Jurors Denounce Their Own Verdict

[Guest guest]

Dear Group,

 

I am posting this for information only.

 

I do not use nor do I advocate the use of marijuana, but I know that

some on this board do believe of it's medicinal value to patients

with severe and terminal illness.

 

I believe in medical freedom and under those conditions, I think they

should have that right.

 

Here is a link. http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=15093

 

 

 

Jurors Denounce Their Own Verdict

 

By Ann Harrison, AlterNet

February 3, 2003

 

After she and her fellow jurors found Ed Rosenthal guilty of federal

marijuana cultivation and conspiracy charges in San Francisco last

week, Marney Craig discovered that that she had made a terrible

mistake.

 

 

Instead of the " businessman " she thought she had convicted, Craig

learned that Rosenthal, was, in fact, a widely published marijuana

advocate who had been asked to grow medical cannabis for critically

ill patients. The judge had kept this information from jurors,

because Rosenthal was tried under federal drug laws that do not

recognize the medicinal use of marijuana.

 

 

" What happened was a travesty and it's unbelievable, unbelievable

that this man was convicted. I am just devastated, " said Craig. " We

made a terrible mistake and he should not be going to prison for

this. "

 

 

Craig is not alone in her remorse. Five other jurors, including the

jury foreman, are expected to join Craig to denounce the verdict in a

joint press conference this week. The event will take place

immediately after a hearing to determine whether prosecutors will

succeed in revoking Rosenthal's $200,000 cash bond and send him to

jail until sentencing on June 4. Attorneys for Rosenthal, who is

facing five to 20 years in prison, say they will ask an appeals court

for a new trial.

 

 

" I was not allowed to tell my story, " said Rosenthal. " If the jury

had been allowed to hear the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,

I would have been acquitted. "

 

 

Juror Debra DeMartini said she was distressed to discover that

Rosenthal had been deputized by the city of Oakland, California to

grow marijuana for its medical cannabis program. Oakland city

officials testified during pre-trail hearings that they had tried to

reconcile the conflict between the federal Controlled Substances Act,

which bans all marijuana cultivation, and California's Compassionate

Use Act (Prop. 215) which permits patients to possess, consume and

grow their own medical cannabis.

 

 

In an effort to provide medical cannabis to patients who could not

grow their own, the city granted Rosenthal immunity from prosecution

under a section of the Controlled Substances Act. But U.S. District

Judge Charles Breyer halted every attempt by the defense team to

directly tell jurors for whom Rosenthal's marijuana was being grown

and blocked city officials from explaining Rosenthal's deputization

during the trial.

 

 

" If I had known that he was told he could grow this by the city, that

would have raised some questions for me in front of the judge, " said

DeMartini. " It's a waste of taxpayer money to bring these cases and

prosecute people. "

 

 

Craig sobbed as she recounted her growing concern during the trial

that Judge Breyer was withholding critical information. Craig said

she became alarmed when the judge took over questioning of the

witnesses, when he repeatedly cut off the defense attorney, and when

she saw protest signs in front of the courthouse suggesting that

jurors were not fully informed.

 

 

" The more information we get, the more we realize how manipulated and

controlled the whole situation was, and that we were pawns in this

much larger game, " says Craig. " As residents, we voted to legalize

medical marijuana and now we are forced to sit here and not take any

of this into consideration?

 

 

" In some sense it is a major setback, and in another it is a call to

arms, " said Jeff Jones, executive director of the Oakland Cannabis

Buyers' Cooperative, one of the medical marijuana clubs that

Rosenthal was growing for.

 

 

Rosenthal's trail was attended by a number of medical marijuana

patients, many of whom wept when the verdict was announced. Nicholas

Feldman, a quadrapalegic cerebral palsy patient who says he smokes

medical cannabis to ease the pain and spasticity in his limbs, was

one of several people who arrived in court in a wheelchair. " How can

they do this to us? People are in pain and it means a lot to us as

citizens not to see a person suffer. " said Feldman. " I stand here to

day for people who could end up in jail for helping to ease my pain. "

 

 

Despite the emotion surrounding the case, some jurors felt that they

had no choice but to follow judge Rosenthal's instructions, based on

the evidence in front of them. DEA agents testified that they seized

thousands of marijuana plants and cuttings at a San Francisco medical

marijuana club, and at an Oakland warehouse owned by Rosenthal. But

jurors said they distrusted the testimony and based their convictions

on video tapes of the marijuana grow sites. They found that Rosenthal

conspired with others at the club to to grow not more than 1,000

marijuana plants, as the prosecutor claimed, but more than 100

marijuana plants, a fact which will affect Rosenthal's sentencing.

Jurors also found him guilty of growing more than 100 plants at the

warehouse and maintaining a place to grow marijuana.

 

 

Shortly after the verdict was read, juror Bill Zemke walked solemnly

from the courthouse past past two medical marijuana patients who sat

weeping. " We considered the evidence in the case, the evidence that

we could review, it was not an easy decision, " said Zemke evenly.

[Medical cannabis] was in the back of everyone's mind, a factor in

the case, but it was not in the evidence in this case. "

 

 

" We have state's rights, " shouted the disconsolate patient, " you

can't lock all of us up. "

 

 

Jurors Have Power But Not The City

 

 

Jury foreman Charles Sackett agreed with Zemke that jurors came to

the only conclusion that they could have, given the information they

were provided. But he said he supports medical marijuana and hopes

Rosenthal will win his appeal. " The medical issue was not introduced

into the court proceedings, it was never an issue for us, " said

Sackett. " We weren't allowed to discuss it amongst ourselves, ever. "

 

 

Sackett says he's now intrigued by the idea of jury nullification,

which he says none of the jurors was aware of. Jury nullification is

a legal principal which allows the jury to find a defendant innocent

if the law itself is unjust or unjust in a particular application.

Would jurors have taken the option of jury nullification in

Rosenthal's case? " It would be speculation on my part, but it's very

possible; dare I say, probable, " says Sackett. " I think jury

nullification is going to be part of the answer regarding states'

rights in future cases. "

 

 

Down at San Francisco City Hall, Matt Gonzalez, president of the

city's Board of Supervisors, or city council, said jurors in cases

like Rosenthal's should know that they can simply refuse to follow

federal law. " The judge is not giving the jury any space, whatsoever,

to engage in what has been an extremely long tradition in common law

as it relates to jury nullification, " said Gonzalez.

 

 

Craig said she believed that if she had taken a stand during

deliberations and said the federal law was wrong, she would have been

removed from the jury. " I didn't know what would happen to us if we

didn't follow the rules, how much trouble I would get into, " said

Craig. " I was totally intimidated into going along with the verdict

because I didn't see any other way. "

 

 

San Francisco public defender Jeff Adachi noted that there have been

a number of decisions involving jury nullification in which judges

have removed jurors who have refused to convict. But he said a jury

instruction that permitted this was ruled to be unconstitutional in

the last year. " Over the past 20 years, there has been a movement to

limit the power of the jury by keeping the jury ignorant of the

facts, " said Adachi. " Jury nullification is a constitutional right

that every individual person who is called for jury duty possesses,

and unless we appreciate that right, we will lose it because the

courts will take it from us. "

 

 

In the meantime, Adachi warned that Rosenthal's conviction will

encourage federal authorities to arrest more medical cannabis growers

and distributors. " The kind of prosecution that we are seeing in the

Rosenthal case could be multiplied 50 or 100 times over in the next

year or two here, " said Adachi.

 

 

Despite the warning of coming prosecutions, Rosenthal's attorney Bill

Simpich noted that city officials were absent during Rosenthal's

trial. While Prop. 215 passed by 78 percent in San Francisco, he said

officials have been slow to comply with a recent ballot initiative

ordering them to investigate a city-run medical cannabis growing and

distribution system.

 

 

" 'The single biggest thing that hurt us is that we did not have the

cities of San Francisco and Oakland by our side, " said Simpich. " They

were not there and if they had been there we would have won. They

made a mistake and the time to correct it is now. "

 

 

Simpich is calling for California cities and counties to continue

immunizing medical cannabis caregivers because the judge's

condemnation of this tactic applies only to those cases in front of

him. " I'd love to get deputized, " said Bob Martin, proprietor of the

San Francisco's Compassion and Care Center medical marijuana

club. " We are scared every day. "

 

 

Gonzales says he is still meeting with officials and legal advisers

to review the city's options. DEA spokesman Richard Meyer has made it

clear that any San Francisco city authority involved growing or

distributing medical marijuana will be subject to arrest and property

forfeiture.

 

 

Craig said she upheld federal law and convicted Rosenthal because she

felt she didn't have any choice. But she says that following

instructions was no excuse for not acting on her conscience and

refusing to convict a medical marijuana grower. " Anyone who said I

was just following orders ... well yeah, we just wiped out this

village in Viet Nam, we were just following orders, or the Europeans

turning away when the Jews were taken away by the Nazis. We are no

better than that if we can't take a stand for what we believe in, "

said Craig.

 

 

" I feel like if I had done something in this trial, even if I had

been thrown off the jury, it would have made a difference because it

would have been on the record that someone said 'No,' and that is

something I have to live with. "

[Guest guest]

What an incredible example showing how the ignorance of our good God

fearing neighbors can be more detrimental to our well being than the

arrogance of manipulating, deceiving, lying judges and prosecutors -

the laiyers - who don't care about " Justice " - but rather are hell

bent on Just-Us and to hell with the people. Our country used to be

founded upon the principles of law and order, based on common law and

natural rights of man. Today it's turned away from what is just and

fair and has become a force unto itself, regulating actions that

historically have been based upon personal responsibility and

accountability. Knowledge is power, and power comes from knowledge.

It can either be good or bad, depending upon how it is used. Lack of

knowledge allows for " opinions " of judges and laiyers to be passed on

under " color of law " . Our schools no longer teach our national

history, our American heritage, the proper use of words and their

meanings, nor that we are a nation of Law and the Supreme Law of the

Land is the Constitution of the united states of America. If a power

is not given to the federal government by the Constitution - they

don't have it! No power given, no authority to act. Where is the

authority in the Constitution to regulate States issues regarding

controlled substances? Back to our " good " neighbors...they become

rubber stamps to judicial authorities who lie, cheat, and steal the

juries right to decide not only the fact(s) of the case, but also the

juries right to rule on whether the law is just - or not. Most

probably never learned in history class the right to a jury trial by

a jury of ones peers (that have not been coerced, questioned, and

specially selected through a perverted process called voir doire) is

a fundamental right that is NOT to be trampled upon. In the case of

the jurors, it is " our " last chance to vote on whether the law put in

place is a good law or a bad one. It is our last chance to protect

our right(s) by telling the government that it's none of their

business. The first question that should be asked in any trail for

any reason is, " Is there a victim who received harm from the person

who is on trials actions.? " No victim, No crime, No conviction, No

punishment. The juries right to decide the issue of law is well

founded, based in fact, and is a maxim of law. However, you'll no

longer ever hear a judge admit it - in fact some will deny it -

knowing full well they are lieing and manipulating a jury.

The Roman historian Tacitus stated something to the effect, " The

more numerous its laws, the more corrupt the government. " People will

only regain control of an out of control judicial system masquerading

under color of law when they themselves become informed. I believe

it was Thomas Jefferson who stated, " You cannot remain ignorant and

free. " http://www.fija.org and http://www.jail4judges.com are a

couple of good places to begin seeking the truth. One of my favorite

sayings is, " Truth is eternal, knowledge is ever changing. Be

careful and don't confuse the two. " Let's educate our neighbors to

truth.

 

Doug

 

 

Gettingwell , " califpacific

<califpacific> " <califpacific> wrote:

> Dear Group,

>

> I am posting this for information only.

>

> I do not use nor do I advocate the use of marijuana, but I know

that

> some on this board do believe of it's medicinal value to patients

> with severe and terminal illness.

>

> I believe in medical freedom and under those conditions, I think

they

> should have that right.

>

> Here is a link. http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=15093

>

>

>

> Jurors Denounce Their Own Verdict

>

> By Ann Harrison, AlterNet

> February 3, 2003

>

> After she and her fellow jurors found Ed Rosenthal guilty of

federal

> marijuana cultivation and conspiracy charges in San Francisco last

> week, Marney Craig discovered that that she had made a terrible

> mistake.

>

>

> Instead of the " businessman " she thought she had convicted, Craig

> learned that Rosenthal, was, in fact, a widely published marijuana

> advocate who had been asked to grow medical cannabis for critically

> ill patients. The judge had kept this information from jurors,

> because Rosenthal was ...