Download Link: Secret Stash - Register to access
Download audio file (NORML_Daily_AudioStash_2010-12-22.mp3)

Hemp Headlines

1. Oklahoma denies application for a “HEMP” license plate
2. Oakland tables plans for medical marijuana “mega grows” under federal threats
3. 700 Club Evangelist Pat Robertson calls for legalization of “a couple of ounces” of marijuana

Daily Toker Tunes

Brought to you by Grateful Dread Public Radio at http://gdreadradio.net, a 24-hour community service Internet radio station proud to carry NORML SHOW LIVE

• Irie Wednesday: Jacob Miller and Ray I – “All I Want for Ismus”

Cannabis Science with Dr. Mitch Earleywine

Radical Rant

• The Montana jury that wouldn’t try a man for 1/16th ounce of marijuana isn’t engaged in “mutiny”, they’re doing their job!

By now you’ve heard the story reported by The Missoulian about a man charged with 1/16th an ounce of marijuana whom the prosecutors could not try because they could not find any unbiased jurors who would convict for such a small amount:

The tiny amount of marijuana police found while searching Touray Cornell’s home on April 23 became a huge issue for some members of the jury panel.

No, they said, one after the other. No way would they convict somebody for having a 16th of an ounce.

In fact, one juror wondered why the county was wasting time and money prosecuting the case at all, said a flummoxed Deputy Missoula County Attorney Andrew Paul.

District Judge Dusty Deschamps took a quick poll as to who might agree. Of the 27 potential jurors before him, maybe five raised their hands. A couple of others had already been excused because of their philosophical objections.

The one problem I have with the story is in how the media are framing the jurors’ actions. In the Missoulian piece, the jurors are said to have “staged a revolt”.

The Huffington Post reports “Montana Jury Stages ‘Mutiny’ in Marijuana Case”.

USA Today writes “Court stunned by ‘munity’ from jury pool over marijuana case”.

The “mutiny” theme has been echoed by many other outlets picking up the story. For the sake of discussion, let’s remember exactly what “mutiny” means:

Mutiny is a conspiracy among members of a group of similarly-situated individuals (typically members of the military; or the crew of any ship, even if they are civilians) to openly oppose, change or overthrow an existing authority.

Did these jurors conspire? Nope, they had never met each other before being called on their civic duty to a jury pool.

Did these jurors attempt to overthrow an existing authority? Nope, they just refused to be unbiased regarding a small-time marijuana charge.

The immediate framing of this jury’s action as “revolt” or “mutiny” just proves how far we have fallen from understanding the true nature of the jury system. The media that believes they opposed authority don’t understand that the true authority in the court system is not the judge, the prosecutor, or even the laws, but the people. How can the people be in revolt against themselves?

The jury system has existed for over 700 years since the signing of the Magna Carta. It remains the ultimate check against the tyranny of government as it provides the people a method for balancing the laws written by the Legislative, signed by the Executive, and enforced by the Judicial branches of government. According to Professor Duane writing for the Fully Informed Jury Association:

At the time the Constitution was written, the definition of the term “jury” referred to a group of citizens empowered to judge both the law and the evidence in the case before it. Then, in the February term of 1794, the Supreme Court conducted a jury trial in the case of the State of Georgia vs. Brailsford. The instructions to the jury in the first jury trial before the Supreme Court of the United States illustrate the true power of the jury. Chief Justice John Jay said:

“It is presumed, that juries are the best judges of facts; it is, on the other hand, presumed that courts are the best judges of law. But still both objects are within your power of decision. …you have a right to take it upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy”.

So you see, in an American courtroom there are in a sense twelve judges in attendance, not just one. And they are there with the power to review the “law” as well as the “facts”! Actually, the “judge” is there to conduct the proceedings in an orderly fashion and maintain the safety of all parties involved.

As recently as 1972, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said that the jury has an “unreviewable and irreversible power… to acquit in disregard of the instructions on the law given by the trial judge….”

Or as this same truth was stated in a earlier decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Maryland:

“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.”

This group of jurors in Montana aren’t “mutineers”. They’re patriots!

TAMPA, Fla. (AP) — Olympic great Michael Phelps has acknowledged ”regrettable” behavior and ”bad judgment” after a photo in a British newspaper showed him smoking marijuana.

In a statement released to The Associated Press, the swimmer who won a record eight gold medals at the Beijing Games conceded the authenticity of the exclusive picture published Sunday by the tabloid News of the World.

Phelps said: ”I engaged in behavior which was regrettable and demonstrated bad judgment. I’m 23 years old and despite the successes I’ve had in the pool, I acted in a youthful and inappropriate way, not in a manner people have come to expect from me. For this, I am sorry. I promise my fans and the public it will not happen again.”

via Phelps Apologizes for Marijuana Use – NYTimes.com.

Youthful and inappropriate.  Childish things, as our president might say.  ”It will not happen again.”  Not to get all Clintonian on you, Mike, but does “it” refer to “smoking marijuana” or does “it” refer to “photos surfacing in newspapers showing you smoking marijuana”?

I’ll never understand the mindset that accepts as rational the idea that these world class athletes – Michael Phelps, Ricky Williams, Ross Rebagliati, those Russian sumo, etc. - can dedicate their entire lives to eating right, working out, honing their bodies and minds to the pinnacle of their sport, but should they wish to relax and unwind, they’re forced to ingest a hard liquid drug that has noticably deleterious effects on health and athletic ability (Max McGee notwithstanding) rather than a mild herb that doesn’t seem to  have affected their abilities whatsoever.

Even more perplexing is the notion that, in the name of “sports medicine”, these athletes are accustomed to taking all manner of narcotic pain killers and other pharmaceutical cocktails that aid performance or mitigate injury, but are addicting (Brett Favre, *cough*,) and wreak havoc on the liver and kidneys, yet if we catch them smoking weed we have to mete out severe punishment (Santonio Holmes, notwithstanding).

As I look at the coverage on Huffington Post (admittedly, a liberal website) almost all comments are “it’s well past time to legalize it” and “so what” and “didn’t hurt Phelps’ performance any”.  Oh, an Obama brother pot bust and an eight-time gold medalist bong photo following ten days of growing drumbeat over President Obama’s non-response to the Tahoe Raid… somebody really did get me a swell birthday present!

Even jury hiring is frozen

Financially strapped New Hampshire has become a poster child for the problem. Among other cost-cutting measures, state courts will halt for a month all civil and criminal jury trials early next year to save $73,000 in jurors’ per diems. Officials warn they may add another four-week suspension.

At least 19 other states, including California, have slashed court budgets and other government services as their economies have tanked, said Daniel Hall, vice president of the National Center for State Courts, a nonprofit in Williamsburg, Va.

California cut its judicial branch budget by more than $200 million, or about 10%, in the current fiscal year, and further reductions are almost certain as the state grapples with a projected $40-billion deficit. A Republican proposal unveiled last week, for example, would trim a further $205 million from the judiciary.

After two rounds of budget cuts in Florida, courts have laid off 280 clerks, lawyers and other staff members, and cut funding for a judges’ unit that helps resolve civil disputes. State legislators meeting next month are expected to demand more spending cuts.

An additional 10% reduction would mean “all civil cases in the state of Florida would virtually be suspended,” Belvin Perry Jr., chief judge of Florida’s 9th Judicial Circuit and chairman of a trial court budget commission, warned a legislative committee in Tallahassee this month.

In Vermont, state Supreme Court Chief Justice Paul L. Reiber recently proposed closing as many as seven county courts, as well as laying off employees, to help ease a budget deficit. The state already shuts district and family courts half a day each week to save money.

It’s bad enough that our schoolchildren have to depend on their teachers to buy paper and pencils and sometimes even toilet paper out of their own pockets because there’s just not enough money to throw at the Pentagon.  But how is it that our states will shut down the very mechanism that ensures our social order – our courts – because enough money cannot be found, and yet when we propose ending adult prohibition of cannabis, they look at us as if we’re sprouting horns and eating babies?

New Hampshire is postponing jury trials to save $73,000 a month.  I guess that would be roughly $876,000 a year.  Currently, New Hampshire spends $20,000,000 per year enforcing adult cannabis prohibition (Miron) and could make $3,500,000 to $5,600,000 per year taxing cannabis sales to adults.

California, Florida, Vermont, and our entire country are desperate for revenue.  Taxing and regulating cannabis similar to hard liquid drugs (alcohol) could generate $10-$14 billion per year in revenue and savings.  A productive hemp industry could add even more revenue with the additional benefit of creating new green jobs.  I’m even willing to bet that with legal cannabis, you’ll see less social harm from other drugs and alcohol.