CA: Is "Innocent until proven guilty" in the law...or just propaganda?

[DownPlay]

California:

If I am innocent until proven guilty, why are my charges available as public
record on a website? Sh!t often leaves a smell even if thrown erroneously...

Shouldn't only convictions be public record? When a person is "proven"
guilty...

How is this legal?

Thanks,
DP

[JETX]

Originally Posted by DownPlay

How is this legal?

Because the lawmakers feel that protection to the public by allowing PUBLIC knowledge of criminal conduct is more important than your 'right' to privacy.

[BelizeBreeze]

Originally Posted by DownPlay

California:

If I am innocent until proven guilty, why are my charges available as public
record on a website? Sh!t often leaves a smell even if thrown erroneously...

Shouldn't only convictions be public record? When a person is "proven"
guilty...

How is this legal?

Thanks,
DP

OH BROTHER!

[AHA]

Originally Posted by DownPlay

California:

If I am innocent until proven guilty, why are my charges available as public
record on a website? Sh!t often leaves a smell even if thrown erroneously...

Shouldn't only convictions be public record? When a person is "proven"
guilty...

How is this legal?

Thanks,
DP

ARE you innocent though???

[jdmba]

Believe it or not, the reason the charges are public record is to protect you, the accused.

Without public scrutiny, it would be much simpler for the government to abuse it's powers.

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by DownPlay

If I am innocent until proven guilty, why are my charges available as public record on a website?

Because a record of an arrest is a public record subject to disclosure upon request pursuant to GC 6254(f).

Shouldn't only convictions be public record? When a person is "proven" guilty...

Perhaps in an ideal world. Speak to your state Assembly person or state Senator if you wish this to change.

How is this legal?

Because the law says it is.


- Carl

[DownPlay]

JETX: Is it criminal activity before you are proven guilty? What about ppl who get acquitted? Were their actions criminal conduct? If so, how could they be acquitted?

AHA: According to the letter of California Health & Safety Codes 11362.5 & 11362.7, I would say that it is a clear YES. My case isn't even borderline...

jdmba: That makes a lot of sense in my imagination...but my imagination also suggests many
other solutions besides publishing accusations to the world to protect citizens from a gov't...
if it was really, by the ppl, for the...blah, blah, blah...

CdwJava: I was never arrested. I don't believe I have enough power or money for my
representatives to give a damn about my interests or opinions...I theoretically have one
vote...I have sincere doubts that politicians really think along these lines anymore...votes
are won through spending lots of money, and spewing whatever propaganda fits within a
parties guidelines that ppl want to hear...etc, etc at best, I would call our country a
republic...but not a democracy...call me jaded

Sig Heil Bush

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by DownPlay

JETX: Is it criminal activity before you are proven guilty? What about ppl who get acquitted? Were their actions criminal conduct? If so, how could they be acquitted?

The courts have to hold that opinion - people don't.

AHA: According to the letter of California Health & Safety Codes 11362.5 & 11362.7, I would say that it is a clear YES. My case isn't even borderline...

So .. you have an appropriate state or county-issued marijuana card? That is, one that has been approved by the state or the county and issued pursuant to those guidelines?

If all you have a is a medical marijuana recommendation from a doctor, then it's not the same thing.

CdwJava: I was never arrested.

Were you cited? Did the police have to respond to a call involving you? Either of those can certainly permit the police to release the information. In fact, they might be required to release it on request depending on the circumstances. There is certainly nothing that prohibits the police from releasing the information in any event.

at best, I would call our country a republic...but not a democracy...call me jaded

Uh ... we ARE a republic.

Sig Heil Bush

When did Bush become fuhrer?

Keep in mind that the Government Code which authorizes and even mandates the information you find so demeaning originated in CA in a legislature that has been controlled by liberal democrats for most of my lifetime.

So, rather than throwing out the pointless N A Z I insult against a President that has had NOTHING (read zilch, zero, nada) to do with our G.C., perhaps you should be asking the legislature, "Why, comrade?"

- Carl

[AHA]

Originally Posted by DownPlay

AHA: According to the letter of California Health & Safety Codes 11362.5 & 11362.7, I would say that it is a clear YES. My case isn't even borderline...

Sure, dopey! Just switch to Red Bull, that'll get you high legally.

[BelizeBreeze]

Originally Posted by DownPlay

JETX: Is it criminal activity before you are proven guilty? What about ppl who get acquitted? Were their actions criminal conduct? If so, how could they be acquitted?

AHA: According to the letter of California Health & Safety Codes 11362.5 & 11362.7, I would say that it is a clear YES. My case isn't even borderline...

jdmba: That makes a lot of sense in my imagination...but my imagination also suggests many
other solutions besides publishing accusations to the world to protect citizens from a gov't...
if it was really, by the ppl, for the...blah, blah, blah...

CdwJava: I was never arrested. I don't believe I have enough power or money for my
representatives to give a damn about my interests or opinions...I theoretically have one
vote...I have sincere doubts that politicians really think along these lines anymore...votes
are won through spending lots of money, and spewing whatever propaganda fits within a
parties guidelines that ppl want to hear...etc, etc at best, I would call our country a
republic...but not a democracy...call me jaded

Sig Heil Bush

More ignorance from the hillbilly sector

[DownPlay]

Originally Posted by CdwJava

The courts have to hold that opinion - people don't.


So .. you have an appropriate state or county-issued marijuana card? That is, one that has been approved by the state or the county and issued pursuant to those guidelines?

That would be YES. Issued by the County of Riverside.

If all you have a is a medical marijuana recommendation from a doctor, then it's not the same thing.

True, not the same thing, but the Health & Safety is utterly based around a doctor's rec.
It is very specific that the county card system is voluntary...

Were you cited? Did the police have to respond to a call involving you? Either of those can certainly permit the police to release the information. In fact, they might be required to release it on request depending on the circumstances. There is certainly nothing that prohibits the police from releasing the information in any event.

I was not cited. No call. One of my neighbors made a sort of threat against his neighbors
including me. He got in a physical confrontation with one of them and was facing assault
charges. He had a record for fighting and she had no record. 9 days after he walked out
of court with no consequences the police came knocking on three doors with accusations
ranging from illegal growing to cocaine distribution to having Meth labs...one lady had
some coke and I was growing legally...all else was utter fabrication...

When did Bush become fuhrer?

"I am the Decider." -- George W. Bush (then he spouts about Democracy in his speeches.)

Perhaps an over dramatization but I've researched it significantly...for one thing, the
death rate of the Iraqis that we are saving with democracy and freedom from Saddam
has increased by 2.3X over Saddam's rule...about 450,000 Iraqis very well might still
be alive along with 3K of our soldiers. Not to mention about 400,000 US soldiers on about
20-100% disability indefinitely now...there is a lot more that makes Bush's track record
look very bad...

Keep in mind that the Government Code which authorizes and even mandates the information you find so demeaning originated in CA in a legislature that has been controlled by liberal democrats for most of my lifetime.

Neither party represents the average US citizen I know...

So, rather than throwing out the pointless N A Z I insult against a President that has had NOTHING (read zilch, zero, nada) to do with our G.C., perhaps you should be asking the legislature, "Why, comrade?"

- Carl

Good point I suppose but I don't trust the Democrats either...

[DownPlay]

Originally Posted by AHA

Sure, dopey! Just switch to Red Bull, that'll get you high legally.

Wow, I hope you aren't an attorney!

[DownPlay]

Originally Posted by BelizeBreeze

More ignorance from the hillbilly sector

Well, Baba bing, bing, bing then...

Have you ever done any research, compiled any real statistics? Have you not noticed
Bush's 32 approval rating and Cheney's 28?

Since when does the most powerful country in the world really need to spend $.5 trillion
and counting to protect itself from a piece of ****, low-tech country half way round the
planet which as it turns out had no WMDs...

Have you paid any attention to his domestic actions while the nations been so distracted
by a country which doesn't even harbor Osama as far as anyone can tell?

[CdwJava]

Okay .. so ... you weren't arrested and you weren't cited ... your plants were not seized ... what does medical marijuana have to do with this, then?

Yes, the police can investigate a complaint of a possible illegal marijuana grow. Yes, they can (and often MUST) release the information regarding calls they respond to. 6254(f) does not prevent them from disclosing this information, and it can arguably be construed as to require the release of an address they respond to and the name of the party they contacted (the media sometimes holds to this interpretation even while most agencies do not ... at least so far as the name goes). But, there is nothing that prevents the law enforcement agency from releasing the info.

Oh, and as far as the suggested part of things, please note the language in H&S 11362.7 et seq.that says that the gov. "SHALL" issue and provide a verifiable database of said issued cards. Only these validated cards would prevent your arrest ... provided you aren't charged with distribution or unlawful cultivation. Recommendations issued by caregivers have no legal weight, by themselves, and can be used as an affirmative defense. In my county the DA has had ZERO compliance with subpoenas for the issuers of these recommendations to come to court to assert that they did or did not issue the recommendation. Since we don't have a county card the county is willing to accept these recommendations without some form of confirmation ... However, since the recommendations are thus far unable to be verified, we tend to prosecute.

As that is neither here nor there, I suggest you keep your marijuana growing and smoking to yourself ... and keep the friends that drop in to a minimum. Friends coming and going would make you kinda suspicious.

- Carl

[DownPlay]

Yes, we have veered off topic...

I am just replying to the aspects of your replies that I find compelling and
enjoying the discussion. Given the quoted text below, I do not see how you can possibly
deny that a Medical Patients accusations do not hinge on the doctors letter.

Besides, I was
only charged with 11359 because of the amounts involved and fact that I had a scale.
There was no other claimed evidence of sales in the discovery.
I was within 11362.7 guidelines on amounts and how can a patient know if they are
within guidelines without one? Besides, the discovery claims the writer of the discovery
report arrived with a code enforcement officer...for the purposes of code enforcement...
and she just so happened to smell marijuana. A little too convenient... The other lady
I mentioned...her case was thrown out because her attorney was able to prove the cops
lied about their claims of how they discovered her coke...they say they saw her scale,
etc through her window...the DA came to her house TWICE and concluded it was
impossible...

I've never heard of a code enforcement officer rolling with 8 drug task force officers (they also just happened to be along).

I assumed too much. Yes, of course my plants were seized with my equipment etc.

From the text of 11362.5:

"11362.5. (a) This section shall be known and may be cited as the Compassionate Use
Act of 1996.
(b)(1) The people of the State of California hereby find and declare that the purposes of
the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 are as follows:

(A) To ensure that seriously ill CALIFORNIANS HAVE THE RIGHT TO OBTAIN AND USE
MARIJUANA FOR MEDICAL PURPOSES WHERE THAT MEDICAL USE HAS BEEN DEEMED
APPROPRIATE AND HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED BY A PHYSICIAN who has determined that
the person's health would benefit from the use of marijuana in the treatment of cancer,
anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine, or any other illness
for which marijuana provides relief."

(B) To ensure that patients and their primary caregivers who obtain and use marijuana
for medical purposes UPON THE RECOMMENDATION OF A PHYSICIAN ARE NOT SUBJECT
TO CRIMINAL PROSECUTION OR SANCTION."