dealers and drug users a top priority for police departments across the country. There’s only so much time in the day, and the focus on drugs often comes at the expense of investigating violent crimes with victims like Jessica Shaver. In the span of about a year, she experienced both problems firsthand.

THE BATTERY

On the night of May 13, 2010, Shaver was smoking a cigarette with her friend Damon outside the Flat Iron bar in Wicker Park. She said she saw a woman walking away from the bar alone when two men began shouting profanities at her. The men then began walking toward the woman. “I made eye contact with her, and she looked like she was in trouble,” Shaver said.

Shaver shouted at the men to leave the woman alone, at which point she says the the two men turned their attention to her, approached her, and began shouting at her. Damon told the men to leave Shaver alone. They jumped Damon and began to beat him. Shaver said she then tried to pry the men off her friend, and managed to free him long enough for him to get away and call 911. Shaver said she was punched repeatedly, including in the face. She fell, stood up, and was hit in the face again. The men then robbed her and left. When she woke up the next morning with bruises, she went to the hospital. Doctors found a concussion and several contusions.

Two weeks later, Shaver still hadn’t heard from the detective assigned to her case. When she finally went to the police station in person to get an update on the investigation, she was told there was no record of the incident. She filed another report, but was told it was unlikely police would be able to track down the witnesses again, and that even if they were, the witnesses’ memories were likely to have faded. Shaver says she decided to investigate on her own. She went back to the Flat Iron and questioned customers and employees herself. A bartender gave her the men’s nicknames: “Cory” and “Sonny,” the guy who hit her. Shaver learned that Sonny was also a reputed cocaine dealer. She heard he had a violent streak, and had been banned from a number of neighborhood bars.

“I was scared,” Shaver said. “I’d heard bad things about this guy, and he knew who I was.”

Shaver is thoroughly tattooed, which makes her easy to recognize. So she dyed her hair, covered her tattoos with clothing, and kept investigating. She worked her way through social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace until she was able to put actual names to her attackers’ faces and nicknames. And yet she still couldn’t get anyone at Chicago PD to help her. “I gave them the guy’s name and everything,” she said. “There were even hip hop videos online with him in them. I told them, ‘That’s the guy!’ They still wouldn’t listen to me.”

In August 2010, three months after the attack, Shaver contacted a reporter for Time Out Chicago, who began asking around about her case. Shaver also met with Chicago Alderman Joe Marino. Shortly before the Time Out article went to press, a detective finally called Shaver down to the police station to identify her attacker. But even with her identification, the police didn’t arrest “Sonny.” He wasn’t charged with the assault until the following month, when he was arrested on an unrelated domestic violence charge.

Shortly after she finally identified her attacker at the police station, Shaver said the detective in charge of her case told her, “Now I don’t want to hear any more bitching from you.”

MISPLACED PRIORITIES

Arresting people for assaults, beatings and robberies doesn’t bring money back to police departments, but drug cases do in a couple of ways. First, police departments across the country compete for a pool of federal anti-drug grants. The more arrests and drug seizures a department can claim, the stronger its application for those grants.

“The availability of huge federal anti-drug grants incentivizes departments to pay for SWAT team armor and weapons, and leads our police officers to abandon real crime victims in our communities in favor of ratcheting up their drug arrest stats,” said former Los Angeles Deputy Chief of Police Stephen Downing. Downing is now a member of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, an advocacy group of cops and prosecutors who are calling for an end to the drug war.

“When our cops are focused on executing large-scale, constitutionally questionable raids at the slightest hint that a small-time pot dealer is at work, real police work preventing and investigating crimes like robberies and rapes falls by the wayside,” Downing said.

And this problem is on the rise all over the country. Last year, police in New York City arrested around 50,000 people for marijuana possession. Pot has been decriminalized in New York since 1977, but displaying the drug in public is still a crime. So police officers stop people who look “suspicious,” frisk them, ask them to empty their pockets, then arrest them if they pull out a joint or a small amount of marijuana. They’re tricked into breaking the law. According to a report from Queens College sociologist Harry Levine, there were 33,775 such arrests from 1981 to 1995. Between 1996 and 2010 there were 536,322.

Several NYPD officers have alleged that in some precincts, police officers are asked to meet quotas for drug arrests. Former NYPD narcotics detective Stephen Anderson recently testified in court that it’s common for cops in the department to plant drugs on innocent people to meet those quotas — a practice for which Anderson himself was then on trial.

At the same time, there’s increasing evidence that the NYPD is paying less attention to violent crime. In an explosive Village Voice series last year, current and former NYPD officers told the publication that supervising officers encouraged them to either downgrade or not even bother to file reports for assault, robbery and even sexual assault. The theory is that the department faces political pressure to produce statistics showing that violent crime continues to drop. Since then, other New Yorkers have told the Voice that they have been rebuffed by NYPD when trying to report a crime.

The most perverse policy may be asset forfeiture. Under civil asset forfeiture, police can seize property from people merely suspected of drug crimes. So long as police can show even the slightest link of drug activity to a car, some cash, or even a home, they can seize it. In the majority of cases, most or all of the seized cash goes back to the police department. In some cases, the department has taken possession of cars as well, but generally non-cash property is auctioned off, with the proceeds then going back to the department. An innocent person who has property seized must go to court and prove his property was earned legitimately, even if he was never charged with a crime. The process of going to court can often be more expensive than the value of the property itself.

Asset forfeiture not only encourages police agencies to use resources and manpower on drug crimes at the expense of violent crimes, it also provides an incentive for police agencies to actually wait until drugs are on the streets before making a bust. In a 1994 study reported in Justice Quarterly, criminologists J. Mitchell Miller and Lance H. Selva watched several police agencies delay busts of suspected drug dealers in order to maximize the cash the department could seize. A stash of illegal drugs isn’t of much value to a police department. Letting the dealers sell the drugs first is more lucrative.

Earlier this year, Nashville’s News 5 ran a report on how police in Tennessee are pulling over suspected drug dealers and seizing their cash along I-40, often without bothering to make an arrest. The station combed through police reports showing that officers spent 10 times as long policing the side of the interstate where a drug runner would be leaving after he sold his supply — and thus would be flush with sizable amounts of cash — than on the side where he was likely to be flush with drugs. The police were letting the drugs be sold in order to get their hands on the cash.

Back in Illinois, Gov. Pat Quinn (D) recently signed a new law that will require convicted drug dealers to reimburse the police agencies that arrested and prosecuted them. The law will provide even more incentive for departments to devote time and resources to drug crimes — and that shift comes at the expense of solving more serious crimes.

The bill does not require reimbursement from convicted rapists or murderers.

Which means battery victims like Shaver can expect even less cooperation from police as more officers are moved to investigations that pay for themselves — and then some.

THE RAID

 Driven By Drug War Incentives, Cops Target Pot Smokers, Brush Off Victims Of Violent Crime

Shaver’s next encounter with Chicago police came in April of this year. She and her then-boyfriend were living on the first floor of a three-story graystone in the Edgewood neighborhood. “Nate,” a friend of Shaver’s boyfriend whom Shaver describes as a “stoner hippie,” was between residences, and asked if he could sleep on their couch while he waited for his new apartment to become available. They agreed.

“He never had keys,” Shaver said. “He’d text us when he was coming home to sleep, and one of us would let him in. He had been here about a week before the raid.”

The raid came on the night of April 14, 2010, part of a series of drug raids across Chicago that night by the city’s Mobile Strike Force and Targeted Response Unit, essentially a SWAT team.

Shaver, her then-boyfriend and a roommate were in the apartment with her four dogs when the door flew open with the crash of a battering ram. “I thought we were being robbed,” Shaver recalled. “It wasn’t clear to us that they were cops at all. I had a flashback to my attack. I was just terrified. I peed myself. I had peed myself, and I was shaking, trying to gather my dogs while they were pointing these guns at me — these huge guns that could blow me apart. My Vizsla mix ran off, and I was afraid they were going to shoot it. I asked if I could get it, and they said ‘We don’t give a fuck about your dog.’”

According to the search warrant, the police were searching for Nate. Shaver said they looked through Nate’s belongings gathered on the couch and found about $900 and a sandwich bag filed with marijuana. They didn’t leave a receipt for what they took.

“They were going through his mail,” she said. “They tried to say he was my brother. They kept looking for some way to say he had always lived here. He had mail here, but it was mail he brought from his old place. It all had his old address on it.”

Shaver’s boyfriend and roommate were handcuffed. Shaver started to panic. She told the police about her prior assault, and asked if she could take some anti-anxiety medication and change her clothes. They refused.

“There were 20 to 25 cops in my apartment now. Some of them were in street clothes. Some of them were in SWAT clothes with face masks. They told me I wasn’t allowed to move. I wasn’t even certain they were police until about two hours later, when a uniformed cop showed up with the warrant,” she recalled.

Shaver says she heard laughter from her bathroom and bedroom. “They went to my bathroom and started going through all of my medication, laughing about how messed up I was,” she said. “I also have a ‘lady drawer,’ where I keep sex toys and some sex-related gag gifts friends have given me.” Shaver said that when the cops finally left, they had left her place a shambles. When she looked in her bedroom, the police had emptied the drawer and laid all of her sex toys out on her bed.

 Driven By Drug War Incentives, Cops Target Pot Smokers, Brush Off Victims Of Violent Crime

The raid ruined the door to Shaver’s apartment and she has since been evicted. She filed a complaint with Chicago PD, but never heard back. When she attempted to get a copy of the affidavit for the search warrant to see what probable cause they had for such a violent raid, she was told that since she was not the target of the raid, she is not allowed to see the affidavit. As for “Nate,” authorities have yet to issue a warrant for his arrest. Chicago PD and the officer who left Shaver his number after the raid did not return The Huffington Post’s requests for comment.

FIGHTING CONSENSUAL CRIMES IN A VIOLENT CITY

“This case is a perfect example of how the war on drugs distracts police from doing the job we hired them for,” Downing said.

Chicago is one of the most violent cities in the country, and is home to America’s most violent neighborhood. The city is usually left out of annual “Most Dangerous Cities” lists because of disputes between the state of Illinois and the FBI on how crimes are reported, but Chicago has roughly triple the murder rate of New York City, and double that of Los Angeles. Crime has gone down in Chicago over the last 20 years as it has in the rest of the country, but at a slower rate than in cities of similar size.

Perhaps more tellingly, the city’s clearance rate — the percentage of homicides solved by police — was 70 percent in 1991. It dropped to under 40 percent in 2008 and 2009. According to a report (PDF) from the criminal justice reform advocacy group The Sentencing Project, drug offenses made up 4.8 percent of Chicago PD arrests in 1980. In 2003, they made up 28.2 percent. The overall number of drug arrests increased 264 percent over that period. An analysis by the Marijuana Policy Almanac found that from 2002 to 2007 alone, overall pot arrests in Cook County jumped from 25,776 to 32,996.

The drug war’s financial incentives appear to be having an effect. A drug offender is much more likely to be arrested in Chicago than he was 10 or 20 or 30 years ago. But kill someone in Chicago, and you’re only about half as likely to be caught as you were in the early 1990s.

Last July, more than a year after her attack, Shaver’s assailant “Sonny” was finally convicted. He was sentenced to six months of probation. Reflecting back on the last tumultuous two years, Shaver says, “It just doesn’t make sense. Repeat violent offenders get to walk while casual pot smokers get terrorized by SWAT teams. I’m pretty disappointed in the justice system.”

Driven By Drug War Incentives, Cops Target Pot Smokers, Brush Off Victims Of Violent Crime is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights

Edward Forchion “NJ Weedman” Modern Day Hero

Tuesday, November 1st, 2011

UPDATE: 2011.11.03 Thanks to an unnamed person, we obtained “judge” DeLehey’s contact info. Feel free to let him know your thoughts on his levying of threats against Ed.

Charles A DeLehey
(609) 737-2202
108 Murphy Dr
Pennington, NJ 08534-1914

DeLehey’s secretary Laura Roche can be reached at: 609-518-2600 ext. 2712

“He’s a champion of the freedom of expression, with the courage to live what he preaches.”

So said Jim Babb (an awesome activist in his own right) about Ed Forchion, aka NJ Weedman. After becoming more familiar with Ed’s situation I think you’ll agree with the assessment.

From Philadelphia Weekly:

Forchion was eventually indicted on one count of felony possession with intent to distribute, and because of his prior conviction he now faces 12 years in jail. The Burlington County Prosecutor’s Office has already offered him a deal that would put him in the joint for about a year, but—haunted by regrets over taking a similar deal a decade ago—Forchion says he’s fighting this case to the bitter end. “Any deal that requires me to go to prison is not a deal to me,” he says. “I don’t want to spend four minutes in jail. I’m going all in. I want a fair and complete trial, and I want … 12 of my peers, to decide my fate. I got arrested on April Fool’s Day, and pretty soon we’ll find out who’s the fool—me, or the state.”

The 47-year-old’s trial is set to begin at the Burlington County courthouse on Tues., Oct. 18. Again, he’s representing himself, and again he’s planning to use a jury nullification defense—a risky strategy that will put the marijuana laws themselves on trial. If he loses, he forfeits his freedom and squanders the modestly successful life he cultivated for himself with his second chance. But, absurd as it may sound, a Forchion victory means that not only would he beat the system, he could potentially weaken those existing laws and help legions of fellow weedheads to escape similar prosecution. “I want to be the Roe v. Wade of marijuana legalization,” says Forchion.

charles delehey Edward Forchion NJ Weedman Modern Day HeroLast week at a pre-trial hearing in central Jersey’s Burlington County, “judge” Charles Delehey made a number of sweeping orders, which Babb summarized:

1) Ed has been forbidden to defend himself. The “judge” feels there is too great a chance of a mistrial.
2) Ed has been forbidden to mention jury nullification.
3) Ed has been forbidden to mention that he is a California licensed medical marijuana patient or that NJ is now in the process of establishing a medical marijuana program.

Basically, Ed is being blocked from making any meaningful defense. Facing the strong possibility of jail, Ed chose to have bone tumor removed from his leg prior to the “trial.” The judge granted his request for a 6 month continuance for Ed to recover. Ed had a similar condition the last time he was in jail. He was given aspirin for 8 months until an outside physician came to his rescue. Avoiding this situation again is very important.

Almost any rational person will agree that an individual has the right to put into their body what they choose, knowing that they alone are responsible for their actions. Otherwise, we are but slaves to those who define what is allowable and what is not. And though Ed has advocated such a perspective, on Saturday when I spoke to him on the phone he said that if people want to help him they can call “judge” Charles Delehey and tell him to “Give Weedman a fair trial.” That’s it. Ed is confident he can successfully shake the threats levied against him if the process unfolds as its supposed to rather than based on Delehey’s orders, which he says clearly violate the Sixth Amendment.

ed forchion Edward Forchion NJ Weedman Modern Day HeroHelp Ed:

  • Participate in a call flood -  despite claims of transparency DeLehey’s direct number isn’t public. If you can provide that to us we’ll throw your choice of a Cop Block t-shirt. In the meantime DeLehey’s secretary Laura Roche can be reached at: 609-518-2600 ext. 2712. Tell her to “judge” DeLehey’s contact info is now at the top of this post. Tell him to “Give Weedman a fair trial.” Of course, feel free have a more exhaustive conversation – perhaps communicate that “just doing your job” doesn’t make an action legitimate, or solicit thoughts on the use of force against peaceful people like Ed.
  • Donate to Ed’s legal defense fund
  • Read and share “NJWEEDMAN MUST WIN CASE TO CONTINUE HEALTH TREATMENT”
  • Support Ed on the ground in April when he’s scheduled to appear before DeLehey (we’ll post updates as they develop)
More:
NJWeedman.com
Philadelpha Weekly published
an exhaustive overview of Ed’s situation
Edward Forchion on Wikipedia
Press release about Ed by Julian Heicklen
Press release by Coalition for Medical Marijuana – NJ
Don’t Take the Plea flyers from FreeKeene.com
NeverTakeAPlea.org
The Fully Informed Jury Association

Edward Forchion “NJ Weedman” Modern Day Hero is a post from Cop Block - Badges Don't Grant Extra Rights