[Vision2020] [corrected] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . .

Fri Aug 16 13:29:58 PDT 2013

Donovan writes:
<Your perception of reality is deeply flawed.>

To
 somewhat echo Paul Rumelhart, I don't even know why I bother wasting my
 time with real world example after real world example of the miscreants
 I'm related to who repeatedly and knowingly violate the law and yet 
face very little, if any, consequences for doing so.  The caveat here is
 that the many examples I can cite are all related to Idaho crimes &
 punishment and Idaho housing assistance & welfare.

Thus my 
deeply flawed perception of reality is that Idaho is very lenient and 
forgiving when dealing with scofflaws who repeatedly violate laws 
related to drugs (aka pot), alcohol (aka DUI), privileges (aka driving 
without liability insurance and with suspended licenses).

My 
deeply flawed perception of reality is that Idaho is very forgiving and 
lenient in terms of crimes one of nephews commits such as statutory rape
 and thus will offer up plea deals with deferred judgements of lesser 
charges such as 'Felony Injury to Child', no jail time, and 2 years of 
probation.

My deeply flawed perception of reality is that Idaho 
is forgiving and lenient for another nephew who is a thief who was 
nabbed for breaking in and stealing from Scooters America in Post Falls 
and was offered 2 years of unsupervised probation who then subsequently 
schemed with his partner in crime to report a car as 'stolen', collected
 insurance money, got caught by an insurance investigator posing as a 
buyer for the advertised 'for sale' car parts that were coincidently 
identical to the vehicle reported 'stolen', and yet neither of them 
received any additional legal charged filed against them.

My 
perception of reality is further deeply flawed by the niece in North 
Idaho who dropped out of high school at age 14, had her first kid at 16,
 her second at age 20, her third now at age 22 (she just wanted a 
daughter so much), has to my knowledge never worked a paying job in her 
life, and yet seemingly manages to eek out an OK existence in HUD 
subsidized housing and on food stamps without having to resort to 'selling
 pot to feed her children' as you yourself assert so many other mothers 
are forced to do because presumably the rotten system we have in place now simply just doesn't 
already provide enough for them.

As for so-called 'food 
stamps',  my deeply flawed perception of reality is that these come now 
in the form of SNAP debit cards.  I also have another able bodied niece 
in CdA who somehow qualified for SNAP (which leaves me with a deeply 
flawed perception of reality that it's not too difficult to qualify for 
SNAP) a few years ago when she was in her early twenties and she thought
 they were 'awesome!!!'.  I asked her if she could purchase candy and 
chocolate and she told me she bought that stuff with SNAP all the time. 
 She said she could purchase 'anything with a nutrition label, which 
pretty much equates to anything except tobacco and alcohol'.  My deeply 
flawed perception of reality is that anyone on SNAP who really has a 
craving for smokes and beers might simply be able to work out a trade 
agreement with one their friends.

Further, my deeply flawed 
perception of reality is that many other resources available that the 
system provides if you just now how to fill out the proper paper work in
 order to access them.  One of my fire breathing Republican father's 
trophy wives (wifey #3) is a God squader extraordinaire who vehemently 
hates the government and also vehemently hates paying taxes.  While she 
was in her early fifties (not all that long ago), she somehow managed to
 be collecting Social Security Disability even though I'd have deemed 
her capable of working an honest job.  But as you accurately pointed 
out, my perception of reality is deeply flawed so who the hell am I to 
deem anyone as being capable of doing anything in terms of how they 
should or should not be earning an income.  But then again, it
 turned out that she actually was working and she actually was making 
very good money under the table.  My deeply flawed perception of reality
 was that she was forced to work under the table so that 1) she wouldn't
 be forced to pay taxes that she so vehemently hates paying and, 2) she 
also didn't want to forfeit her coveted Social Security Disability 
payments she'd been regularly receiving.  This all actually turned out 
to be a financially good deal for my Dad when they were divorcing, 
because in order for her to receive Social Security Disability in the 
first place, she had signed legal documents giving most of her assets 
over to him so she could appear to be not very financially well off 
(even though my deeply flawed reality was that she was indeed living a 
very opulent lifestyle).

Maybe the reason that I have a deeply 
flawed perception of reality is because I feel that I'm surrounded by so
 many deeply flawed family members and also because I'm deeply flawed 
person myself.  And further, my perception of reality is 'off' because I
 see so many instances of family members repeatedly breaking drug (aka pot) and DUI laws and not facing very much in 
the way of incarceration meaning they are virtually immediately back out
 in society where you all seem to want them to be.  So if the one with 3
 DUIs who continues to drive on the streets of Lewiston without any 
liability insurance and with a suspended license and, God forbid, he 
actually wipes out an innocent family, I wonder how many of you bleeding
 hearts will ask why the system that you right now consider to be so 
fucked up by incarcerating too many people couldn't have done more to prevent such a senseless tragedy.  
This was the last rap sheet I pulled on him and it's a little dated and thus has grown since then.

Nez Perce County

Case History 19 Cases found. 

DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE

DRIVING WITHOUT PRIVILEGES

DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE (EXCESSIVE)
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $859.25
Jail: 365 days
Suspended Jail: 355 days

DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $592.90
Jail: 30 days
Suspended Jail: 18 days
Community Service 48 hours

Probation: PROBATION: 1 YEAR BR TERMS: ____28____ DAYS / MONTHS OF JAIL TIME IS SUSPENDED AND / OR $ ___250._______ 
OF THE FINE IS SUSPENDED AND WILL NOT HAVE TO BE SERVED AND / OR PAID IF THE DEFENDANT COMPLIES WITH 
THE FOLLOWING: COMMIT NO CRIME NOTIFY THE COURT, IN WRITING, OF ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS SIGN A PROBATION 
AGREEMENT AND ABIDE BY ALL THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THAT AGREEMENT PAY ALL PROBATION SUPERVISION 
FEES BY THE FIFTH DAY OF EACH MONTH BEGINNING ON ___________ (SUPERVISED PROBATION FEES OF $25 
PER MONTH - UNSUPERVISED PROBATION HAS A ONE-TIME FEE OF $25) OTHER 10-12 HRS ALCO/DRUG EDUC & FOLLOW 
UP AT YOUR P.O.'S DISCRETION______

INSURANCE-FAIL TO PROVIDE PROOF OF INSURANCE
Finding: Dismissed By Prosecutor

ALCOHOLIC BEV-POSSESS/CONSUME/PURCHASE BY 
MINOR
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $163.50

INSURANCE-FAIL TO PROVIDE PROOF OF INSURANCE
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $107.50

SAFETY RESTRAINT-FAIL TO USE
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $5.00

DRUG PARAPHERNALIA-USE OR POSSESS W/INTENT 
TO USE
Finding: Guilty
Disposition date: 06/25/2002
Fines/fees: $163.50

DRIVING WITHOUT PRIVILEGES
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $228.50
Jail: 2 days

STOP SIGN-FAIL TO STOP/YIELD FROM
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $53.00

INSURANCE-FAIL TO MAINTAIN LIABILITY INSURANCE
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $107.50

INSURANCE-OPERATE MV WITHOUT LIABILITY INSURANCE
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $107.50

DRUG PARAPHERNALIA-USE OR POSSESS W/INTENT 
TO USE
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $243.50

STOP SIGN-YIELD SIGN VIOLATIONS
Fines/fees: $53.00

HUNT,TRAP OR FISH WITHOUT A LICENSE
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $97.00

TOBACCO-POSSESSION,DISTRIBUTION,USE BY MINOR 
VIO
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $213.50

TOBACCO-POSSESSION,DISTRIBUTION,USE 
BY MINOR VIO
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $213.50

TOBACCO-POSSESSION,DISTRIBUTION,USE BY MINOR 
VIO
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $213.50

Probation: PROBATION: 6 MONTHS BR 
FAILURE TO APPEAR FOR MISDEMEANOR CITATION
Finding: Dismissed By Prosecutor

CONTROLLED SUB-USE/UNDER INFLUENCE PUBLIC 
PLACE
Finding: True
Fines/fees: $20.00
Jail: 90 days
Suspended Jail: 90 days
Misc. Treatment Program

Probation: PROBATION: 2 DAYS, 5 MONTHS BR 

MINOR-POSS MARIJUANA/PARAPHERNALIA,USE,INFLUENCE
Finding: True
Fines/fees: $38.00
Jail: 90 days
Suspended Jail: 90 days
Community Service 30 hours
Misc. Treatment Program

Probation: PROBATION: 6 MONTHS BR 
MINOR-POSS MARIJUANA/PARAPHERNALIA,USE,INFLUENCE
Finding: Dismissed By Prosecutor

ALCOHOLIC BEV-POSSESS/CONSUME/PURCHASE BY 
MINOR
Finding: True
Jail: 90 days
Suspended Jail: 90 days

Probation: PROBATION: 6 MONTHS BR 

BEER,WINE OR OTHER ALCOHOL AGE VIOLATIONS
Finding: Guilty
Fines/fees: $163.50

Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 07:21:04 -0700
From: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
Subject: Re: RE: [Vision2020] [corrected] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . .
To: philosopher.joe at gmail.com; scooterd408 at hotmail.com
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com

Your perception of reality is deeply flawed. The majority of pot sellers are men. When mothers are put in prison for pot, prisons must be built for women instead of men, requiring male prisoners to be released for lack of space. When the US taxpayers incarcerate a larger percentage of its population then any other nation on the planet, at a cost of $50,000 to hundred thousand a year, it leaves little in resources to those for wefare.  If welfare and jobs were provided, mothers would not be selling pot, especially if it were legal and regulated. Republican conservatives try to save money by cutting assistance to the working poor, but end up paying three times as much for prisons and law enforcement. 

                                From:

                            Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com>;                            

                                To:

                            Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>; Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>;                                                     

                                Cc:

                            viz <vision2020 at moscow.com>;                                                                             

                                Subject:

                            RE: [Vision2020] [corrected] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . .                            

                                Sent:

                            Fri, Aug 16, 2013 9:50:18 AM                            

                                        The two scenarios are not comparable.  The vast majority of sex offenders are men so releasing them out of prison doesn't free up any space for female dope dealers / self-admitted felons.  Prisons aren't co-ed.  So yeah, your 'philosophy' is flawed.

Moms should be able to feed their kids using available resources within the system such as welfare and food stamps so that they shouldn't be put into a position where they're dealing dope or selling their bodies and whatnot.  Easier said than done, I suppose, but the leeches in my family don't seem to have too much trouble sucking off the Idaho system with things like $20 a month HUD housing and hundreds of dollars worth of food stamps and I don't consider them to be the sharpest cookies, but maybe I'm wrong about that.

Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013
 01:18:32 -0700
From: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [corrected] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . .
To: scooterd408 at hotmail.com; philosopher.joe at gmail.com
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com

We let sex offenders that prey on children out of prison to make room for moms that sell pot to feed their children. Anyone else see the giant crack in this philosophy?  Donovan J. Arnold
        From: Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com>
 To: Joe Campbell
 <philosopher.joe at gmail.com> 
Cc: viz <vision2020 at moscow.com> 
 Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 10:58 PM
 Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [corrected] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . .

I've identified that selling pot in front of children is (or was) a felony in the state of Oklahoma.  I've noted that she plead guilty to this felony.  The sentencing was then up to the judge.  I've already stated I thought that the sentencing was 'too harsh'.  I'd have been fine with a suspended sentence.  I'd have been fine with a deferred judgement plus probation where on a job application she could have checked the box marked 'No' for the question 'Have you every been convicted of a felony'. If you're interested in the judge's comments some of them are here:http://newsok.com/how-31-of-pot-gave-mom-a-10-year-prison-sentence/article/3542585‘Kids are involved'

[Judge] Pritchett said on first drug offenses,
 sentences are usually suspended and
 may require treatment or random drug tests. Only if there are other more serious circumstances is a first-time drug offender sent to prison, she said. “When kids are involved, it's different,” Pritchett said “This
 was a drug sale. When I look at someone in front of me, I'm thinking, 
‘What is it going to take to rehabilitate this person?' We look at their
 attitude and other factors.” When Spottedcrow was taken to jail 
after her sentencing, she had marijuana in her jacket. She pleaded 
guilty to that additional charge Jan. 24 and was sentenced to two years 
in prison and fined nearly $1,300. That sentence also will run 
concurrent with her other conviction.CC: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com; vision2020 at moscow.com From: philosopher.joe at gmail.com Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [corrected] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . . Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:19:17 -0700 To: scooterd408 at hotmail.comYou can go into a variety of mom-and-pop stores across the nation and find folks selling beer, cigarettes, etc. "in front of their children." Presumably you have no issue with that. So far the only problem with the issue that you've identified is that pot is illegal. No doubt that IS a problem. But it doesn'take her out to be the beast you suggest -- at least before prison "saved" her.
I just think you're overstating
 your case and apparently I'm not alone. On Aug 15, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com> wrote:

You're right Joe.  She sold pot.  What in the hell could possibly go wrong with that???  We'd both probably guess that absolutely NOTHING could wrong.  I'm glad we're both in agreement now and can give it a rest since we've finally reached a point of consensus.CC: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com; vision2020 at moscow.com From: philosopher.joe at gmail.com Subject: Re:
 [Vision2020] [corrected] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . . Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 10:04:22 -0700 To: scooterd408 at hotmail.comDregs of society? She sold pot. Give it a rest. On Aug 15, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com> wrote:

She was peddling dope in front of her kids.  As a former deputy prosecutor, would you say the aspect of dealing dope with dregs of society in front of her kids shouldn't factor at all into the particular law that she was charged with breaking and subsequent sentence rendered and that the miniscule amount of dope involved should instead outshine all else such that she should have only been given a slap on the wrist? Obviously I value your legal expertise on issues such as this otherwise I would not have hired you a few years ago to get your take on a nephew and niece of mine in Lewiston who had been confiscated by CPS.  You weren't appalled back then that CPS had swooped in and grabbed the kids after several daycare facilities (that had all been stiffed after rendering their services) had reported that one of the kids had a broken arm as they're required by law to do so.  One broken arm from one clumsy kid resulted
 in all kids in the same living environment being ripped from their loving parents arms and sent into foster care for more than 6 months as the disproportional law required.  The nerve! -ScottFrom: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com CC: vision2020 at moscow.com Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 06:45:34 -0700 Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [corrected] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . . 

Scott, I disagree with almost everything you say on this issue, so it's hard to know where to start. Until yesterday I was speaking generally. I have now looked at this particular situation more, and nothing I saw changed my mind. I'll try to separate the general from the particular below. "The price of the dope is completely irrelevant to her plea of guilty and
 the sentencing of the law that she herself admitted she broke." I don't know what basis you have for this. As a former deputy prosecutor and criminal defense lawyer, I disagree with this based on my experience. The price reflects the amount sold, and the amount should always be relevant. I think you  should not treat someone selling tiny amounts of pot the same way you would treat someone selling large quantities of pot. The judges I appeared in front of knew this. In this situation in particular, I think the general rule applies, and the amount was relevant, and should have resulted in a low sentence. In your afternoon response to me, you discussed whether she had a lawyer. Looking into it, yes, she did, though he did not appear to serve her well and has had his own issues. I found this article but have not looked further into him:http://reason.com/blog/2011/05/19/oklahoma-woman-sells-30-worth The 'Blind Plea' meant there was no binding plea agreement, what we would call a 'Rule 11' in Idaho. If the lawyer knew this judge was a nutjob, he should have gotten a binding agreement. I don't know if the prosecutor would have agreed to a good agreement, and it doesn't strike me as unusual to enter this plea without an agreement on the basis that, given her lack of a record and the small amounts involved. I can see how her lawyer might not have seen this sentence coming. I think the sentences in this case were appalling. Absolutely appalling. That she was able to get a GED in prison is not a silver lining but an illustration of the wretchedness of her pre-incarceration life. The sentence was punitive, and it doesn't look like the judge considered
 rehabilitation at all. The judge had the discretion to hand down a sentence of her choosing; this was not one of those terrible 'check a box' sentence, and I agree with Tom's basic premise in posting this situation. It's a terrible sentence. In an earlier post you said she should not be working but parenting her children: 'I'm not even sure this lady should be working in 
the first place unless she really, really wants to.  She has 4 kids to raise so IMO she should be raising them.  
This is why society has things like welfare to help out moms saddled 
with kids from deadbeat dads.'In most states she is ineligible for welfare or public housing. As a society we think she should be working, and she doesn't have the options you mentioned. SunilFrom: scooterd408 at hotmail.com To: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com; sunilramalingam at hotmail.com CC: vision2020 at moscow.com Subject: RE: [Vision2020] [corrected] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . .
 . Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 00:18:50 -0600 

She and her mother were each offered plea deals for 2 year sentences and
 they declined this.  Instead they entered blind pleas gambling that the
 judge would be lenient based on no previously felony convictions and 
and the small amount of dope they were dealing.  If they had gotten a 
male judge, perhaps like myself he would have been smitten by her good 
looks and would have let her go with a simple warning + a stern finger 
wagging telling her not to do this same sort of thing again.  Worst 
case, the slime dog judge - my alter ego if you will - also might 
have asked her out to dinner. But as fate would have it, they got
 a female judge who wasn't too keen on them dealing dope in front of 
children and instead she gave Patricia Spottedcrow a 12 years sentence 
which was a sentence that the judge herself considered as 'lenient' 
given all the circumstances that she had evaluated.  She gave 
Spottedcrow's mom a 30 years suspended sentence with no jail time. Considering
 that ultimately Patricia Spottedcrow served 2 years behind bars and her
 mom served zero, they did even better than original plea deal they 
declined that was for 2 years incarceration for each of them.  This 
could be considered a silver lining for anyone who might think of 
themself as being an 'optimist' who sees things as the 'jail half empty' 
instead of  the 'jail unnecessarily full'. The presumed downside is that she 
now has a felony conviction and supposedly won't be able to find employment, 
housing, or be able to get loans.  Just as an aside - and GOD FORBID 
that anyone (especially Tom Hansen who posted this in the first 
place) ever bothered to scratch the surface and get any EFFING DETAILS 
surrounding this whole sad and sorry situation - they would have learnt 
that prior to her arrest, she was 'unemployed and did not have a stable 
residence at the time of her 
arrest, the report states. The family lost their Oklahoma City home for 
not paying bills, the report states.' Thus, prior to her arrest 
and without a felony record, she was uneducated, unemployed,  flat 
broke, and homeless with 4 kids when she turned to dealing drugs in 
front of her kids as a way to make IN HER OWN WORDS 'easy money'.  And 
now due to incarceration, she has earned a GED, attended parenting 
classes, and attended AA meetings which is probably a good thing 
considering that when she was booked, after her sentence was handed down, 
marijuana was found in her jacket resulting in a subsequent additional 
guilty plea from her and an additional 2 year concurrent sentence.  Hellooooo!!!!!!  When you get caught dealing dope, would it bother to cross your mind that it might be yet another BAD CHOICE to be carrying any more bags of dope on your person at your sentencing & booking such that you don't get additional criminal charges filed against you that you have zero defense to rebuff???  Do you think that might not look so good in the future in front of parole boards who are looking for some inkling of remorse and some small signs that you're not going to re-offend on the exact same crimes??? If
 you ask me, this should be considered a 'feel good' story along the 
lines of a phoenix rising from the ashes, someone getting a second 
chance at doing right for themselves and their kids, the criminal 
justice system succeeding at rehabilitating and admitted felon, ... But
 no one is asking and they wouldn't listen to anything I have to say 
because they're all just deafened by sound bites of 'racial injustice' 
and '$31 bags of marijuana'.  Knock yourselves out. FWIW - I hope she and all of her kids are proven to be spectacularly productive members of society or in the alternative that they are all happy, healthy, and stay out of any further legal trouble. 

            Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 21:32:36 -0700 From: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [corrected] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . . To: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com; scooterd408 at hotmail.com CC: vision2020 at moscow.comAnybody will admit to a crime if the alternative
 is a longer prison sentence because you don't have a defense. At $500 an hour, what defense could you afford against a department with virtually unlimited resources and a goal of a 100% conviction rate? 
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

                                From:

                            Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com>;                            

                                To:

                            Sunil <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>;                                                     

                                Cc:

                            viz <vision2020 at moscow.com>;                                                                             

                                Subject:

                            Re: [Vision2020] [corrected] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . .                            

                                Sent:

                            Wed, Aug 14, 2013 11:44:54 PM                            

                                        Sunil!!!  The price of the dope is completely irrelevant to her plea of guilty and the sentencing of the law that she herself admitted she broke.  If it was relevant in any way whatsoever, then her PD should have made it such.  For all I know she didn't have PD.  For all I know, she had absolutely zero legal representation.  The only thing I've read is that she entered a 'blind plea' which in retrospect seemed to have been a MONUMENTAL MISTAKE on her part.  I've seen nothing about the exact law that she blindly plead guilty to, but my guess is that it was something along the lines 'FELONY DRUG DEALING'.  Can you explain to me how the $31 bag of dope is relevent whatsoever???  She blindly plead guilty to felony drug dealing.  This phase of the legal proceedings is now done.  The next phase is
 sentencing.  For all I know, the sentencing was a simple lookup table that resulted in '12 years behind bars'.  It might have been wise to go that lookup table prior to entering a blind plea.  It might have been wise to have a defense lawyer.  If Ms. Spottedcrow had hired you to defend, do you think she would have gotten 12 years?  I don't.  I don't think she would have gotten 12 months behind bars.  Her own mom got a 30 year SUSPENDED sentence.  She herself with 3 or 4 young kids couldn't have gotten a similar suspended sentence with representation from a halfway decent PD??? Beyond that, one of the articles I found had snipets that read: 'Spottedcrow took responsibility for her crime and told the board that 
things in her life at the time of her arrest were spiraling out of 
control, and prison may have saved her life, Dreyer said.
' What a shame, eh, that 'prison may have saved her life' that was 'spiraling out of 
control'. -ScottFrom: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com CC: vision2020 at moscow.com Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 05:32:31 -0700 Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [corrected] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . . 

The amount is not irrelevant. IF you're going to criminalize selling MJ, you should not treat all people who sell in the same way. The person selling large quantities should face a higher penalty than someone selling a minor amount. SunilFrom: scooterd408 at hotmail.com To: thansen at moscow.com Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 16:02:05 -0600 CC: vision2020 at moscow.com Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [corrected]
 It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . . 

Tom wrote:<A 30-dollar sale in 2010 DOES NOT equate to "a big bulk package".>

I agree.  The $30 (or in this case $31) is irrelevant except to you because you keep harping on it as if it has any merit to the law(s) being broken or to the associated sentencing terms.  "a big bulk package" would be indicative of it's physical dimensions and mass and no one seems to be able to get that information since their is so little information available about this case.  Distilling it down to basics, she was dealing drugs, she was caught, she was charged, she plead guilty, she was sentenced accordingly, and she was released 2 years after service her 12 year sentence.  Simple as that.  Disproportionate?  Probably. <Another aspect to consider as to why so many
 defendants convicted of minor crimes is . . . privatized prison systems.>
Untrue.  Privatized prison system are not the cause of why many defendants are convicted of minor crimes.  That's a ridiculous notion.

CC: moscowcares at moscow.com; vision2020 at moscow.com From: thansen at moscow.com Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [corrected] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . . Date: Tue,
 13 Aug 2013 14:26:28 -0700 To: scooterd408 at hotmail.comMr. Dredge . . . A 30-dollar sale in 2010 DOES NOT equate to "a big bulk package".  In fact, it barely qualifies as a user quantity (a standard many states apply when determining whether or not to charge "with intent to sell").  
Now, that "big bulk package" on the other hand is comon among those charged with intent to sell.
Another aspect to consider as to why so many defendants convicted of minor crimes is . . . privatized prison systems.  The more prisoners, the higher the government pay-out to the privatized prisons.  There are several strong lobbies that promote
 these privatized prison systems.  I'd be interested to see if there is such a lobby here in Idaho and just how much influence they applied when Idaho adopted the privatized prison system.
Things that make you go, "Hmmm."Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . ."Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)http://www.moscowcares.com/  Tom HansenMoscow, Idaho"There's room at the top they are telling you still But first you must learn how to smile as you kill If you want
 to be like the folks on the hill."
- John Lennon
  On Aug 13, 2013, at 2:11 PM, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com> wrote:

Tom, There are so few details that I can find about this particular case, I'm not able to give my best unbiased opinion on it.  Everything I've searched for hits on the same one-sided text.  Absent any other information, I had already conceded below that 12 years was 'too much' in my opinion and that even 2 years was 'probably too much'. The arbitrary price tag she put on the bag she was selling probably was completely irrelevant to the law being applied.  Usually laws specify the weighted amount of the drugs being dealt or in possession.  She shouldn't have been dealing the shit.  Hopefully she's the wiser for it now and stays out of trouble. I was once foreman of 12 person jury on a case where a guy was charged with 1) an infraction of having an open container, 2) a misdemeanor of possession of a controlled substance, and 3) a felony of possession of a
 controlled substance with intent to sell. The first 2 charges weren't even contested, so with the consent of the jury I just checked 'guilty' on the verdict form for both of those counts.  Considering the guy had 4 ready to serve packets along with a big bulk package, we the jury eventually unanimously found him 'guilty' on the felony count as well.  I have no idea what the sentencing was but when I phoned the prosecutor the next day because I was curious as to why he so aggressively went after this seemingly small time criminal who had the bad luck of blowing through a stop sign right in front a cop, he told me the judge would probably sentence him to 2 to 3 years. In the case of Patricia Spottedcrow, she and her mom apparently submitted blind pleas (whatever those are) and was hit with whatever sentencing was applied to breaking those laws.  I agree with Wayne in that if the laws are unjust, then they
 should be changed.  A lot of times it takes just the right case such as this one to actually force a change. -ScotCC: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com; vision2020 at moscow.com From: moscowcares at moscow.com Subject: Re: [corrected] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . . Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 12:00:59 -0700 To: scooterd408 at hotmail.comMr. Dredge -
Do you have ANY idea
 of the negligible amount of marijuana sold for $30 in 2010 amounts to?
Let me give you an idea.
In 1977 in San Francisco an ounce of Columbian sold for $50-$60.  That was THIRTY-THREE YEARS prior to this 30-dollar "sale".
And for THAT, this lady was sentenced to twelve years in prison.
Meanwhile San Diego Mayor Filner walks away from sexually assaulting thirteen women after FIVE DAYS OF THERAPY.
God bless America . . . . . . please.Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . ."Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have
 with your pants on)http://www.moscowcares.com/  Tom HansenMoscow, Idaho"There's room at the top they are telling you still But first you must learn how to smile as you kill If you want to be like the folks on the hill."
- John Lennon
  On Aug 13, 2013, at 11:46 AM, Scott Dredge <scooterd408 at hotmail.com> wrote:

In this particular case, it's a a mixed bag regarding marijuana laws making sense / working.  She sold a bag of marijuana which I'm guessing would be a much worse offense than merely being in possession of it.  12 years for all of her combined crimes is too much in my amateur opinion.  The 2 years she served is probably too much.  On the upside, while incarcerated she completed her GED and took parenting classes and participated in a few other programs that were offered.  Hopefully she's come out of this experience as more functional person. I think if the marijuana laws are not making sense and not working, it might be because marijuana is lumped into to the same category as say cocaine.  I'm not sure of the laws, but if this is the case, then marijuana should be moved into some lesser category.  Even so, dealing it should carry a heavier penalty than possessing
 it.From: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com To: vision2020 at moscow.com Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 05:35:13 -0700 Subject: Re: [Vision2020] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About Marijuana . . . 

Wayne, Do you think our marijuana laws make sense or are working? SunilFrom: bear at moscow.com Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 18:37:58 -0700 To: vision2020 at moscow.com Subject: Re: [Vision2020] It's Time for an Honest Conversation About	Marijuana . . . Honest?  I think not!Served 2 years in prison, not 12. On Aug 12, 2013, at 6:05 PM, Tom Hansen
 wrote:<1146440_502299883171842_938877420_n.jpg>Cannabis Nationhttp://www.cannabisnationradio.com/  Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . ."Moscow Cares" (the most fun you can have with your pants on)http://www.moscowcares.com/  Tom HansenMoscow, Idaho"There's room at the top they are telling you still But first you must learn how to smile as you kill If you want to be like the folks on the hill."
- John Lennon
  =======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
               http://www.fsr.net/
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
======================================================= =======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
               http://www.fsr.net/
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
======================================================= 		 	   		  
 =======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
               http://www.fsr.net/
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
======================================================= 		 	   		  
======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.               http://www.fsr.net/          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com======================================================= 		 	   		  
======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.               http://www.fsr.net/          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com======================================================= 		 	   		  
 =======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
               http://www.fsr.net/
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
======================================================= 		 	   		  
 =======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
               http://www.fsr.net/
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
======================================================= 		 	   		  

 =======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
               http://www.fsr.net/
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
======================================================= 		 	   		  
======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.               http://www.fsr.net/          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com======================================================= 		 	   		  

 ======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.                http://www.fsr.net/           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com =======================================================     		 	   		  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20130816/fe99de67/attachment-0001.html>