How about filing amicus briefs in his case, or even doing as I did for you and exposing to the press that evidence is being covered up in Marc Emery’s case with several dozen targeted faxes?

Anyway, I’ve submitted my email address with this post, contact me if you can think of something I can do to help.

Peace.

http://tinyurl.com/FreeMarcEmery

“SF Weekly ?Rural sheriff’s departments in California may have to find a new pastime toreplace bullying medical marijuana growers. In a major victory for potadvocates, the California Supreme Court — right around harvest time! — hasrefused to review a landmark appellate court ruling protecting the right ofmedical marijuana patients and their caregivers to collectively grow weed. The 2-1 ruling by California’s Third Appellate District Court also affirmedpatients’ ability to take civil action when their right to collectivelycultivate marijuana is violated by law enforcement. The case, County ofButte v. Superior Court, involved a private seven-patient medical marijuanacollective in Paradise, California (oh! the delicious irony — props to Godor whomever is responsible). Americans for Safe Access (ASA), a nationwide medical marijuana advocacygroup, filed a May 2006 lawsuit on behalf David Williams, 56, and half adozen other collective members after the Butte County Sheriff’s Departmentconducted a warrantless search of Williams’ home in 2005. The officersforced Williams to uproot more than two dozen plants, threatening him witharrest and prosecution if he didn’t comply. Williams was incorrectly told by Deputy Jacob Hancock that his collectivelycultivated marijuana was illegal. California state law, in fact, does allowfor collective cultivation. Butte County Sheriff/Coroner Perry Reniff and his department were attemptingto impose a de facto ban on medical marijuana patient collectives, accordingto ASA. ?”By refusing to review this case, the California Supreme Court sends astrong message that local law enforcement must uphold the medical marijuanalaws of the state and not competing federal laws,” said Joe Elford, ASAchief counsel, who litigated the case for Williams. According to the July2009 appellate court ruling, the “deputy was acting under color ofCalifornia law, not federal law. Accordingly, the propriety of his conductis measured by California law.” The court went further, stating that to deny medical marijuana patientsprotection from warrantless intrusions and seizures by law enforcement”would surely shock the sensibilities of the voters who approved[Proposition 215].” The landmark decision said that the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 is notsimply an affirmative defense to criminal sanctions, holding that itconsisted of “…an opportunity for an individual to request the sameconstitutional guarantee of due process available to all individuals, nomatter what their status, under state state Constitution. The fact that thiscase involves medical marijuana and a qualified medial marijuana patientdoes not change these fundamental constitutional rights or an individual’sright to assert them.” The appellate court ruling upheld Butte County Superior Court Judge BarbaraRoberts’ ruling from September 2007, in which she stated that seriously illpatients cultivating marijuana collectively “should not be required to riskcriminal penalties and the stress and expense of a criminal trial in orderto assert their rights. Roberts’ ruling also rejected Butte County’s policyof requiring all members to physically participate in the cultivation,thereby allowing collective members to “contribute financially” rather thanwith sweat equity. The Butte County Sheriff’s Department was already known for its zealousanti-marijuana enforcement. The first medical marijuana supplier in thestate to be prosecuted in federal court after the passage of Proposition 215was originally arrested by Butte County officers. Chico resident Bryan Episreceived a 10-year sentence in federal court in 2002 for medical marijuanacultivation after Butte County officers raided his home in 1997 and seized458 plants. Observers of the medical marijuana scene say the court decision could haverepercussions statewide in other (predominantly rural) counties withpot-phobic local law enforcement. Elford said he has received hundreds ofcomplaints from medical marijuana patients about local anti-pot cops seizingtheir drugs on the logic that “we’ll take it from you and let the courtssort it out.” Repeated reports of problematic behavior by Butte County law enforcement, aswell as other police agencies throughout the state, resulted in the filingof the Williams lawsuit, according to ASA. “After uncovering Butte County’s de facto ban on medical marijuana patientcollectives, ASA decided to pursue the case to show that collectives andcooperatives are protected under state law,” said ASA media liaison KrisHermes. “In addition to protecting patients’ rights to collectively cultivate, theCourt has reaffirmed that medical marijuana patients enjoy the sameconstitutional rights as everyone else,” said Elford, “including theability to file civil rights actions when those rights are violated.”

MW

I am a victim of childhood sexual abuse, and while I was not raped or kidnapped, I know what it’s like to be a child, and to have an adult take advantage of me for their own pleasures. To think that the actions that man took with me & his other victims could be seen as the same as an adult who chooses to ingest marijuana seriously disgusts & enrages me. Marijuana is not illegal because it’s evil, it’s illegal for a multitude of complex reasons which have very little to do with protecting the public good. As long as we equate crimes which harm others with the action of taking drugs, we are encouraging crime & disrespect for the rule of law… even the ones which serve to protect.

The main point I felt Steve was trying to make:” Resources currently devoted to enforcing our pot prohibition laws could be used to fight crimes which are far more harmful to our communities and society.”
Still rings true for me, but I do think that his attempt to summarize that point at the end of his article was less than helpful for the movement which seeks to RE-Legalize cannabis.

Overall, great article, but I do have to concur that the last line oversimplifies a very complex justice system conundrum.