California Medical Marijuana Dispensary Owner Charlie Lynch Found Guilty in Grotesque Miscarriage of Justice

Charles Lynch, the owner of a medical marijuana dispensary in Morro Bay, California that was fully compliant with state laws, has been found guilty in federal court of pushing drugs. The grim details, courtesy of The Los Angeles Times:

The owner of a Morro Bay marijuana dispensary was found guilty today in federal court of five counts of distributing drugs.

Charles Lynch, the owner of the dispensary, faces a minimum of five years in prison.

His closely watched trial involved conflicting marijuana laws and went to a federal court jury Monday. Jurors were asked to determine if Lynch was guilty of violating federal drug laws.

During a week-and-a-half-long trial in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, federal prosecutors sought to depict Lynch as a common drug dealer who sold pot to teenagers and carried a backpack stuffed with cash.

Lynch was charged with distributing marijuana, conspiring to distribute marijuana and providing marijuana to people under the age of 21.

Whole news story here.

Lynch is one of the countless casualties of an idiotic and tragically long-running war on drugs. His shop scrupulously followed Golden State laws and when he opened his shop in Morro Bay, local officials attended the ribbon-cutting ceremony. And that kid he provided medical marijuana to? A high school athlete who had lost a leg to cancer and had a prescription from a Stanford-trained doctor (and in any case, Lynch only dealt with the boy's parents). Yes, a common drug dealer.

There's only one good possibility to come out of this verdict: That its manifest injustice and stupidity and inhumanity (to Lynch and his customers) will help spark a long overdue reaction to the drug war and its punishing toll on individuals and basic Constitutional rights.

reason has been covering this story closely. Its import goes beyond drug policy to questions about federalism and whether or not states can truly be laboratories of experimentation and it compounds the awful logic of the Supreme Court's dreadful ruling in Gonzales v. Raich (2005) which invoked the commerce clause in deciding that federal laws overrode state laws when it came to medical marijuana.

Click here for coverage, including video updates featuring key players in the case, of the trial of Lynch.

Click below to watch the Drew Carey Project documentary "Raiding California" that tells the truth about Charlie Lynch.

reason's drug war coverage here.

reason's medical marijuana coverage here.

Drew Carey defends medical marijuana here:

Comments

Colin | August 5, 2008, 7:50pm | #

Horrible.

It's a sad day for this country.

Naga Sadow | August 5, 2008, 7:50pm | #

Awful. Now where's Juanita to troll about where Lynch had it coming?

*looks under nearest bridge*

David E. Gallaher | August 5, 2008, 7:51pm | #

Would this story be different if Obama were Prez?

The "low-grade" war between the Feds and California differs only by degree with the Feds' wars on Colombia and Afghanistan.

I mean, are we after Osama in Afghanistan or poppies? Which is it?

KyleG | August 5, 2008, 8:01pm | #

I don't know what to do anymore. I've written letters, signed petitions, made phone calls, sent emails, voted, campaigned...how the fuck does one stop this shit?

TrickyVic | August 5, 2008, 8:04pm | #

Yeah, the feds can smell the blood now. This win is a green light for them to jump all over the dispensery owners.

juanita | August 5, 2008, 8:07pm | #

If he wanted to lead a successful criminal lifestyle he should have been more discrete.
Don't flaunt the crime if you cant do the time.

Jake Boone | August 5, 2008, 8:18pm | #

I can't believe I'm saying this, but Terry's "libertarian militia" is starting to sound downright reasonable to me.

DarkRail | August 5, 2008, 8:24pm | #

Amazingly disgusting.

Maybe the good news is that this is so vile it will cause some kind of public outcry. I'll certainly be at the protest against this whenever it happens, and protesting is something I never do.

State's rights are deader than ever.

I need a bigger gun.

Ironic | August 5, 2008, 8:33pm | #

"If he wanted to lead a successful criminal lifestyle he should have been more discrete.
Don't flaunt the crime if you cant do the time."

Umm, what crime? He followed all state laws and the United States COnsitution does not grant Congress or the president the power to ban such a product unless it crosses state lines. It did not.

Fluffy | August 5, 2008, 8:34pm | #

Well, what California should do here is make it illegal to interfere in the conduct of the business of a legal marijuana clinic, and then arrest federal law enforcement agents, US attorneys and judges who so interfere.

Jim Jones | August 5, 2008, 8:36pm | #

Here is a guy who clearly stepped on the wrong toes! This is what happens when you tick off the wrong person.

JT
www.Ultimate-Anonymity.com

Ironic | August 5, 2008, 8:36pm | #

"Well, what California should do here is make it illegal to interfere in the conduct of the business of a legal marijuana clinic, and then arrest federal law enforcement agents, US attorneys and judges who so interfere."

Hmm, sounds like a good idea. I wish all states would pass laws making it illegal for federal law enforcement to violate the U.S. Constitution. I would love to see some FBI thugs rot in a state prison.

Jaybird | August 5, 2008, 8:37pm | #

I was sure that this was not, in fact, a trial by jury before I clicked on the link.

Then I saw the sentence "Jurors were asked to determine if Lynch was guilty of violating federal drug laws."

At that point, I was sure that the Defense had much of their evidence suppressed.

Then I saw the sentence "Lynch's defense attorneys sought to portray him as a responsible businessman who had the blessing of Morro Bay's mayor and city attorney before opening his Central Coast Compassionate Caregivers."

What's wrong with the people on the jury that they couldn't have found *ONE* willing to hang?

Marc | August 5, 2008, 8:39pm | #

I have little hope for anyone to think critically of government.

Ironic | August 5, 2008, 8:42pm | #

Jaybird, the problem with juries is that often the best and brightest find ways of avoiding jury duty. I would LOVE to be on a jury in which someone has been accused of a "crime" that should not even be illegal. I would commit jury nullification. Please, I beg of you, if you care about liberty - serve on a jury if you get a jury notification. It is more important than voting - far more important than voting.
http://www.fija.org/

juanita | August 5, 2008, 8:42pm | #

The verdict is just.Lynch was knowingly violating federal law.He wasnt prosecuted in ca state court because they dont have a law for his crime anymore.

Fluffy | August 5, 2008, 8:46pm | #

What's wrong with the people on the jury that they couldn't have found *ONE* willing to hang?

The prosecutors no doubt just asked every potential juror, "Will you vote to convict this defendant even if his conduct was specifically legal by state law?" and threw off everyone who said No.

That's why you have to lie during voir dire of all drug cases, and then vote to nullify, people. If every libertarian would register to vote, and then show up for jury duty, and then nullify in all drug cases, the feds would go absolutely nuts. A minimum of 1 in 3 cases like this would go down in flames.

Alice Bowie | August 5, 2008, 8:50pm | #

Hey Juanita,

KEEP DOPE ALIVE !!!

Alice Bowie | August 5, 2008, 8:55pm | #

Why is it that I have such a different opinion than the police, government.

I'm really begining 2 b-lieve that it's not my opinion...These people r just pure hypocrats.

The fact that the Courts can pass a rule saying that "YOU CAN'T USE a CERTAIN DEFENSE". What if that FORBIDDEN DEFENSE is the ONLY one an innocent citizen has?

Tim Leary™ | August 5, 2008, 8:56pm | #

Anyone know where I can get some medical LSD?

Kthxbye. :-)

Peter Orvetti | August 5, 2008, 8:59pm | #

Is there some sort of Tenth Amendment Defense Society?

Ironic | August 5, 2008, 9:00pm | #

"The verdict is just.Lynch was knowingly violating federal law.He wasnt prosecuted in ca state court because they dont have a law for his crime anymore."

Juanita, show me where in the United States Constitution either the United States Congress or the POTUS is given the power to ban medical marijuana if it does not cross state lines.

Peter Orvetti | August 5, 2008, 9:01pm | #

Fluffy,

I agree with you about the nullification, but when I've been in voir dire before, I have not considered being untruthful. I don't want to fight hypocrisy with deception.

Actually, the last case I was called on, the prosecutor looked fairly giddy to see me -- a white middle-class male in D.C. -- for his drug case, and I actually saw his face fall when I told the judge I supported legalization. I was not seated.

Alice Bowie | August 5, 2008, 9:02pm | #

Hey Ironic...u know Janita is a Marijuana troll...right ?

Ironic | August 5, 2008, 9:06pm | #

"If every libertarian would register to vote, and then show up for jury duty, and then nullify in all drug cases, the feds would go absolutely nuts."

I agree, even if you are someone who does not vote because you think it is unethical or does no good or something this is a reason to at least REGISTER to vote. You might save someone's life or at least give someone a better life. You might prevent a man with cancer from getting raped by a cell mate.

Paul | August 5, 2008, 9:07pm | #

I remember I posted something about us getting to the point where all we can do is negotiate reasonable surrender terms on the WoD.

They're in your houses, drinkin' your beer, and sleeping with your women... but your victory is juuuust around the corner. I'm sure of it.

Ironic | August 5, 2008, 9:09pm | #

"Hey Ironic...u know Janita is a Marijuana troll...right ?"

Thanks for the info, I didn't actually. Still, it would be interesting to see if she has an answer for my last question to her.

MP | August 5, 2008, 9:10pm | #

That's why you have to lie during voir dire of all drug cases

Jail time is a pretty big disincentive for me to not tow the line. Maybe if I was 21, single, and childless. But nowadays, it would take some pretty high stakes to make me willing to take that chance.

spur | August 5, 2008, 9:13pm | #

This bust was a political move by the DEA -- not to stop dispenseries as a whole to to keep a lid on the ones run the most professionally -- close down the well intentioned clubs and let the less scrupulous clubs continue and get a bad word in the communities and allow the communities to turn against medical marijuana and the dispenseries and then the local councils / state legislature will do the DEAs bidding.

Horrible -- Horrible

Ironic | August 5, 2008, 9:14pm | #

A lot of voir dire is just OPINION right? How can someone prove you were not a strong supporter of the WOD when you filled out that paperwork but changed your mind after looking at the person on the stand who might get raped in the ass because he smoked a plant that might help him keep down his meds? That kind of thing could VERY WELL change someone's mind. OR am I missing something?

Alice Bowie | August 5, 2008, 9:16pm | #

,,,

Alice Bowie | August 5, 2008, 9:25pm | #

Your not missing anything. People are JUST plain cruel...Especially when it comes to Drug War.

Alice Bowie | August 5, 2008, 9:27pm | #

Perhaps some of you can remember Vietnam...but, I believe that the Government has been going Ape-Shit since.

Out defeat in Vietnam has always been attributed to the fact when the entire country is high...we tend to be 'anti-war'.

juanita | August 5, 2008, 9:27pm | #

congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce if there was no marijuana dispensary the addict might buy it out of state

MP | August 5, 2008, 9:30pm | #

FWIW, Classic Julian Sanchez post about his personal experience regarding voir dire.

Lin Zexu | August 5, 2008, 9:30pm | #

"Out defeat in Vietnam has always been attributed to the fact when the entire country is high...we tend to be 'anti-war'."

Some of you may find this drug war interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_war

Ironic | August 5, 2008, 9:35pm | #

"congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce if there was no marijuana dispensary the addict might buy it out of state"

If the entire transaction is within a single state and the plant is grown in that same state how is that "interstate" under any circumstances?

Occam's toothbrush | August 5, 2008, 9:37pm | #

the problem with juries is that often the best and brightest find ways of avoiding jury duty.

That's only half the story. The attorneys on both sides don't want critical thinkers on the jury either. Too unpredictable and difficult to manipulate.

Disclosure: I've been zapped during voir dire thrice, each time by the prosecution, so that might color my attitude a bit.

MJ Troll | August 5, 2008, 9:51pm | #

ironic:

see Raich

All of the liberal SCOTUS Justices, in the mold of future President Barack Obama nominees (+ Scalia), voted that even growing and consuming your own weed is subject to federal regulation on interstate commerce grounds.

Don't worry though, Obama will support the feds holding off on the raids if the marijuana is approved by the FDA. FDA approved marijuana will soon be legal in medical marijuana states as soon a sObama is elected, keeps his vague promises, and the FDA gets around to approving med MJ as safe and effective.In other words, NEVER !!!

MJ Troll | August 5, 2008, 9:58pm | #

The United Nations applauded the US Supreme Court's decision to keep medical marijuana illegal under federal law. If you want legal marijuana you might consider following the John Birch Society's campaign to Get US out of the United Nations! We are obligated by treaty to keep drugs illegal.This is one reason why liberal internationalists will never permit legal medical marijuana .

Ironic | August 5, 2008, 10:01pm | #

I am not a member of the JBS but I do support getting the United States out of the United Nations.

John C Jackson | August 5, 2008, 10:05pm | #

I am a nonviolent person but I am beginning to think the only way to "stop this shit" involves forceful means.

Alice Bowie | August 5, 2008, 10:08pm | #

Look kiddies at the John Birch Society.

How can u get the US out of a building in the middle of Midtown Manhattan?

Do u really think the United Nations is not the United States?

Tell me, how many brown 'pickup truck drivin' americans would have any respect for the UN if it was in China?

Bodine Jones | August 5, 2008, 10:15pm | #

Charlie Lynch is my son and my heart is truly saddened at the verdict of the jury. I continue to have faith that all will be well. Charlie is a good man that operated his dispensary in good faith and according to the laws of California. For those of you that have an opinion otherwise, that is your choice, for those of you that believe in Charlie Your continued support is appreciated, and if you are in a position to donate to Charlie's cause, that also would be appreciated. To donate, please visit www.friendsofccl.com. My email is [e-mail]. For those of you that agree with the verdict, shame on you.
I remain, Proud and Loving mother of Charles C Lynch

Ironic | August 5, 2008, 10:16pm | #

"Do u really think the United Nations is not the United States?"

Yes, I do. While I certainly agree the U.S. Government is both corrupt and inept, the United Nations makes the U.S. Government look benign. Watch Hotel Rwanda sometime and you will see the difference between the United Nations and The United States. Have a box of Kleenex handy - that movie would make even a battle-hardened marine cry.

Robert Goodman | August 5, 2008, 10:17pm | #

I hung a jury in a federal narcotics trial. It ain't hard. And it's fun to fool people. It's especially fun to have judges & prosecutors by the balls knowing there's nothing they can do about you.

Ironic | August 5, 2008, 10:19pm | #

Good for you Robert Goodman, we need more people like you.

perilisk | August 5, 2008, 10:22pm | #

Wait, do you really need to -lie- to a federal prosecutor? If he specifically asks if you can convict based on the facts of federal law, ignoring state law, feel free to say "yes". After all, most of us libertarians believe the facts of federal law are that Congress is not empowered to regulate the trade of controlled substances, with the possible exception of those trades that involve international or interstate trafficking, regardless of the Supreme Court's reprehensible and tortured reasoning in Raich.

If the prosecution elects not to show (or cannot show) that the defendant did engage in interstate/international drug commerce, then we vote not guilty on grounds that the Congressional law is not constitutional, being overly broad. If he demands our reasoning, he can't say we perjured ourselves, because state law never entered into that decision.

Occam's toothbrush | August 5, 2008, 10:27pm | #

You guys do know that a hung jury doesn't mean the accused goes free, right? If there's one thing we've seen from prosecutors in drug cases, it's that if at first they don't succeed, try, try again.

Colin | August 5, 2008, 10:30pm | #

Best of luck, Mrs. Jones.

We're all with you (all those that count.)

Ironic | August 5, 2008, 10:35pm | #

Yes, Mrs. Jones. My thoughts are with you and your son. This is a sad day.

Elemenope | August 5, 2008, 10:48pm | #

Well, what California should do here is make it illegal to interfere in the conduct of the business of a legal marijuana clinic, and then arrest federal law enforcement agents, US attorneys and judges who so interfere.

Fluffy, I've been wondering why they don't do that for a long fucking time. And California is *the state* to do it; big, ornery, quixotic, and unpredictable as they are.

The Angry Optimist | August 5, 2008, 10:50pm | #

He followed all state laws and the United States COnsitution does not grant Congress or the president the power to ban such a product unless it crosses state lines. It did not.

The Feds have this power thanks to this little doozy of a decision, which you'll see pimped hardcore in Raich.

Next time some "progressive" talks up what a great "liberal" FDR was, you can feel free to throw this and Korematsu back in his smug freakin' face.

Fluffy, I've been wondering why they don't do that for a long fucking time. And California is *the state* to do it; big, ornery, quixotic, and unpredictable as they are.

Because when it's all said and done and the shit hit the fan, the States handed over their authority over their respective National Guards a loooong time ago.

The Bearded Hobbit | August 5, 2008, 11:03pm | #

There's only one good possibility to come out of this verdict: That its manifest injustice and stupidity and inhumanity (to Lynch and his customers) will help spark a long overdue reaction to the drug war and its punishing toll on individuals and basic Constitutional rights.

.. I'm holding my breath ..

.. blue-faced Hobbit

John C. Randolph | August 6, 2008, 12:37am | #

The voters of California did a very fine thing by passing the medical marijuana laws, but it's time to take the next step. We must not only legalize drugs in Calfornia entirely, we must also make it a felony for anyone to interfere with a patient trying to obtain or ingest their medication.

If the feds want to come here and harass sick people, they should be facing hard time for it.

-jcr

John C. Randolph | August 6, 2008, 12:40am | #

Mrs. Jones,

I'm very sorry that you and your family are suffering at the hands of a power-crazed federal government. Your son was trying to help people in pain, and I hope that he never doubts that he did the right thing.

-jcr

John C. Randolph | August 6, 2008, 12:47am | #

Lynch was knowingly violating federal law.

Lynch knew he was doing the right thing by helping people who needed his product. The federal law you allude to is blatantly unconstitutional, and Mr. Lynch also did the right thing by defying it.

It took a constitutional amendment to prohibit alcohol, and that amendment has been repealed. Where do you think the federal government obtains the power to ban any other drug?

They don't get it from the rule of law, they get it from the failure of the people to bring them up short when they overstep their authority.

-jcr

John C. Randolph | August 6, 2008, 12:57am | #

That sheriff's an elected official, I take it? So, who's ready to step up and run against him at the next opportunity?

-jcr

Herbalicous | August 6, 2008, 12:59am | #

God bless Lynch and his family (and bless Juanita who desperately needs it for all the hatred she spews on this blog)

Ways you can help:
~ Protest OCT 6 at 8am at 312 N Spring St Los Angeles (or a federal building near you)

~ You can educate yourself by going to Lynch's website.
http://www.friendsofccl.com/index.html

~ You can educate yourself about the case by watching this video and other videos.
http://safeaccessnow.org/blog/?p=110
http://www.friendsofccl.com/Videos.htm

~You can educate yourself by looking at the google searches about the trial.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=charlie+lynch+trial&btnG=Google+Search

~ You can notify your local & NATIONAL news station about the event and ask for it to be covered.

~You can donate to Charlies Lynch, if EVERY one who read this donated a $1 it would make a difference. If you can afford to donate more do it.
http://www.friendsofccl.com/donate.htm

~You can call or email Charles
http://www.friendsofccl.com/contact.htm

~You can contact the news outlets that have covered the issue and thank them.
http://www.friendsofccl.com/news.htm

~ You can help by showing up at any and all of these times to show your support.

~ You can talk to friends and family about the injustice our justice system causes people.

Please let us know what you are able to do by replying to this post. Or make suggestions of what others can do. Thank you.

What I did:

~ I donated $5.

~ I contact Local and National news organizations.

~ I emailed Charles and I've gotten responses. He's very grateful.

~ I went to federal court every day for the last 2 weeks and I plan to be there on OCT 6 at 8am.

Art-P.O.G. | August 6, 2008, 3:49am | #

I didn't sign up to defend the country for crap like this to happen.

Kolohe | August 6, 2008, 4:43am | #

That sheriff's an elected official, I take it? So, who's ready to step up and run against him at the next opportunity?

It was the feds, right? Wouldn't changing the sheriff be like adding a rear spoiler to a front wheel drive car?

Mike | August 6, 2008, 7:03am | #

Maybe all those prophecies about California breaking off into the Pacific were misinterpreted...

It's time for secession.

JMR | August 6, 2008, 7:53am | #

This can be filed under: "Why McCain's going to lose." All Obama has to say is "change" from stupidity like this, and even if the change is to a lower, more friendly level of stupidity, the sheep will follow.
JMR

troy | August 6, 2008, 9:01am | #

What I think is disgusting is that the defense could not put on a defense. They couldn't say that he was scrupulously obeying state laws. So fuck the judge too. Fuck congress.

It'll be interesting to see what the judge has to say at his judgment and sentencing. On the internet, I just read where Bush was chiding China on having political prisoners. He shouldn't call the kettle black.

troy | August 6, 2008, 9:08am | #

One of the jurors had this to say.

"I think all of us sometimes choose to hear what we want to hear," said Meese, a registered nurse from Torrance.

Meese said jurors had a clear sense that Lynch was not an ordinary street-corner drug dealer, but the fact that he was dispensing medical marijuana didn't matter under federal law.

"We all felt Mr. Lynch intended well," Meese said. "But under the parameters we were given for the federal law, we didn't have a choice."

What a stupid fucking bitch. Yeah, you DID have a choice. This is why juries are so scary. You get idiots like this that think they actually have to do what the judge says. A jury of MY peers would know that they could tell the judge and the state to fuck off. Stupid bitch.

"he meant well, but he should still go to prison." God, what a stupid bitch.

Juanita | August 6, 2008, 9:37am | #

The way the controlled substance act is written, because it cannot be known whether or not the substance crossed state lines, it is assumed to have crossed state lines. Even if you grow your own, that just substitutes for buying something that may have crossed state lines, so it affects the demand for interstate products and therefore affects interstate commerce.

Marijuana has not been proven safe and effective by the FDA. In this country, you don't have the right to take anything that is not approved by the FDA.

There are safer drugs available by proscription for nausia, for example Phenergan. This is not medicing, this is Cheech and Chong voodoo.

Alowing the use of marijuana will send the message to youth that drugs addiction is OK, it is just a stepping stone in the legalization movement.

We have got to send a clear, concise "No Use" message to Americas children.

While it is sad he will be going to prison, he did choose to break the law, a law required by international treaty.

J sub D | August 6, 2008, 9:52am | #

Ask your congresscritter about this. Explain that your note is going to somebody who will act to end this evil. Follow through on that promise. If both major party candidates support the status quo, vote third party.

This is blatantly evil behavior by our government. What has your representative done to end it?

J sub D | August 6, 2008, 9:55am | #

Ah, the real Juanita, goddess of the internet appears at last.

Can you imagine...

Me and you together
My hand in your hand
Or even imagine that soft kiss..

Can you Imagine...

The Holidays together
The love we can share
or even imagine the kindness we will share...

Can you imagine...

All of this
All of the joy
Or if you can't imagine this then we weren't Meant to be...

red green | August 6, 2008, 10:10am | #

There should be no "controlled substances" in the first place.Regulated ,yes but "controlled",no. The FDA is being held hostage by the White House ONDCP/DEA. We already have a federal drug regulator, why would we need further"controlling"? The only answer is, society must like being "controlled", right? Many must fall in the good cause.

Eric | August 6, 2008, 10:23am | #

Just horrible.

troy | August 6, 2008, 10:25am | #

I did a quick look-see of the news sites this morning. Lots of stories about Paris Hilton's rebuttal to elder in chief McCain but not one story about the poor guy who is going to get ass fucked for his humanity.

And some of you chided that Niel Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death was wrong. I think this is a good indication that Postman was right.

Juanita's disciple | August 6, 2008, 10:26am | #

Ah Juanita,

There's just not enough cages are there? The "Land of the Free" incarcerates more people than any other country in the world (yay, we win!), and a large portion of it has to do with a substance as toxic as coffee and chocolate (Johns Hopkins 2006).

Why tax and regulate when we can build more cages, which will need more hotels, restaurants, and superstores for those working and visiting the cages? Talk about interstate commerce!

Oh, then there's the poor victimized children in all of this. Maybe we could build them all large plastic bubbles to live in so that parents wouldn't actually have to educate their children. Why educate when you can legislate and build more cages!

Say it with me Juanita: "Save the children! Build more cages!"

Mike | August 6, 2008, 10:32am | #

"addict"...interesting choice of words, Juanita. We wouldn't happen to be part of the 12-step,it's all a disease, Puritanism wasn't all that bad train of thought, would we?

Juanita | August 6, 2008, 10:50am | #

"addict"...interesting choice of words, Juanita.

Use of illegal drugs is addiction. If your need for them is so strong that you need to break the law then you are an addict, and are in need of some punishment to cure your disease.

There should be no "controlled substances" in the first place.

So should we all take pot? Should kids be on the pot? Should we put crack vending machines in kindergarden?

Do you really want to live in a world where everyone is on drugs, including surgeons and airline pilots? That is why dangerous drugs must be controlled. It has always been that way, and always will be, grow up and get used to it.

Congress determined in 1971 that marijuana had no currently accepted medical use, was dangerous, and had a big potential for abuse. This is why it is a controlled substance.


There's just not enough cages are there? The "Land of the Free" incarcerates more people than any other country in the world (yay, we win!)

Too many people are on the drugs, freedom is drug free. People on the pot are in need of some SEVERE PUNISHMENT!

LET FREEDOM RING!

mark | August 6, 2008, 10:50am | #

So when do we take it to the streets?

Mike | August 6, 2008, 11:00am | #

Jaunita...sounds like someone is a card carrying member of the recovery-industrial-complex. Inpatient or outpatient?

Juanita's disciple | August 6, 2008, 11:15am | #

Juanita,

You're right, we should all just stick to the Oxyontin. No surgeons or airline pilots using that stuff. Not addictive at all AND legal! No money to be made there to be sure.

I think you've had too much of the alcohol (more toxic and addictive, but who's paying attention), you're missing a few critical thinking brain cells. You should probably actually research a substance before condemning it (Johns Hopkins 2006). Lots of big words in the study though...

Ah, but you're just a tad too high on "freedom" (self-righteousness?) to do that I suppose.

Your Humble Disciple

J sub D | August 6, 2008, 11:17am | #

My darling Juanita, why do torment me so? Surely my love desrves acknowledgement and reciprocation.

I want to say I love you on your birthday,
Though love is something you don't want from me.
Things didn't go so well when I last said it,
And so I'll keep it silent in my heart.

But how the words reverberate within me!
A song that I must struggle not to sing,
A music I must dance to without motion,
A poem that I must never read aloud.

Your wishes are a wall I would not scale,
Yet won't abandon, loathe to leave behind.
I cannot have, and cannot bear to lose you,
And so I send you this in my despair.

Chris | August 6, 2008, 11:46am | #

"Alowing the use of marijuana will send the message to youth that drugs addiction is OK, it is just a stepping stone in the legalization movement.

We have got to send a clear, concise "No Use" message to Americas children. "

Why don't you send that message to your kids and leave me the fuck out of it?

Jordan | August 6, 2008, 12:23pm | #

Too many people are on the drugs, freedom is drug free. People on the pot are in need of some SEVERE PUNISHMENT!

LET FREEDOM RING!

Seriously, why does everybody respond to Juanita? Her posts are obvious satire.

Toggle | August 6, 2008, 12:31pm | #

"Use of illegal drugs is addiction."

That is one of the dumbest things I have ever read. You have got to be trolling.

Mike | August 6, 2008, 12:43pm | #

congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce if there was no marijuana dispensary the addict might buy it out of state

In other words, supplying medical marijuana helps reduce crime. Lynch should get a medal.

CUZ KRISTEN | August 6, 2008, 12:50pm | #

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WANT TO JUDGE CHARLIE LYNCH. FUCK YOU!!! HE WAS A MAN WHO TOOK A STAND TO DO WHAT HE HAD BEEN LED TO BELIEVE WAS LAW ABIDING. IVE KNOWN CHARLIE LYNCH MY ENTIRE LIFE AND LAST NITE WAS HORRIFIC!! HE NEEDS BIG SUPPORT RIGHT NOW!! SO TAKE A STAND IN WHAT IS RIGHT!!!! LETS FIGHT FOR CHARLIE LYNCH!!!!!!

Juanita | August 6, 2008, 1:03pm | #

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WANT TO JUDGE CHARLIE LYNCH. FUCK YOU!!!

He is also a criminal. If you don't want to do the time, don't do the crime. Period, end of discussion.

Juanita's kid #7 | August 6, 2008, 1:22pm | #

Hey I seen thast movie Reefer Maddness and I now how bad pot is for you bad medicle marijuana users. My momma ussa be a crack whore; but she never don't do no reefer.... She watch Reefer Madnes wid all us kids and we all no betta fo sho. Reefer mak you crazy!!!!
My Daddy is a Fed, momma say, and he nake lots and lots of mony every two weeks regular to arrest bad pot smokers. Theyt gonna do the crime they gotta do the time. My brother daddy he work at the prison, so he make regular mony to watch the pot smokers rot in the jail.
All iis good.

wat | August 6, 2008, 1:52pm | #

It's too bad that none of these juries have ever heard of "Jury Nullification".

Juanita | August 6, 2008, 1:59pm | #

It's too bad that none of these juries have ever heard of "Jury Nullification".

It could get you imprisoned for contempt of court. You must judge the criminal based on the facts that are allowed. The government can override the nullification to preserve their law.

disgusted with the ignorant | August 6, 2008, 2:15pm | #

"Use of illegal drugs is addiction. If your need for them is so strong that you need to break the law then you are an addict, and are in need of some punishment to cure your disease."

hahahah oh juanita how ignorant of you to say such things. You must be on some crazy prescription drugs- DRUGS Juanita...that have clouded your brain! Should all patients be punished for becoming addicted to these so-called 'legal drugs' prescribed to them as well?

"So should we all take pot? Should kids be on the pot? Should we put crack vending machines in kindergarden?"

Juanita..wow, you are right the kids should be on those other DRUGS 'controlled substances' such as riddilin, oxycontin, xanex & prozacc. I bet if they had them in school vending machines, not only kindergarten but all class levels; perhaps this would help to avoid violence in the schools.

"Do you really want to live in a world where everyone is on drugs, including surgeons and airline pilots? That is why dangerous drugs must be controlled. It has always been that way, and always will be, grow up and get used to it."

WAKE UP lady...we already live in a world where everyone is on drugs. Its called PRESCRIPTION MEDICATION...LOOK IT UP, those are dangerous drugs. It gotten to the point they have even put our pets on pills. Where do you live? I think you need to open your eyes, grow up and do some research.

"Congress determined in 1971 that marijuana had no currently accepted medical use, was dangerous, and had a big potential for abuse. This is why it is a controlled substance.
Too many people are on the drugs, freedom is drug free. People on the pot are in need of some SEVERE PUNISHMENT!

LET FREEDOM RING!"

You have blinders on - take them off and see the truth. You are scared of the truth. Freedom is not about about being drug free- its exemption from external control, interference, regulation, etc. It is MY choice to use medical marijuana- an alternative natural medicine- rather than be on prescription drugs that are addictive & cause bodily/organ destruction. That is MY choice- thats called freedom. No one is pushing you to try a natural medicine, Don't be intimidated Juanita, it's ok. Answer me this, is Congress made up of recognized, distinguished, educated doctors???? As far as I know, they are not. The Government is NOT my doctor nor do they have a right to tell me what i can or cannot put in my body. Freedome remember.
Get over your fear Juanita & do your research.There are plenty of studies that show the medicinal values of cannabis. And if you look even more, Juanita, there are articles that show that teen use of marijuana are DOWN in 11 states that recognize its value. Use Your Freedom & Read & educate yourself.

If you havent noticed- medical marijuana is allowable by law in California. Where is the freedom??

No need for violence Juanita... Are you teaching your kids to swear? Eff You.

George Arndt | August 6, 2008, 2:26pm | #

One of the most commonly abused drugs in this Nation is Oxytocin. But, thats a perfectly legal drug. And now one would call a doctor or a pharmacist a "pusher" right? And many teens are having "pharming parties" where the often crush ritalin and other drugs and snorting them. But, these are “legal” substances, right?

My mom once worked at a local Lodge and said the hardest drinking, heaviest smoking and rowdiest group she ever saw there was a meeting of....DEA agents. A few years ago on 60 Minutes, they did a report about high level of alcoholism among drug enforcement is sky high. So, rowdy, heavy smokers and drinkers are in charge of enforcing this nation’s drug policy. Gotta love it..

Mike | August 6, 2008, 2:37pm | #

Very sad (by the way, while it was a criminal prosecution...it is in name alone and is apparent to all of us more reasonable Americans that it was politically motivated and justified), and I agree (based on the 3000 plus cases I've defended in my career as a lawyer) that Justice was not served with this prosecution or conviction. However, despite the remarkable efforts of the defenders, the result is not surprising given the inability to of the defense to get a fair chance to bring in material evidence that would have assisted their case. For example the prosecutions efforts to insure that "sick-looking people" did not get the chance to testify. Based on what I've read and experience in similar matters they were effectively handcuffed from providing the necessary defense to achieve due process. It's not only a sad day for Charlie and his lawyers, family, friends, and community; it is truly a sad day for justice. I'd like to hear more about the voir dire and which jurors were struck for cause.

Get Up Stand Up | August 6, 2008, 2:43pm | #

The guy foolishly defied federal drug control laws...how is any of this surprising to anyone? You break the law, they come and get you.

If you don't like this get the federal government to change the law. As long as the law is the law though, more arrests like this will happen - so be warned.

I love how people love to act all suprised that this happened and like the victims in all of this -- yet they won't even call their representatives in D.C. to try to get this changed.

"Medical" marijuana is a poorly administered scam in California which does get marijuana into the hands of people it can help with terminal illness and other conditions.

Its so poorly run that anyone going to a doctor next door to the dispensory can claim to have "anxiety" and get a "prescription".

"I stubbed my toe!"

"Ok sir, here's your joint."

Medical marijuana is a righteous cause, but when any shmoe can walk off the street and get a prescription for it it becomes a joke. It is just a stop on the road for making marijuana laws difficult to enforce, similar to the hemp movement. If you can legally grow hemp the government cant go around spraying any plant that resembles marijuana, now everyone can grow their own stash without worrying about "the man" coming to crash their party.

If you want marijuana legalized quite messing around with these shenanigans and actually do something meaningful to make the drug war go away. Run for office. Don't buy weed for a month and give that money as a campaign donation to a candidate who cares. Take out a newspaper ad -- do anything, but quit acting like the victim in all of this.

Questioning the drug war is an entirely rational thing to do. Questioning this arrest is not.

I don't ever see this changing because the marijuana movement is usually a movement for people with too much time on their hands -- mostly youth. As you get older other things take priority -- jobs, kids, family obligations, etc.

Youth have rarely known enough about the political system to be effective. Most don't even bother to vote, so don't expect this to go away any time soon.

John C. Randolph | August 6, 2008, 3:21pm | #

In this country, you don't have the right to take anything that is not approved by the FDA.

Juanita,

I have the right to ingest anything I care to ingest. My body is my own, it's not the property of the state. The question at hand is whether or not the government will forcibly interfere with that right.

-jcr

disgusted with the ignorant | August 6, 2008, 3:31pm | #

PEOPLE ABUSE EVERYTHING IN THIS COUNTRY-
What about the MILLIONS of underage kids who get their hands on alcohol????

WAKE UP- you idiot ignorants!

John C. Randolph | August 6, 2008, 3:31pm | #

It could get you imprisoned for contempt of court. You must judge the criminal based on the facts that are allowed. The government can override the nullification to preserve their law.

Juanita,

The whole reason we have juries is so that when our liberty is in jeopardy, it's the people, not the government, that decide whether a conviction is justified. A jury can alwaysacquit, even if it makes the judge and the prosecutor, and sycophantic boot-lickers like you turn blue in the face.

-jcr

John C. Randolph | August 6, 2008, 3:36pm | #

Wouldn't changing the sheriff be like adding a rear spoiler to a front wheel drive car?

This sheriff invited the feds to come and raid Lynch's business. He actively aided and abetted violations of California law by federal agents.

-jcr

John C. Randolph | August 6, 2008, 3:42pm | #

Spotted in the comments on another blog:

"We recognize, as appellants urge, the undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by the judge, and contrary to the evidence. This is a power that must exist as long as we adhere to the general verdict in criminal cases, for the courts cannot search the minds of the jurors to find the basis upon which they judge. If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused, is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic of passion, the jury has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision. (US vs Moylan, 417 F 2d 1002, 1006 (1969))."

So, Juanita, you tragic little apparatchik, you are WRONG about the power of juries.

-jcr

David Green | August 6, 2008, 3:48pm | #

I live in Nevada which is a medical marijuana state ( THANK GOD! ) and the voters. We don't have state legal dispensaries here; but each patient grows their own or small groups of patients coop, take care of each other and without much money being exchanged. We legal Nevada patients have no problems with either local law enforcement or the Feds. I'm sure the problem in California stems from the localization of distribution from the dispensaries, large demand and the necessity of funneling large amounts of cash back to the growers to cover expenses, etc. I've heard that the $2,000K they're saying Lynch had was gross sales without consideration for even the direct cost of those sales. Well that's a lot of money to funnel through one guy, so that's the rub. Doesn't a whale only get harpooned when he surfaces? If these guys running the dispensaries want to keep it going they are going to have to become Mother Meressa's for awhile, lower their prices and build good will and don't dazzle the Feds with all the $$$$$. It's the money that always screws things up, not a wonderful little flowering plant given to us by Mother Nature and taken away by Randolph Hearst.

Peace and love
D

beedogs | August 6, 2008, 4:42pm | #

It's time for jurors to simply refuse to return guilty verdicts for pot "crimes", regardless of the evidence offered.

What's stopping them from doing this?

Kim | August 6, 2008, 4:47pm | #

"It's time for jurors to simply refuse to return guilty verdicts for pot "crimes", regardless of the evidence offered.

What's stopping them from doing this?"

Simply stated. Not enough education & too much intimidation; such as by the prosecution in this case.

SandraDee | August 6, 2008, 4:47pm | #

Jurors CANNOT be punished by their verdicts.

John C. Randolph | August 6, 2008, 5:00pm | #

It's time for jurors to simply refuse to return guilty verdicts for pot "crimes",

More to the point, jurors should vote according to their conscience. Whether the law is just or not, whether the defendant is a good person or a bad person, the question before the jury is "did this person do what he's accused of beyond a reasonable doubt and if so, is it right to punish the defendant for this particular instance ?

-jcr

Juanita | August 6, 2008, 5:02pm | #

Jurors CANNOT be punished by their verdicts.

If they don't follow the evidence allowed thy can. How else can the government ensure convictions?

I have the right to ingest anything I care to ingest.

Uh, no you don't, you need a prescription, which requires FDA approval.

My body is my own, it's not the property of the state.

Yes it is because they pay for your health care thru medicaid/medicare.

Juanita | August 6, 2008, 5:04pm | #

PEOPLE ABUSE EVERYTHING IN THIS COUNTRY-
What about the MILLIONS of underage kids who get their hands on alcohol????

A little alcohol is harmless if you are 21 or older, but we certainly don't want them messing up their health and killing their brain with the pot.

Juanita | August 6, 2008, 5:05pm | #

LET FREEDOM RING!!!

FREEDOM MEANS OBEY THE LAW.

disgusted by ignorance | August 6, 2008, 5:16pm | #

""A little alcohol is harmless if you are 21 or older""

Are you serious?? Do you know what constitutes as a little? I'm sure it differs to many people.alcohol

You would rather the underage kill themselves or someone else by drinking & driving.
Ingesting alcohol to the point of poisoning, where their stomachs must be pumped.
Passing out & puking is your body letting you know it cannot take anymore. YOU CAN DIE.

Oh Wait--all this doesn't only happen to underage drinkers but also those "21 & over"
harmless you say?

""but we certainly don't want them messing up their health and killing their brain with the pot.""

Over consumption of marijuana will put you to sleep.
You are a sheep Juanita- Keep believe whatever you are told by this government that grants you this freedom you believe you have. The only pot that kills brains is the one beating you over the head!

cls | August 6, 2008, 5:23pm | #

People like Jaunita (assuming their stance is genuine) is the problem. A person who is devote in the letter of the law but not the spirit. If we follow each and every letter, every person among us is a criminal. Is it just? Absolutely not. It is control and authority.

beedogs | August 6, 2008, 6:16pm | #

Boy, oh boy, this "Juanita" person is a really terrible troll -- no intelligent person should think that way. Please just ignore.

Pin | August 6, 2008, 6:30pm | #

Juanita is either a straw dog or the dismal product of the government taking control of "family values." How did we let these control freaks get ahold of our freedom? They took it one day at a time by making our grandparents afraid of the killer weed I guess. Untrue, racist propaganda about mj by liars took our freedom.
I write my congressman all the time to remind him of the immoral history of federal mj prohibition. Everybody do your research and do the same.
I'd like to say Juanita is from Stepford; but I'm afraid she's from "Anytown, USA"

John C. Randolph | August 6, 2008, 6:37pm | #

My body is my own, it's not the property of the state.

Yes it is because they pay for your health care thru medicaid/medicare


Ok, I have to admit that I thought Juanita was for real. It's obviously someone playing the fool for rhetorical reasons. No actual person could be such an idiot as to claim that the state owns my body.

-jcr

Thomas Jefferson | August 6, 2008, 7:16pm | #

when is everyone gonna wise up, buy a gun, and march on washington???? 1-10 million angry motherfuckers with guns can get shit changed quick, fast, and in a hurry.

John C. Randolph | August 6, 2008, 8:59pm | #

TJ,

Google for "bonus march". Been there, tried that, FDR crushed them.

-jcr

Ironic | August 6, 2008, 9:12pm | #

"Yes it is because they pay for your health care thru medicaid/medicare."

I do not lose my right to control my body because the right to control my healthcare is violated.

Ironic | August 6, 2008, 9:14pm | #

"LET FREEDOM RING!!!

FREEDOM MEANS OBEY THE LAW."

Oh, Juanita, George Orwell would be so proud.

Ironic | August 6, 2008, 9:29pm | #

Juanita from the past:

"Juanita | February 18, 2008, 9:27am | #

Fighter pilots are not criminals or addicts because they get drugs from the government, which means those drugs are safe and effective to use. Alcohol is safe because it is legal. Xanax and speed are okay as long as the government gives you permission to use them but if you use them the wrong way even once you are an addict and a criminal and both you and your doctor should go to jail."

In other words, if the government legalized marijauna then it will be OK because it is legal. Right Juanita?

Jim McDosh | August 6, 2008, 9:30pm | #

What a JOKE. No wonder the US is the laughing stalk of the entire world. Its no surprise. Kangaroo courts and kangaroo judges.

Jt
http://www.FireMe.To/udi

joe | August 6, 2008, 9:36pm | #

while this is obviously a failure of federal law and overzealous prosecutors, it is even more so a failure of the jury system. the jury had the right to aquit this guy, but most likely because they were ill informed or ignorant they gave up that right and failed this young man.

Mike | August 7, 2008, 12:10am | #

But wait...isn't it a fact that there is still a federal medical marijuana program where the participants receive pre-rolled marijuana cigarettes (other wise know as joints) from Uncle Sam and the marijuana labs at Ole Miss! If so, then Charlie was only legally wrong in the most technical sence and not morally wrong. Right Juanita?

Lin | August 7, 2008, 1:45am | #

California is a perfect venue for the feds to run roughshod over. California as a whole supports big government, and the state is hopelessly addicted to Federal Money. So, why is this called progressive and Liberal?

Yahoo Answerer | August 7, 2008, 8:33pm | #

"So, why is this called progressive and Liberal?"

It is not classical liberal certainly but it is Ted Kennedy Liberal. Progressive is just an auto insurance company. I am not sure what any of this has to do with auto insurance.

red green | August 8, 2008, 9:41am | #

Where is the Gubernator? The buck stops at his desk, on this federal invasion of the State of California. Re-Legalize and Regulate Everything-For Freedom! You know,like it used to be.