Colorado

[palmspringsbum]

Updated Thursday, June 22, 2006 10:19 AM MDT

Collin pleads not guilty; alleged victim says he never intimidated her



Katharhynn Heidelberg
Daily Press News Editor

MONTROSE — A man accused of marijuana cultivation pleaded not guilty to all charges Wednesday and was tentatively set for trial in October. Michael Collin’s attorney, Robert Corry, also said the alleged victim in his client’s witness intimidation case denied feeling threatened at any time. He produced a signed statement to that effect, which could significantly impact related charges and later told the Daily Press his client had distributed medical marijuana in accordance with state law.

Collin was arrested after a March 24 Delta/Montrose Drug Task Force bust at his residence. He was accused of growing marijuana and, in April, was also charged with intimidating a witness. Authorities alleged the woman was afraid when Collin allegedly came to her home with paperwork identifying her as the witness. In a task force affidavit, the woman reported being afraid because of “the people Collin is associated with.”

Collin has always denied intimidating the witness. In past court motions, Corry said the witness had simply hoped law enforcement would not identify her in paperwork associated with the marijuana case and contacted them to ask why they had done so.

Wednesday, Corry presented a motion to lower Collin’s bond from $50,000 to a personal recognizance bond. The motion included a statement, signed by the witness, who said Collin had never made an effort to intimidate her or induce her to change her testimony.

“I am not currently and never have been in fear of (Collin) and would request that any ‘no-contact’ order that prevents him from contacting me be lifted,” the statement, dated June 20, read.

It also contained an allegation that Chief Deputy District Attorney Myrl Serra had “ignored” that request earlier, when Collin was still in jail, and claimed that he’d wanted Collin to remain in custody.

Serra was not present in court. When contacted later, he told the Daily Press he could not comment on any aspect of the case, but would be filing a response to the motion.

In court, Corry called the woman’s sworn statement straightforward. “I’m not sure what the district attorney can do to dance around it,” he said.

Deputy District Attorney Pat Kramer appeared on Serra’s behalf and said because her office had just received the motion, additional time was needed to prepare a response.

Judge Dennis Friedrich granted the DA seven days for that purpose, citing the potential impact the new information could have on how the DA chose to proceed with the witness intimidation case.

Corry said after proceedings Wednesday that Collin had done nothing wrong.

“Mr. Collin supports medical cannabis. That’s a complete affirmative defense to all charges. We’re hoping the DA shows a sense of proportion and compassion for these medical marijuana patients who can’t obtain it any other way.”

Though a U.S. Supreme Court ruling allows for federal prosecution even in states with medical marijuana laws, Corry said Colorado law allows individual “caregivers” to grow, manufacture, transport and distribute marijuana to patients who have valid prescriptions for medicinal marijuana, as provided for under Colorado’s constitution. “Mr. Collin was not in violation of any laws in the state of Colorado,” he said, nor was Collin charged at a federal level.

Corry successfully defended a similar case in the local 7th Judicial District, winning an acquittal for Gunnison County resident Ryan Margeneau, who grew marijuana for a back injury.

“Colorado’s medical marijuana defense is alive and well in state court,” Corry said.

A trial was set for Oct. 3, but that could change if Collin enters into a plea agreement by the cutoff date of Aug. 24, or if the district attorney’s office drops or amends charges.

A second man, Benman Szeto, was arrested in late March on allegations of marijuana cultivation, after the task force reportedly found evidence pointing to him at Collin’s house. Szeto is due in court at 2:30 p.m. July 10.

[budman]

<span class=postbold>See Also</span>: <a class=postlink href=http://www.palmspringsbum.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?p=624#624 target=_blank>Police keeping tasers amind prob</a>

<span class=postbold>See Also</span>: <a class=postlink href=http://www.palmspringsbum.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?p=627#627 target=_blank>Taser death details vague</a>

<span class=postbold>See Also</span>: <a class=postlink href=http://www.palmspringsbum.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?p=641#641 target=_blank>Dad: Taser use inappropriate</a>

<span class=postbold>See Also</span>: <a class=postlink href=http://www.palmspringsbum.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?p=683#683 target=_blank>Police reviewing Taser policies</a>

<span class=postbold>See Also</span>: <a class=postlink href=http://www.palmspringsbum.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?p=702#702 target=_blank>Speakout: Taser maker staunchly defends product even as bodies pile up</a>

[budman]

Feds Accused of Meddling to Prevent State Drug Law Reform

by Kari Lydersen
The NewStandard


<blockquote class=postbold>Amid accusations that the US Drug Enforcement Administration is covertly opposing a Colorado initiative to legalize marijuana, questions have arisen over federal policy toward state drug laws.</blockquote>

Sept. 11 – Critics are questioning the US Drug Enforcement Administration's operations in Colorado, where they say the agency is overstepping its authority by actively campaigning against a ballot initiative that could legalize marijuana possession.

A pro-legalization group that helped put the initiative on Colorado's November ballot says the DEA is using taxpayer money in an attempt to influence laws, rather than enforce them. As evidence, Safer Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation (SAFER) points to an August 8 e-mail searching for a campaign director to spend $10,000 fighting the legalization initiative and listing a local DEA agent as the contact. The initiative, known as "Amendment 44," would allow anyone over the age of 20 to possess up to one ounce of marijuana.

Jeffrey Sweetin, who heads Denver's DEA, says the affair is a misunderstanding. He told The NewStandard the e-mail was circulated by a private individual who listed agent Michael Moore's name and contact information without notifying Moore.

According to Sweetin, the DEA was involved in an "informational" campaign called the Colorado Marijuana Information Committee, but the agency pulled out after the Committee became a political organization and started fundraising. Sweetin said a member of the Committee sent the e-mail after the DEA resigned as an official participant. He said the agency still provides research upon request to the Committee.

"The DEA does get money to educate the public," Sweetin said. "But is the DEA campaigning to battle this initiative? No."

Initial Colorado media reports about the e-mail described it as coming directly from Agent Moore, and local papers including the Denver Post, the Rocky Mountain News and the Aurora Sentinel published editorials criticizing the DEA's alleged actions. Sweetin said the editorials were based on misinformation since, he says, the e-mail was sent by a "concerned citizen" and not by Moore.

"The person who wrote that e-mail was probably confused and thought the DEA was still involved in the Committee," Sweetin said.

A copy of the e-mail obtained by TNS showed Moore's contact information but not the originating address of the e-mail. Boulder Daily Camera reporter Ryan Morgan, who broke the story, could not be reached for comment. Moore was also not available to comment.

Critics say the DEA's possible intervention in legislative issues is notable because the agency is charged with enforcing laws, not influencing their creation.

"It's clearly inappropriate for the executive branch of the federal government to be spending taxpayer dollars to oppose a statewide ballot initiative," said Steve Fox, executive director of SAFER. "The federal government shouldn't be involved in statewide elections."

There is no evidence that the $10,000 advertised in the e-mail comes directly from the DEA budget, and Sweetin said it was donated by private individuals. But critics of the DEA noted the agency did commit staff time and resources to the organization running the campaign. There is no question the agency was involved in starting the Committee, which is now formally opposing Amendment 44.

Sweetin said the DEA has not been campaigning against Amendment 44, but rather providing information to the public about what the agency sees as the dangers of marijuana. He says the informational campaign was launched to counter what he describes as a misleading ad campaign by SAFER in favor of the ballot initiative. SAFER's campaign claims that legalization is a matter of making alcohol and marijuana regulation equitable.

Meanwhile, advocates for drug-policy reform say the federal government's involvement in state debates over marijuana legalization is not limited to Colorado. They cite visits by the White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy Director John Walters and his staff to various states considering medical marijuana or marijuana de-criminalization initiatives. In August, Walters spoke out in Nevada against a ballot initiative similar to Colorado's, which would legalize, regulate and tax the possession of marijuana for adults 21 and older.

"[Federal Agencies] seem to have decided that it's their job to make the laws, not only enforce the laws," said Bruce Mirken, spokesperson for the Marijuana Policy Project, a national organization that led the drive to collect 86,000 signatures to put the Nevada measure on the state ballot. "That's not the way it should be in a democracy, they should be letting the public decide and enforcing what the voters choose."

Fox of SAFER thinks the situation in Colorado is particularly disturbing since it is the DEA – rather than the White House – that has been most vocal in the debate over the legalization initiative. He thinks that even what the DEA has termed "public education" goes beyond a pure law-enforcement approach.

"Typically, the [White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy] is a little more of an advocacy arm," he said. "I'm not defending them, but their mission is to fight drug abuse in this country, whereas the DEA is purely a law-enforcement arm, which is supposed to enforce the laws as they are, not advocate for laws to be stronger or weaker or with different priorities on different drugs."

[Midnight toker]

DEA: Pot law would strain cops

September 20, 2006
The Rocky Mountain News


Opponents of the proposed ballot measure that would legalize possession of marijuana statewide said today that its passage would put further strains on federal law enforcement.

Drug Enforcement Agent Jeffrey Sweetin said by making the state a place for legalized possession of small amounts, drug runners will begin trafficking in large amounts of marijuana to sell. Large amounts, he said, becomes a federal problem.

"It will clearly impact what we do," he said. "Right now, a smaller amount of focus is on pot, but if this passes, we will be able focus less and less on other drugs and pot will become a major focus."

Standing with medical professionals and Lt. Gov. Jane Norton, they all urged voters to reject Amendment 44 in November. That measure seeks to legalize possession of marijuana by adults across the state.

Supporters of the amendment have said that legalizing marijuana possession for adults — less than an ounce — would free up law enforcement to pursue drugs like methamphetamines and cocaine. They have also claimed prohibition isn’t working and use the prohibition of alcohol in the ‘20s as an example of a failed policy.

[palmspringsbum]

Pot plan would strain authorities, foes say


By David Montero, Rocky Mountain News
September 21, 2006

DEA Special Agent Jeffrey Sweetin holds a baggie of fake marijuana cigarettes as Lt. Gov. Jane Norton, right, and national drug policy and prevention experts conduct a news conference Wednesday to announce a campaign urging voters to reject Amendment 44. The ballot measure would legalize possession of small amounts of marijuana statewide.


Voter approval of a statewide ballot measure that would legalize possession of small amounts of marijuana would put further strains on federal law enforcement officials, opponents of the proposal said Wednesday.

Drug runners will begin trafficking large amounts of marijuana to sell if Colorado voters approve the amendment, Drug Enforcement Agency special agent Jeffrey Sweetin said.

Large amounts, he added, become a serious federal problem.

"It will clearly impact what we do," he said.

"Right now, a smaller amount of focus is on pot, but if this passes, we will be able to focus less and less on other drugs, and pot will become a major focus."

Standing with medical professionals, Sweetin and Lt. Gov. Jane Norton urged voters to reject Amendment 44 in November.

That measure would legalize possession of less than an ounce of marijuana by adults throughout Colorado.

Calvina Fay, executive director of Florida-based Save Our Society from Drugs, said "the stakes are very high" because she believes that this is just the first step toward the pro-Amendment 44 forces' eventual goal of legalizing all drugs throughout the nation.

She also said that legalization would undo much of the anti-drug education that has been a staple of educating youth.

"Messages that drugs can hurt, addict or kill have had a positive effect by decreasing overall drug use," Fay said.

"Certainly by legalizing and normalizing, you're sending the wrong message to children."

The fight over the ballot measure, which a recent Rocky Mountain News/CBS 4 poll showed to be failing 53 percent to 42 percent, has centered largely on the medical effects of marijuana and the age of those who would be allowed to smoke the drug.

Fay said that the amendment would make it legal for an adult to give an ounce of marijuana to a 15-year-old, but proponents said that is misleading.

Mason Tvert, campaign manager for a group that supports the amendment, said that there are already laws on the books that make it a felony to provide marijuana to a minor.

His group wants to make it legal only for those over 21 to possess pot, he said.

Tvert said the opposition forces "bend the truth" about marijuana and are using scare tactics to defeat the measure - including the charge that they're part of a national movement to legalize all drugs and are funded by wealthy individuals and political action groups.

"I have no interest in other drugs, and we don't intend to run a statewide campaign anywhere else in the country," Tvert said.

"They're also trying to say we took money from (billionaire Democratic donor) George Soros. We've never received a cent from George Soros, and believe me, if he offered me $1 or $1,000, I'd take it."

[Midnight toker]

Saturday, September 23, 2006


Safer or not? Amendment 44 prompts questions about pot

Staff Report
The Montrose Daily Press

Marijuana, like alcohol, is an intoxicant. With Amendment 44 on Colorado’s ballot this November, talk has focused on whether issues related to the drug would worsen if the proposal passes.

According to the American Medical Association, marijuana can cause impairment of short-term memory, attention, motor skills, reaction time and organization of complex information. A 2001 report issued by the AMA concerning the pros and cons of medical marijuana (now legal in Colorado) found that 4 to 9 percent of marijuana users meet the diagnostic criteria for substance dependence.

“It is true that tolerance and dependence, the two factors indicating physical addiction, don’t develop as quickly or as intensely with marijuana as they do with other drugs,” Montrose clinical psychologist Nicholas Taylor said.

“However, it is important to note that addiction is a parallel experience involving both physical and psychological factors.”

Taylor didn’t have an opinion on Amendment 44, a measure that would decriminalize the possession of less than one ounce of marijuana by adults over 21 (see related story), but spoke generally of pot’s addictive qualities.

He said that while heavy marijuana use may not lead to severe withdrawal tendencies and cravings, its frequent use to deal with stress can make it hard for people to cope without at least a little bit of the drug. People also use alcohol the same way, Taylor said.

“When it comes to marijuana, regardless the legality of any substance — alcohol and prescription drugs included — it can be psychologically addictive if misused to accomplish a mental state or mood the person is not able to, or is unwilling to accomplish on their own.”

Amendment 44 supporter Mason Tvert said alcohol was far more devastating than marijuana, but legal for adults to consume. Tvert is part of Safer Alternative for Enjoyable Recreation Colorado.

“We don’t encourage them to do it (pot), but the fact is, it’s out there. As adults, we’re faced with many choices. We simply think adults should be allowed to make the rational, safer choice to use marijuana rather than alcohol.”

Additionally, he said it’s marijuana’s illegal status, not its addictive properties, that create the perception that it’s a “gateway drug.”

“People don’t refer to alcohol or tobacco as illegal. But when millions of people use marijuana, we’re forcing them into an illegal market where they have other illegal substance available.”

Opponents said SAFER hadn’t offered any proof that marijuana is less harmful than other drugs. Several organizations have come out against Amendment 44 because they believe it will harm children.

Jeffrey Sweetin, agent in charge of the federal Drug Enforcement Administration’s Rocky Mountain Division said criminalizing alcohol for those under 21 hadn’t stopped them from abusing the substance. (As a federal agency, the DEA does not take official positions on legislation.)

“Using the alcohol example is one piece of evidence that things that are legal for adults become very interesting to kids.”

He pointed to Alaska, which had decriminalized pot for adults, but saw an increase in use and addiction rates for teenagers.

“All of a sudden, we say it’s legal for adults. We’re sending those kids the message, ‘We’re wrong; it’s not harmful.’ We’re really at the edge of sending our kids a very dangerous message and that is that it’s a safe drug.”

But Tvert said the present system isn’t keeping marijuana from kids. He reported that 86 percent of surveyed high school students said it was easy to get marijuana, while others were under the mistaken perception that smoking marijuana once a week was more risky than binge drinking.

“If they’re so concerned about kids using marijuana, we need to take all the resources we’re wasting on adults,” he said. “Clearly, the system’s not working right now. We do not think anyone under 21 should use marijuana, but we do need to tell the truth about it.”

[Midnight toker]

Ballot Issue 44: Vote Your Conscience

YourHub.com
Contributed by: Paul Tiger on 9/27/2006


<table class=posttable align=right width=100><tr><td class=postcell><img class=postimg src=bin/tiger_paul.bmp></td></tr><tr><td class=postcap><center>Paul Tiger</center></td></tr></table>Our state is one of few that has something very close to self-government and direct democracy. It is no wonder that it is the birthplace of the Libertarian Party. It isn't just about partisan politics. Coloradoans with concerns about how they are governed tend to get involved. They meet with their neighbors; speak out in public forums; create lobbyist groups; volunteer in their local and state government, and then succeed in changing policies and laws. It can be infuriating or happily successful, but it is always educational.

Political activism is a good thing, because a read of our constitution tells us that We The People are in fact the government.

Few people want to be governed; most want simply to be left alone, but when it becomes clear that our governing bodies have lost touch with the citizens we have a method of strong change: the ballot box.

Colorado peaks the national average for the number of active voters. In 2004, the People wanted change on a national level and there was a huge increase in the number of active voters. That election was preceded and followed by an increase in political activism.

The desire for change is especially clear in our state as our initiative process allows the governed to change the laws without waiting our representatives in the halls of government. Thusly, this year we have a large number of initiatives on the ballot.

There is a good amount of difficulty getting an initiative on the ballot. Few participants in this work are being paid to do it. For them it is a labor of love, or anger. Unfortunately, in the last few weeks before an election, those who may have worked very hard for years to get a proposed change on the ballot end up facing opponents who just noticed this proposal. Often this means that the opponents are ill-prepared to provide voters with reasonable opposing views.

Citizens who want to get an issue to the ballot must present their case to the state government must follow a distinct set of rules. Those who oppose have fewer rules and often distort facts.

Such is now the case with what many of us know to be Ballot Issue #44.

In 1998 an initiative to make marijuana medicine in our state passed. However, the state Supreme Court decided that the number of signatures that petitioners collected weren't enough, so even though it was on the ballot the votes wouldn't count. The opposition organizers attempted to discredit the proponents as drug fiends. The SoS had been documented in many errors in counting petition signatures in the past. The opposition failed at the ballot box. The court overturned the measure, even though the voters had passed it. After all was said and done, more petition canvas errors were found. Hanky panky in the halls of government. Too late.

In 2000 voters passed a medical marijuana issue that amended the state constitution. This made marijuana available as a basic health right to those whose doctors would approve it for them. The measure won, and the opponents continued their attempts to overrule the will of the voters in the courts, and by bringing in federal muscle. The courts have continued to support the will of the voters and the physician-approved use of medical continues in the present. Colorado is the only state of the eleven that have medical use rights as part of its constitution.

In 2001 the state legislature understood that some percentage of the population would be in possession of small amounts of marijuana, and also understood that many patients would like to be able to grow their own to effect the quality of this drug. Quality, not quantity. The constitution now stated how much an approved medical user could grow, which is very small, but the state statutes continued to make possession and cultivation a felony. Putting citizens in jail for possession of something that the constitution allowed created a quandary for the police; courts; corrections; and an immense fiscal burden on the state. Thus the legislature passed a new law that decriminalized for the possession of small amounts. This is Colorado Revised Statute 18-18-406. It's very simple: possession of less than an ounce is no more than a $100 fine and a class two petty offense. There is no incremental penalty and no criminal record.

Now, five years after the creation of this state law, marijuana proponents seek further decriminalize by making possession of less than an ounce legal for adults. At the same time the proposed measure specifically sets an age limitation that does not currently exist in the present law. As with alcohol, we find that adults are age 21 and older.

People of all ages consume both alcohol and marijuana. With alcohol, those under 21 are considered minors and banned from consumption and possession of liquor. With marijuana, everyone is banned. Legality doesn't seem to concern those that marijuana over alcohol, but the legal system finds them to be different and does prosecute them. This is not just a burden on marijuana users, but on all taxpayers.

The opponents of ballot issue 44 have been telling voters that this measure, if passed, will allow children to possess marijuana and to allow adults to give marijuana to those under 21. This is not what the language of the proposal states. It is very clear in setting an age limitation. The opposition is unfazed by the simple truth and has continued to represent a complete falsehood. What the proponents have come to understand is that the opposition was unaware of this state law for the past five years. We understand that they want re-criminalization, not less.

So here's a question: Why haven't those interested in criminal prosecutions of marijuana users lobbied the legislature or brought about their own ballot initiative?

Well they certainly have lobbied the legislature, and were rebuffed. The lawmakers understood the will of the people and followed their constituents' lead. It is far too costly, both financially and in human terms, to jail people for possession of minor amounts of marijuana. The police are burdened with many tasks in public safety. Deferring their resources to what is truly a victimless crime and a matter of personal choice sandbags the police and judicial system.

The opponents haven't gone after a ballot initiative for a number of reasons: First and foremost, their ideals on prohibition are a minority in free-thinking Colorado. Secondly, it is costly to bring about a ballot initiative, and they simply don't have the organizational skills and money to get it done.

With just over a month before we go to the polls, the minority opponents of the measure to legalize small amounts of marijuana are scrambling to come up with ideas to convince voters that 44 is a bad idea. We've heard statistical fabrications; misstatements of the current laws; and insults of proponents as being drug fiends. They've even blamed the lawmakers for the passage of 18-18-406, and have been telling voters that they were misled in passing the medical marijuana initiative back in 2000.

They've brought in the big guns from Washington, who on the taxpayers dime are 'volunteering' to help. Let's not be misled here: The DEA is not helping for free; we are paying the federal government to oppose 44. The opponents don't have to pay a penny for this help, because they've gotten you to pay for it for them.

What is so confounding is that both opponents and proponents appear to have the same goals: keep drugs out of the hand of children. Legalize marijuana for 21 and older, and clarify criminality for those younger.

We trust in the intelligent and freedom loving nature of Colorado voters. Please vote your conscience this November, not someone else's.

Paul Tiger -- Longmont

[Midnight toker]

Drug War Chronicle - world’s leading drug policy newsletter

Feature: Colorado Marijuana Legalization Initiative Trails, But the Fight Is On

from Drug War Chronicle, Issue #455, 9/29/06

Last year, SAFER Colorado largely flew under the radar to a surprise win with its Denver marijuana legalization initiative. This time around, SAFER Colorado's Colorado Marijuana-Alcohol Equalization Initiative, now known officially as Amendment 44, is not having it so easy. But initiative organizers say they are within striking distance and preparing for a frantic last few weeks before the November elections.

<table class=posttable align=right width=250><tr><td class=postcell><img class=postimg src=bin/rockies.jpg></td></tr><tr><td class=postcap align=center>Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado</td></tr></table>Like the Denver initiative, which legalized the possession of up to an ounce of marijuana by adults via a municipal ordinance (and which city officials promptly ignored), Amendment 44 is elegant in its simplicity. Voters will be asked: "Shall there be an amendment to section 18-18-406 (1) of the Colorado revised statutes making legal the possession of one ounce or less of marihuana for any person twenty-one years of age or older?"

If voters approve of the measure, Colorado could become the first state in the nation to vote to legalize the weed. Or, in a perfect world, it would join Nevada, where an initiative to allow the possession and sale of limited amounts of marijuana is on the ballot and very competitive.

But the fight is on. In the last two weeks, Coloradans have witnessed dueling press conferences, a challenge to Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, who owns the Wynkoop Brewery, a debate between SAFER Colorado's Mason Tvert and Colorado Attorney General John Suthers, a failed challenge to some bad ballot guide language, repeated visits by high-profile, out-of-state anti-drug crusaders, and the emergence of a parents' group in favor of the initiative.

At a news conference in front of the state capitol last week, Guarding Our Children Against Marijuana Prohibition made its public debut. “We need to rethink marijuana prohibition and what it says about the priorities of Colorado and this nation,” said Jessica Peck Corry, cofounder of the organization. “The science shows that marijuana is far less harmful than alcohol and for our children’s sake it is time we treat it that way," said the conservative Republican public policy analyst with the Independence Institute in Golden, Colorado, who is also the mother of a 16-month-old daughter.

"I'm not a marijuana user," Corry told Drug War Chronicle Wednesday. "I see the drug war, however, as a greater threat to my daughter's future than the recreational use of marijuana by adults could ever be. Our government has spent $2 billion in anti-drug ads since 1998. I'd rather have this money spent on college scholarships for needy kids from our poorest communities. It's time to wake up to the fact that prohibition isn't working," she explained. "We say our nation trusts adults to make decisions in their private lives. It's time we live up to this promise."

"We're doing something right," said SAFER Colorado's Mason Tvert in between press events. "We've got two people running this whole campaign, no millions of dollars, no office, no multiple phone lines, and we're in a very competitive fight," he told Drug War Chronicle. "While the Rocky Mountain News had us down 42% to 53%, they only polled people who had voted in previous elections. But we're not too concerned with polling; last year, we were polling lower than this in Denver, and we won."

What SAFER Colorado is concerned with is winning the campaign and using innovative tactics. Thursday, for instance, Tvert issued a challenge to Mayor Hickenlooper on the occasion of the opening of the Great American Beer Fest. Since "marijuana is safer than alcohol" is SAFER's constant -- and so far successful -- refrain, Tvert challenged Hickenlooper and Peter Coors. For every beer they drank, Tvert said, he would take a hit of marijuana. Neither Coors nor the mayor bit, but the challenge garnered even more media attention for Tvert and the initiative.

"This ongoing duel with the mayor is a win-win for us," Tvert exclaimed. "Either he shows up and gets killed or he doesn’t show up and looks bad. We're trying to do something fun and new and interesting that clearly explains our position that marijuana is safer than alcohol. We hope Bill O'Reilly is watching; we'd love for him come after us."

As in Nevada, the opposition is gearing up in Colorado, and it's bringing in outsiders from national anti-drug organizations. Coming to the rescue of Colorado children are such self-appointed crusaders as Dads and Mad Moms Against Drug Dealers head Steven Steiner, who, after his son died of an Oxycontin overdose, took funding from Oxycontin's manufacturer, Purdue Pharma, to campaign against marijuana legalization and even medical marijuana. He hit town on Thursday. Already parachuting in to help stop the initiative is long-time anti-drug zealot Calvina Faye, executive director of the Drug Free America Foundation. Former White House deputy drug czar Dr. Andrea Barthwell has joined the carpetbagging crew, too; she plans to wage the fight with a series of lectures to alert people to the dangers of the devil's weed.

"These folks are crazy," moaned SAFER Colorado's Tvert. "These people who come out here like Calvina Faye talking about 'our' children in 'our' state -- she lives in Florida and she doesn’t even have children! And Andrea Barthwell, with her little marijuana lectures. At her first one, the only person to show up was our infiltrator, and they threw him out. The lectures are designed to convince you that marijuana is bad, but apparently you had to already agree with that to attend," he snorted.

But it's not all outsiders. Leading Colorado elected officials, including Attorney General John Sutherland and Lt. Gov. Jane Nelson are members of a new "grassroots" organization opposing the measure, Stop Amendment 44. That group has so far managed to line up the Colorado PTA, the Colorado Education Association, and the Colorado Association of School Executives against the initiative.

The group is led by Boulder County Republican Party chairman Rob McGuire, whom Tvert qualified as a worthy adversary. "He's very sharp and he uses clever positions," Tvert said. "But he's only doing this because the governor asked him to. Still, the group is a problem. Groups are beginning to come out against us."

McGuire may be a sharp operator -- we wouldn’t know because he would not return repeated calls for comment -- but the Stop Amendment 44 web site has things as crazy as anything Calvina Fay or Steven Steiner ever said. One page warns that "Marijuana Gumballs can pack enough THC to kill a small child!," a patently absurd proposition. Another page on the site, "He Was Only 12 Years Old -- Now Disabled By Marijuana" is written by Colorado anti-marijuana crusader Beverly Kinard and pretty much speaks for itself.

It looks like October is going to be a very interesting month in Colorado. Can SAFER Colorado pull another upset like it did in Denver last year? The element of surprise is gone, but the group and its allies hope their message and their media assault can combine to compensate for that and make Colorado the first state where voters have chosen to legalize marijuana.

[palmspringsbum]

Amendment Could Legalize Marijuana In Colorado

<big><span class=postbold>Should Marijuana be Legal? </span></big>

Katherine Cook
KKTV


Would legalizing marijuana in Colorado make our state safer? Supporters of Amendment 44 say yes. If passed, the amendment would allow adults 21 and older to legally possess up to an ounce of marijuana at a time. Supporters of Amendment 44 are using the campaign slogan, "The Safest Thing In The World," in reference to marijuana, denying claims by opponents that it is a gateway drug. Campaign Manager Mason Tvert says the only thing that makes pot a gateway drug is its illegal status.

"We're forcing otherwise law-abiding citizens into an illegal market where they find illegal drugs," said Tvert.

But Drug Czar John Walters says legal or illegal, marijuana is and always will be part of a deadly and destructive business.

"The same mafias that kill people on the boarder and slaughter judges and prosecutors in Mexico make the bulk of their money on marijuana sold here in the US," said Walters.

Walters was in Southern Colorado Wednesday to speak out against Amendment 44. Unlike past efforts to legalize marijuana for medical reasons, supporters of Amendment 44 aim to legalize the drug purely for recreational use, with the goal of reducing the consumption of alcohol-- a drug Tvert says is much more dangerous than marijuana.

"If adults who use alcohol use marijuana instead, there would be fewer cases of domestic violence, over-doses, death and so on," said Tvert.

Walters disagrees.

"It (Amendment 44) suggests we can decrease the real effects of alcohol by having greater harms from marijuana," said Tvert. "That's ludicrous."

Opponents of Amendment 44 say the initiative would also allow those over 21 to give marijuana to kids as young as 15. However Tvert says that is misinformation and not true.

[palmspringsbum]

Pot charges to proceed despite medical defense

By SARA REED
SaraReed@coloradoan.com
The Coloradoan
October 16, 2006


A Fort Collins couple still faces charges of possession and cultivation of marijuana after a judge today refused to dismiss the charges under Colorado’s medical marijuana law.

District Court Judge Jolene Blair told Lisa and James Masters she couldn’t dismiss the charges because there is no state documentation showing they are caregivers for people authorized to use marijuana for medical purposes.

The Masters’ attorney, Robert Corry, told Blair that they did not have the documentation but were attempting to show their exemption through testimony from patients and others.

Amendment 20, passed by Colorado voters in November 2000, allows patients to grow, possess and use marijuana for medicinal purposes if recommended by doctors. It also allows designated caregivers for those patients to grow and possess marijuana.

The amendment created a registry, overseen by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, which provides documentation for patients given a medical marijuana recommendation by a doctor. Such registration isn’t required if the patient is growing or possesses his or her own marijuana.

However, for someone to be named a caregiver, the patient must get on the registry and list that person as their designated caregiver, according to Ron Hyman, the Colorado register of vital statistics.

More details in Tuesday’s Coloradoan.

[palmspringsbum]

Charges in medical marijuana case stand

Judge: Couple missing caregiver documentation

By SARA REED
SaraReed@coloradoan.com
The Coloradoan
October 17, 2006

<table class=posttable align=right width=260><tr><td class=postcell colspan=2>
<center><span class=postbold><big>By the numbers</big></span></center>
</td></tr><tr><td class=postcell align=right>931</td><td class=postcell>Number of registered medical marijuana patients in Colorado</td></tr><tr><td class=postcell align=right>82</td><td class=postcell width=190>Number of registered medical marijuana patients in Larimer County</td></tr><tr><td class=postcell align=right>77</td><td class=postcell>The percentage of patients who report severe pain as a condition that requires medical marijuana</td></tr><tr><td class=postcell align=right>70</td><td class=postcell>The percentage of patients who are male</td></tr><tr><td class=postcell align=right>45</td><td class=postcell>The average age of registered medical marijuana patients</td></tr><tr><td class=postcell colspan=2>
Source: The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment

<hr class=postrule align=center>


<center><span class=postbold><big>Requirements for<br>medical marijuana license</big></span></center><ul class=postlist><li> A recommendation from a medical doctor stating the patient has a debilitating condition that might be alleviated by the medical use of marijuana</li>

<li> An application from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment</li>

<li> $110 annual fee to the department</li>

<li> If you want to designate a caregiver, do so on the application. This must be done for someone else to grow or possess medical marijuana on your behalf.</li></ul>

Source: The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment

</td></tr></table>A Fort Collins couple still faces charges of possession and cultivation of marijuana after a judge refused Monday to dismiss the charges under Colorado's medical marijuana law.

It was the first court test of a provision in Amendment 20, the medical marijuana law passed by voters in November 2000.

District Court Judge Jolene Blair told Lisa and James Masters she couldn't dismiss the charges because there is no state documentation showing they are caregivers for people authorized to use marijuana for medical purposes.

The Masterses' attorney, Rob Corry, told Blair they did not have the documentation but were attempting to show their exemption through testimony from patients and others.

The amendment allows patients to grow, possess and use marijuana for medicinal purposes - including HIV/AIDS and cancer patients - if recommended by a physician. It also allows designated caregivers for those patients to grow and possess marijuana.

Lisa and James Masters both have medical conditions that resulted in a doctor's recommendation for medical marijuana, Corry said after the hearing.

But they don't have the necessary state documentation to grow marijuana, the focus of their court case.

They decided to focus their case more on the caregiver exemption to protect their privacy.

Corry declined to disclose what medical condition either had that led to the recommendation of medical marijuana.

The couple were arrested Aug. 2 when police were called to check the welfare of the couple's two children, ages 4 and 6, according to an affidavit from Fort Collins police. The officer smelled marijuana in the house and the couple told the officers they had a doctor's recommendation for medical marijuana and they were growing it for that purpose.

The children had been in foster care but have since been reunited with their parents, according to discussions held in court Monday.

Continued negotiations with prosecutors are likely before the couple returns to court at 8:30 a.m. Dec. 12.

The amendment created a registry, overseen by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, that provides a permit of sorts for patients who have a doctor's recommendation for medical marijuana.

Registration isn't required if the patient is growing or possesses his or her own marijuana.

However, for someone to be named a caregiver, the patient must get on the registry and list that person as their designated caregiver, according to Ron Hyman, the Colorado registrar of vital statistics.

Only then, Hyman said, can that person be recognized as a caregiver and qualify for the exemption.

[palmspringsbum]

<i>...we scoff at any system that would decriminalize possession while growing and distribution would remain against the law.</i>

Interesting point. One I haven't seen anyone make yet. Who profits from such a law?

<span class=postbold>editorial </span>

Amendment 44 a cloud of smoke

Amendment 44, which would legalize possession of a small amount of marijuana, should be rejected. It's a national issue, not a state one.

The Denver Post
Article Last Updated:10/21/2006 09:57:42 AM MDT

It's the shortest proposal on this year's statewide ballot, but Amendment 44 touches on a host of thorny legal, social and health issues and has garnered a fair measure of national attention. If passed, it would change state law to allow people over 21 to possess an ounce or less of marijuana without legal penalty.

The Post recommends a "no" vote.

That said, we agree that the issue of marijuana decriminalization has many shades of gray.

An estimated 25.4 million Americans use marijuana at least once a year, and about 97 million are believed to have tried it at least once. (About 120 million Americans regularly drink alcoholic beverages, which is legal, though drinking carries many of the same risks as marijuana.) Nearly half a million Coloradans have used marijuana in the past year, according to federal statistics.

Given such significant use, it's reasonable to think that the "drug war" isn't working as far as marijuana is concerned.

But, marijuana use has declined steadily for many years - the peak was in 1979 - and anti-drug advocates also point to dropping teen marijuana use as a sign that enforcement and anti-drug campaigns are working.

The debate is highly charged, full of clashing studies and fiercely held philosophies about protecting young people on one side and personal freedom and adult choice on the other.

The Colorado debate mirrors the divide. Proponents somewhat disingenuously argue that smoking dope is safer than drinking booze, so marijuana use by adults ought to be decriminalized. Opponents, including law-enforcement types, have sometimes veered toward "reefer madness" territory in their arguments.

It's tempting to ask if passing Amendment 44 would make much difference. Colorado already is one of 11 states that impose just a fine (in our case, up to $100), not jail time, for simple possession.

It's clear that marijuana laws are ignored by many people, and laws that aren't respected can always stand review. But it's also clear that marijuana use has significant risks, something society should not ignore.

Some have suggested that marijuana use be legalized but regulated and taxed. (A measure before Nevada voters would set up such a system.)

But the debate can't be ended by a couple of states voting on ballot measures. If marijuana use is to be decriminalized, declared a medical problem not a crime problem, or be otherwise redefined, the decision should be made at the national level. Or Congress could allow marijuana use to be regulated by states, as happened with alcohol when Prohibition ended.

In the meantime, we worry about the message to young people if Colorado passes 44, and we scoff at any system that would decriminalize possession while growing and distribution would remain against the law.

We urge voters to just say say "no" on 44.

[palmspringsbum]

Ad watch: Why should adults be able to use marijuana instead of alcohol?

<table class=posttable align=right width=300><tr><td class=postcell><img class=postimg src=bin/colorado_ad.jpg></td></tr></table>Article Last Updated:10/31/2006 11:06:32 PM MST
The Denver Post

<span class=postbold>Title:</span> Why should adults be able to use marijuana instead of alcohol?

<span class=postbold>Type:</span> TV ad

<span class=postbold>Sponsor:</span> Safer Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation, supporters of Amendment 44, which would legalize pot for recreational use.

<span class=postbold>Message:</span> The ad gives statistics about the dangers of alcohol in an attempt to show that marijuana is a safer alternative. A narrator says that two-thirds of all spousal-abuse cases are alcohol-related and that nearly three-quarters of all college rapes occur while a female is intoxicated by alcohol. The commercial continues, "Do we want our daughters growing up in a society where the only legal substance for recreation is alcohol? Not if we love them."

<span class=postbold>Fact:</span> The statistics in the ad are correct, according to reports by the U.S. Department of Justice and the Harvard School of Public Health. However, using marijuana has its own dangers, including adverse affects to the brain, lungs and mental health, according to numerous medical authorities.

- Felisa Cardona

[palmspringsbum]

Associated Press

Colo. Pro-Pot Ads Target Bush, Cheney

By ROBERT WELLER 11.04.06, 8:08 PM ET
Forbes

<table class=posttable align=right width=220><tr><td class=postcell><img class=postimg src=bin/colorado_ad_cheney.jpg></td></tr></table>A group that claims marijuana use is safer than drinking ran newspaper ads Saturday mentioning allegations that President Bush once drunkenly challenged his father to fight and Vice President Dick Cheney's accidental shooting of a friend after drinking.

SAFER Colorado, which put a measure on the Colorado ballot to legalize possession of marijuana, placed an ad in a newspaper in Greeley, where Bush made an appearance on Saturday.

The ad in the Greeley Tribune had a photo of Bush accompanied by text that read: "In 1972, this man tried to fight his dad when he was drunk. Just one more reason to vote 'Yes on 44.'" The ad was referring to published reports that in 1972, a 26-year-old Bush had come home drunk and challenged his father to a fight. The matter was reportedly settled without violence.

The group ran the Cheney ad in The Gazette of Colorado Springs, a day after he spoke to troops at the nearby Fort Carson Army post and attended a campaign rally. The ad said, "Shot his friend in the face after drinking. Just one more reason to vote 'Yes on 44.'"

Cheney accidentally shot and wounded a friend while hunting in Texas in February. The vice president said he had one beer several hours before the shooting.

"They were both in town ... and we are simply taking this opportunity to draw attention to the fact that alcohol contributes to far more problems than marijuana," said Mason Tvert, the group's campaign director.

White House spokesman Tony Snow, asked for comment aboard Air Force One as Bush headed to Texas after the rally, dismissed the ads as "kind of snarky and juvenile."

"I'm not sure they did their cause much good," he said.

Referendum 44, which is on Tuesday's ballot, would allow adults to carry up to an ounce of marijuana, similar to an ordinance Denver voters approved last year. No other state allows pot possession for anything other than medical use. Federal law also prohibits possession.

A recent poll of 625 registered voters by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research found 34 percent of voters supported the measure, while 57 percent opposed it. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.


Associated Press writer Nedra Pickler contributed to this report.

[palmspringsbum]

Safe Access: Beauprez for Governor

Contributed by: Paul Tiger on 11/5/2006
YourHub.com

For those of you yet to vote, here are some facts* about who's pro marijuana with a proven track record. In particular, I am addressing the governor's race.

This year (2006), and for the fourth year in a row, the Hinchey-Rohrabacher amendment came to a vote in the US House of Representatives. This bill was originally crafted by Dana Rohrabacher, a Californian Republican, and Maurice Hinchey, a New York Democrat.

The amendment specifically prohibits the Department of Justice from using appropriated funds to interfere with the implementation of medical cannabis laws in the 13 states that have approved such use.

House voting has taken place on the amendment on July 23rd of 03; July 7th of 04; June 16th of 05; and on June 23rd of 06. I give these exact dates so that you can check my facts*.

[ In might be noted for humor sake that the first House session role call on in 2003 as the issue of Hinchey-Rohrabacher came up for debate was known as "Roll Call #420" ]

Every time that Hinchey-Rohrabacher has come to a vote, Bob Beauprez has voted in favor. Additionally, so have Tom Tancredo, Mark Udall, and Diana DeGette.

In 2003 & 2004, before John Salazar went to Washington, his predecessor Tom Strickland voted for Hinchey-Rohrabacher. Since RepresentativeSalazar took office in 2005, Colorado now has one more vote against Hinchey-Rohrabacher.

Known opposition of Hinchey-Rohrabacher from Colorado in the US Congress are House Representatives Marylyn Musgrave, and Joe Hefley. Outspoken US senatorial critics of this amendment and supporters of marijuana criminalization from Colorado are Ken Salazar and Wayne Allard. Ken Salazar's predecessor, Ben Nighthorse Campbell was for marijuana decriminalization.

Bob Beauprez has proven to be a representative of the laws and constitution of Colorado. Our laws give us marijuana as a basic medical right, and without question Mr. Beauprez supports these rights.

Bill Ritter has been the Denver DA since 1993. He touts his leadership in the creation of one of the nation's very first drug courts, and sat on the board for the National Association of Drug Court Professionals. Bill Ritter is the Vice President of the National Association of District Attorneys.

The Denver drug court has seen many medical marijuana cases with Ritter's staff as the prosecution. Ritter has prosecuted Denver marijuana possession cases, even though the citizens of Denver approved legalization for minor amounts in 2005 with the passage on the ballot of I-100. He has defied the will of the voters, and his track record proves this.

Bill Ritter is anti-marijuana in all respects.

Of the front-runners in the race for Governor of the state of Colorado, Bob Beauprez is the clear choice for pro-marijuana legalization advocates.

If you are going to the polls on Tuesday and you want to be sure that Coloradoans will have safe access to medical marijuana, then please cast a vote for Bob Beauprez.


Paul Tiger, member of NORML

*A bibliography for some of the facts presented here can be found:
Americans for Safe Access
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/article.php?id=3471

DrugScience.org
http://www.drugscience.org/Archive/bcr1 ... _reg8.html

The Congressional Record of the US Congress
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/crecord/index.html

[palmspringsbum]

Marijuana amendment goes up in smoke

By David Montero, Rocky Mountain News
November 7, 2006

<table class=posttable align=right width=240><tr><td class=postcell><img class=postimg src=bin/tvert_mason.jpg></td></tr><tr><td lass=postcap>Mason Tvert, campaign manager for Amendment 44, waves at passing motorists on the corner of Colfax and Lincoln avenues.</td></tr></table>Colorado voters snuffed out a ballot measure seeking to legalize possession of up to an ounce of marijuana for those 21 and older, according to a projection by the Rocky Mountain News.

Amendment 44 would have made Colorado the first state to legalize marijuana use for recreational purposes. Previously, several states - including Colorado - passed medical marijuana initiatives that allowed for the distribution of the drug for those battling illness.

Colorado was one of two states considering a recreational use provision regarding pot this election. The other state was Nevada.

But many voters stood in the way.

Barbara Reed, a 65-year-old retiree who lives in Denver, voted against the amendment, saying "we have enough that’s legal. I’ve known people who have used drugs, and it started with marijuana."

Even if it had passed, Amendment 44 wouldn’t technically have made pot smoking legal in Colorado. It is still a violation of federal drug laws - though federal drug enforcement officials have said publicly they will not actively seek to arrest, try and convict users in possession of an ounce or less.

Mason Tvert, campaign manager for Amendment 44, said he believed the success of Denver’s passage of an initiative seeking to legalize pot possession last year signaled the mood of citizens of the state. But voters didn't back the statewide initiative.

"I wish I knew (why it failed). I think years of marijuana prohibition happened and people have heard half-truths about it all their lives," Tvert said. "Now we're seeing in several counties a majority of people who want to change marijuana laws."

"Our goal is about changing people, not laws."

He said he sees legalization happening in "five to 10 years perhaps." He said he's not sure what his next step is, but he did say, "I do live in Colorado and I'd like ot see the laws change where I live."

"Why shouldn’t adults over the age of 21 be able to make a safer choice by choosing to smoke marijuana instead of consuming alcohol?" he asked.

"That’s all we’re trying to accomplish - to give adults the right to make a safer choice."

Some voters supported the move.

"It should be a non-issue," said Quentin Schermerhorn, 23, a Democrat who voted at the Colorado Convention Center. "Any war on drugs should be done on other substances instead of marijuana."

The campaign has been opposed largely by Save Our Society from Drugs. Its Colorado-based spokesman, Robert McGuire, said the Amendment 44 campaign is simply trying to use Colorado as the first step toward legalizing all drugs nationally.

He said he thought that voters would "see through" the pro-pot agenda and would defeat the statewide ballot measure.

"People are smart enough to understand what’s at stake here," he said. "People don’t want their children growing up in a society that says drug use is OK."

Federal drug enforcement officials said they feared drug traffickers would begin shipping more pot to Colorado because it would have been viewed as "a drug tourist spot." But Tvert argued that the current fines - a misdemeanor offense and a $100 ticket - show that the government doesn’t really consider possession of an ounce of marijuana a serious problem anyway.

"If they did, they wouldn’t have such light penalties," he said.

Tvert’s campaign strategy relied heavily on penetrating markets not normally targeted in politics. Advertising on alternative radio stations, using text messaging and pushing a massive voter registration drive on the three largest college campuses appeared to make a difference.

But he admitted registering the youth wasn’t enough. They actually would have to show up and vote - not something that can always be relied upon. And some of those they registered at Colorado State University said they wouldn’t support the measure.

Most students opposed to the ballot measure suggested that pot was so readily available anyway that they simply didn’t see a need to legalize it. But student supporters said they felt it was a waste of resources to continue to try to prosecute those in possession of less than an ounce.

Even some Republican activists joined the pro-44 campaign, saying it is a question of personal freedom and the government should stay out of it.

Among Republicans to support the measure were activist Jessica Cory and talk show host Mike Rosen.

Attorney General John Suthers said the passage of an initiative in Denver last year was misleading in projecting statewide support for legalizing pot.

"This time around, we were able to educate the voters on what it meant and I don't think people were ready to embrace the legalization of marijuana," Suthers said.


Copyright 2006, Rocky Mountain News. All Rights Reserved.

[palmspringsbum]

Colorado outlaws gay marriage


The Summit Daily News
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
November 8, 2006

DENVER — Colorado voters overwhelmingly outlawed gay marriage Tuesday, joining more than two dozen other states in amending their constitutions to declare marriage must be a union between a man and a woman.

A second proposal that would award same-sex couples some of the same benefits enjoyed by married spouses under state law was failing.

Jon Paul, director of the pro-ban group Coloradans for Marriage, said he knew it would be a tight race in part because of the money poured into the race by Colorado-based software millionaire Tim Gill, a deep-pocketed supporter of gay rights.

“We knew we were in for a fight from the beginning. But we also knew that Coloradans believed marriage was between one man and won woman. We just had to make sure that people got to vote for it,” Paul said.

With 61 percent of the projected vote counted, the gay marriage ban Amendment 43 had 57 percent support to 43 percent against it, or 608,466 votes to 460,349. Referendum I, the domestic partnerships proposal, was losing 55 percent to 45 percent, or 584,524 votes to 484,268.

Facing the second-longest ballot in Colorado history, voters also overwhelmingly rejected a proposal to legalize adult possession of up to an ounce of marijuana, a proposal which Denver voters approved last year. Amendment 44 lost with 61 percent voting against it.

They also approved a ban on all gifts over $50 to any lawmaker or government employee. Experts at the National Conference of State Legislatures said Amendment 41 gives Colorado one of the toughest government ethics laws in the nation.

Voters also rejected Amendment 40, which would have limited judges on the Colorado Court of Appeals and the Colorado Supreme Court to three, four-year terms.

The other high-profile issues on the 14-item state ballot included Amendment 42, which would raise Colorado’s minimum wage from $5.15 to $6.85 per hour, adjusted annually for inflation. That ballot measure was too close to call late Tuesday.

Colorado was one of eight states where voters were deciding whether to amend their state constitutions to ban gay marriage. Twenty states have already done so and six more joined them Tuesday.

The dominant issue for many was gay marriage.

Business owner John Lindsey, 48, of Glenwood Springs voted for Amendment 43 and against Referendum I.

“I’m not anti-gay, so to speak, but there are a lot of ramifications that go around that,” said Lindsey, a married Republican who described himself as a traditionalist.

Among other things, Referendum I would allow the couples to adopt children and require alimony and child support if they separate. It would also ensure that their partners can make medical decisions for them and the right to inherit property even without a will.

Referendum I says domestic partnerships are not marriages, though opponents said it delivered the same benefits enjoyed by spouses.

Supporters of Amendment 43 hoped a recent court decision in New Jersey ordering lawmakers to endorse gay marriage or civil unions would boost turnout here. Yet Colorado was rocked last week by the resignation of evangelical leader Ted Haggard — a prominent backer of the amendment — amid allegations that he paid for gay sex.

Denver pollster Floyd Ciruli said the allegations against Haggard likely helped sway undecided voters against Referendum I.

“The goal of the gay-rights advocates was to keep it very low key,” Ciruli said, but instead Haggard’s troubles put a spotlight on the issue.

“What they had was a huge controversy on the front page related to the most controversial aspects of the gay lifestyle,” Ciruli said.

State law already defines marriage as being between one man and one woman, but Amendment 43 supporters said that could be overturned by a judge and the better move was a constitutional amendment.

Joshua Tafoya, 22, a literature major at Mesa State College in Grand Junction, voted against the marriage amendment and yes on Referendum I. He said whatever goes on in someone’s bedroom isn’t his business or the government’s.

“Personally if it were me, and I was on my deathbed, I would want to give what I want to who I want without the state intervening,” said Tafoya, a single Democrat.

— Editor’s note: This was the most up-to-date information as of 1:15 a.m. press time

[palmspringsbum]

Pro-pot proposal takes a big hit

<span class=postbigbold>Overwhelmingly, voters just saying no to legalization</span>

By David Montero, Rocky Mountain News
November 8, 2006

By about a 2-1 ratio, voters snuffed out a measure that would have allowed adults 21 and over to possess up to an ounce of marijuana.

With 701 precincts reporting, it appeared to be doomed to defeat, especially since it was barely getting a split vote in traditionally liberal Boulder County.

That was the news Robert McGuire, spokesman for the Colorado Chapter of Save Our Society from Drugs, had been waiting to hear.

"We're pretty happy with the way things turned out," he said. "Our goal was to beat it badly enough so we don't see it again on the ballot.

Mason Tvert, campaign manager for Amendment 44, said he "wasn't disappointed by the results" and conceded defeat early in the evening.

"We had a yearlong conversation about marijuana," he said. "We still believe there are a larger number of people in favor of changing the laws."

"We think the writing is on the wall," he added.

If the initiative passed, it would have made Colorado the first state to legalize marijuana use for recreational purposes. Previously, several states - including Colorado - passed medical marijuana initiatives that allowed for the distribution of the drug for those battling illness.

Colorado was one of two states considering a recreational use provision on pot this election. The other state was Nevada.

Even if it had passed, Amendment 44 wouldn't have technically made pot smoking legal in Colorado. It is still a violation of federal drug laws - though federal drug enforcement officials said publicly they will not actively seek to arrest, try and convict users in possession of an ounce or less.

Some supporters of the amendment thought the success of Denver's passage of an initiative seeking to legalize pot possession last year signaled the mood of citizens of the state. Tvert led that successful campaign.

The campaign had been opposed largely by Save Our Society from Drugs - a Florida-based group that made several sojourns to the state to drum up opposition against the measure.

Through McGuire, they successfully brought the director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy to campaign against it as well as employing the help of Colorado Attorney General John Suthers.

Suthers said he was pleased to see the amendment go down to defeat and said voters never bought the argument made by Tvert that marijuana was safer than alcohol.

"Usually when this issue comes up, the debate centers on Libertarian values," he said. "This was a different approach and one that didn't work."

The opponents of the amendment also believed, along with federal drug enforcement officials, that passage would bring more drug traffickers to Colorado because it would be seen as "a drug tourist spot."

But Tvert argued that the current fines - a misdemeanor offense and a $100 ticket - show that the government doesn't really consider possession of an ounce of marijuana a serious problem anyway.

"If they did, they wouldn't have such light penalties," he said.

Voters from both parties were unimpressed with the campaign's strategy to declare the war on drugs as failed.

Jared Klarquist, 24, and a registered Democrat, couldn't bring himself to cast a ballot for it.

"I think pot is bad, it's a real de-motivator," he said. "As poorly as the war on drugs is going, I don't feel legalizing it is the way to make things better."

<span class=postbold>Amendment 44</span>

Would have legalized the adult possession of an ounce or less or marijuana<ul class=postlist><li> <b>Winners: John Suthers.</b> He became the face of the anti-44 movement and used his clout to push against legalization. The campaign group, Florida-based Save Our Society from Drugs, received $37,000 in contributions - the largest from Denver resident Kevin Kaufman who gave $20,000. </li>

<li> <b>Losers: Mason Tvert</b>, campaign manager for Amendment 44. He was able to spearhead legalization in Denver last year but couldn't muster enough support statewide. The campaign was mostly funded by the SAFER Voter Education Fund, which poured more than $148,000 into the losing effort. </li>

<li> <b>What's next?</b> It's possible Tvert could try again, but for now, pot is still illegal.</li></ul>

[palmspringsbum]

Ill man claims wrongs in jail

By Sue Lindsay, Rocky Mountain News

December 8, 2006

<table class=posttable align=right width=240><tr><td class=postcell><img class=postimg src=bin/thomason_timothy.jpg></td></tr><tr><td class=postcap>Timothy Thomason, who is dying of lymphoma and must take high doses of painkillers including liquid morphine, says he was denied pain medications while in jail after being arrested late last August in Denver. Thomason is shown at his mother's home in Denver on Wednesday.</td></tr></table>Timothy Thomason lives a life of pain.

Terminally ill with lymphoma and subject to wrenching joint pain associated with his cancer, Thomason depends on a regimen of high-powered painkillers, including OxyContin and liquid morphine.

The Denver man also has had a license to use marijuana to control his nausea and increase his appetite.

But Thomason, 32, was arrested Aug. 25 after Denver police came to his door to investigate a claim that he was growing marijuana with an expired license.

The police allowed Thomason to bring his pain medication with him to jail and informed the jail nurse that he was sick, Thomason said.

But Thomason contends he was barred from taking his pain medicine and forced to endure a 24-hour ordeal of humiliating treatment by deputies and excruciating pain from his illness that led to seizures.

"I was treated like an animal," -Thomason said. "I've experienced excruciating pain in my life with my cancer. But this was one of the most painful and scary experiences I've ever had. I'm not a troublemaker. I told them I was a cancer patient, and it didn't even faze them. I got no sympathy at all."

Thomason contends that a vindictive deputy detained him for eight hours after a judge ordered him released.

"I felt absolutely helpless," said Thomason, whose brother is a police officer in Montana.

Thomason's attorney, Anna Cayton-Holland, has filed a notice to sue the city for outrageous conduct and negligence.

Luis Conchado, assistant director for litigation in the city attorney's office, and sheriff's department spokesman Frank Gale said they couldn't comment because the case is under investigation.

However, Gale said jail records show that Thomason was released several hours earlier than he claims to have been. Gale added that jail medical staff have to verify the validity of prescriptions before administering them.

Cayton-Holland said the prescriptions were verified through Denver Health Medical Center.

But Thomason contends that when he begged the jail nurse for his pain medication, she instead asked him if he needed to go to detox.

"This is a terminal cancer patient in severe and barely medically controlled pain," Cayton-Holland said. "He was treated by this facility with deliberate indifference to this known serious medical condition - mocking him and pretending as if he were an addict who just needed time to 'detox.' "

Thomason and the notice to sue give this account of events:

His mother begged that her son be held in the infirmary until he could go before a judge to set bail, but her request was denied.

Instead, Thomason was placed in a cell with two other inmates. He was forced to lie on the floor in agonizing joint pain.

A nurse asked what was wrong, and Thomason told her he had cancer and needed his pain medication. She gave him ibuprofen.

Finally, Thomason was brought before a judge who released him on a personal recognizance bond at 11:30 a.m. on Aug. 26.

But once back at the jail, Thomason tangled with deputy Joseph Cleveland while asking about the return of $1,100 in cash that Thomason said his mother had given him to visit her in Arizona.

Cleveland told Thomason that he picked the "wrong day" to mess with him, shouted and spat in his face and wound up detaining him for another eight hours, still without his pain medication, according to the claim.

When Thomason finally went home, he called an ambulance and was treated at Denver Health Medical Center for symptoms associated with seizures.

Thomason says he hopes his legal action will protect other inmates from being treated the way he was.

"It was a totally dehumanizing experience," he said. "I felt like I was in a Third World country. I've heard horror stories of people going to Mexican jails. I almost wished I was in one."

Copyright 2006, Rocky Mountain News. All Rights Reserved.

[palmspringsbum]

Article published Jan 6, 2007

Couple who claim use of medical pot to face trial

By LAURA BAILEY
LauraBailey@coloradoan.com
The Coloradoan

A Fort Collins couple who say they were growing marijuana for medical use pleaded not guilty Friday to felony cultivation and distribution charges.

James and Lisa Masters are now set to go to trial March 27. They face up to six years in jail.

The Masters were arrested Aug. 2, 2006, when police were called to check the welfare of the couple's two children, ages 4 and 6, according to an affidavit from Fort Collins police.

The officer smelled marijuana in the house, and the couple told the officers they had a doctor's recommendation for medical marijuana and they were growing it for that purpose.

At a press conference following the Masters' arraignment, the couple's lawyer, Rob Corry, said they were within the bounds of Amendment 20, a Colorado initiative approved by voters in 2000 that allows people with certain debilitating medical conditions, such as cancer, AIDS and severe pain and nausea, to grow, possess and use marijuana for medicinal purposes.

"The majority of voters in this state said medical marijuana should be available. My hope here is the jury will follow the law and show some compassion for patients who need help," Corry said.

The couple face separation from their two girls if they're convicted and required to serve jail time. The girls were taken away for eight weeks after the Masters' arrests but have since been returned to their parents.

"I hope (people) realize that to split a family apart because of marijuana, which is so obviously less destructive than alcohol, is absolutely wrong," James Masters said.

Masters, 29, said he has a condition that causes chronic nausea and muscle spasms. Masters, a student at Front Range Community College, said he cannot work because of his condition. He will not reveal the exact condition until the trial so it doesn't influence a jury pool, Corry said. Lisa Masters, 31, said she suffers from joint swelling, muscle spasms, carpal tunnel syndrome and protruding disks.

The couple said they grew marijuana solely for themselves and patients on Colorado's medical marijuana registry, which is maintained by the state's Department of Health and Environment.

However, in October, District Judge Jolene Blair rejected a dismissal motion, saying the couple didn't have the required state documentation showing they are caregivers for people authorized to use marijuana for medical purposes.

Corry said that, while the Masters did not have a state registry card for caregivers, they were designated as such by registered patients who had doctors' recommendations for marijuana use.

Corry said Amendment 20 does not require the state to issue caregiver cards and that the patient's verbal designation of a caregiver is sufficient.

While representatives with the Medical Marijuana Registry program where not available for comment, Ron Hyman, the Colorado registrar of vital statistics, told the Coloradoan in October that in order for someone to be named as a caregiver, the patient must list that person as such on the registry.

Corry and co-counsel Brian Vicente said the Masters are the first in the state to use Amendment 20 and the caregiver defense.

"This test case has the potential to increase vital access to medical marijuana by expanding the legal definition of 'caregiver' to allow those with significant responsibility for the care of seriously-ill individuals to cultivate and provide them with medical marijuana," Vicente said.

According to Colorado's Department of Health and Environment's Web site, the law allows patients or primary caregivers to possess up to 2 ounces of marijuana and six plants as long as they have a Medical Marijuana Registry identification card.

Since the registry began in 2001, a total of 1,513 patients have applied and only seven have been denied.

Severe pain is listed for 78 percent of all requests with muscle spasms being the second most listed condition at 34 percent.

[palmspringsbum]

<span class=postbold>Drug War Chronicle - world’s leading drug policy newsletter</span>

Medical Marijuana: Colorado Case Will Test State's Law

from Drug War Chronicle, Issue #468, 1/12/07

A Fort Collins couple will be the first in Colorado to seek to use the state's medical marijuana law as a defense to marijuana cultivation and distribution charges. James and Lisa Masters pleaded not guilty to the charges last Friday and face a March trial.

The couple was arrested last August when police arrived at their home to check on the welfare of their two children, girls aged four and six. According to a police affidavit, a police officer smelled marijuana in the house, and the couple told officers they had doctors' recommendations to use marijuana, which they were growing for that purpose.

The Masters and their attorneys filed a motion last fall to have the charges dismissed, arguing that they were protected by the state's medical marijuana law. The couple, both registered medical marijuana patients, said they grew the pot solely for themselves and other patients on the state registry. But in October, District Judge Jolene Blair rejected that motion, saying the couple did not have proper documentation showing they are caregivers for registered patients.

According to the Colorado criminal code, the state Department of Public Health and Environment is charged with creating "a confidential registry of patients," not patients and caregivers. But the code also charges the department with creating an application form for would-be patients, and on that form, patients are required to fill in information about caregivers.

Last fall, when the Masters were first arraigned, their attorney, Rob Corry, argued they were within the bounds of the state medical marijuana law. While there is no state registry card for caregivers, he said, the Masters were designated as such by properly registered patients. "The majority of voters in this state said medical marijuana should be available. My hope here is the jury will follow the law and show some compassion for patients who need help," Corry said.

But at least one Colorado official argued that in order for someone to have protection as a caregiver, patients must list that person on their applications. It appears that the Masters case will resolve that apparent ambiguity in the law. If the Masters lose, they face up to six years in state prison and the loss of their children, whom police seized after their arrest despite the lack of any evidence of abuse or neglect. It took the couple eight weeks to win the return of their children.

"The Masters are being targeted for helping sick people. This test case has the potential to increase vital access to medical marijuana by expanding the legal definition of 'caregiver' to allow those with significant responsibility for the care of seriously-ill individuals to cultivate and provide them with medical marijuana," said co-counsel Brian Vicente.

[palmspringsbum]

Tokin' opposition:

<span class=postbold>Did Larimer prosecutor steal the medical marijuana movement's legal playbook?</span>

CSIndy
February 8, 2007
by Joshua Zaffos

Brian Vicente was about halfway through schooling a roomful of defense lawyers on how to represent medical marijuana patients, when "there was a ruckus of some sort,'" says Vicente. "After the talk, [one of the attorneys] said, 'There was a prosecutor in here spying and we had to kick him out.'"

Vicente, the executive director of Sensible Colorado, a medical marijuana advocacy group, had a couple reasons to be upset. First, the Jan. 25 training session inside the Larimer County Courthouse had been organized by the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, which bars prosecutors and law-enforcement officers from all of its workshops.

Second, the alleged infiltrator is Vicente's opposing counsel in the upcoming James and Lisa Masters case, Deputy District Attorney Thomas Lynch.

Vicente believes the Larimer County District Attorney's Office got an illicit sneak peek of the Masters' defense when Lynch strolled into the training seminar. The deputy D.A. may have gotten away with a handout of Vicente's 20-page manual, "How to Defend Medical Marijuana Patients in Colorado."

"[Lynch] essentially took a copy of my playbook for protecting medical marijuana patients," says Vicente. "His actions, I feel, have tainted the entire Larimer County District Attorney's Office."

Vicente responded by making a motion to County Chief Judge James Hiatt, asking for Lynch — and the entire county D.A.'s office — to be recused from the case and replaced with an independent special prosecutor. Hiatt has agreed to hear Vicente's argument on Feb. 26.

The district attorney's office does not comment on pending cases, says spokeswoman Linda Jensen. She declined to answer whether the D.A. thought Lynch should be removed from the case or whether he had, in fact, obtained a copy of Vicente's playbook.

But not all of the training-session attendants believe Lynch sneaked into the seminar with the intent to sabotage the Masters' defense, or that he made off with any top-secret strategies.

"I have no indication that it was anything other than an innocent mistake," says Andrew "Guss" Guarino, executive director of the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, who helped organize the training session, which he also attended.

Prosecuting attorneys are prohibited from the state defense bar's workshops, Guarino explains, so attendees can openly discuss strategies and tactics for how to argue a case. But Lynch didn't cause a "ruckus," and he left willingly, says Guarino. He didn't notice if Lynch took off with one of Vicente's manuals.

"If, in fact, he did do that, bad on us that we didn't check to see if prosecutors were in the room," says Guarino.

"Typically, there are no real secrets," he adds, "but we want a free flow of ideas and information, and it can only be done if there isn't someone in the room who is your adversary."

Guarino didn't comment whether the alleged gaffe should lead to the removal of Lynch, or the county district attorney's office, from the trial. But he's less fatalistic than Vicente about how the episode might affect the success of medical marijuana patients and caregivers in Colorado courtrooms.

Still, Vicente is adamant.

"It just seems so underhanded," he says. "Mr. Lynch's job is to impartially search for justice, not to jail people, and he's not being impartial" by coming to the training session.

"This affects due process rights of the 14th Amendment, and certainly this instance has prejudiced the Masters and any others [with medical marijuana court cases] in Larimer County."

— newsroom@csindy.com

[palmspringsbum]

Medical-pot advocate slain in Denver home

By Karen Rouse
Denver Post Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 02/18/2007 11:31:00 PM MST


A Denver man who was killed in a South Decatur Street shooting Saturday was a well-known advocate of medical marijuana, a neighbor confirmed.

Ken Gorman, a 59-year-old activist who promoted passage of Colorado's medical marijuana law in 2000, was shot sometime after 7 p.m. in the home in the 1000 block of South Decatur Street where he lived. He was transported to Denver Health Medical Center, where he later died, police said.

Police did not confirm his identity, but neighbor Alexandra MacKay said Gorman had lived in the community for four years.

"The first day he moved here, he came across the street and he was talking to me about how he sold marijuana, but he sold it legally," said MacKay, 79.

Colorado allows authorized patients to use marijuana for medical purposes, but federal law still prohibits its use. Colorado allows patients and primary caregivers to possess up to six plants and 2 ounces of marijuana.

Nearly a year ago, Gorman helped organize a pot gathering in Denver's Civic Center. It was part of an effort to make marijuana possession legal at the state and federal levels. It followed the city's passage of an ordinance that allows adults to legally possess a small amount of marijuana.

Colorado voters in November rejected Amendment 44, which would have allowed anyone 21 and older to possess and use up to an ounce of marijuana.

MacKay said she was not bothered by Gorman's activities, nor all the visitors he received.

"He was very calm," she said. "You never saw him drunk. ... He was a very nice person. ... He never had parties, no big drinking. He just sold the stuff."

She said she believes Gorman was trying to do the right thing. However, she said, she believed it would come to an end.

"I knew something was going to happen," she said.

[palmspringsbum]

Pot activist's death probed


By Felisa Cardona
Denver Post Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 02/19/2007 02:32:05 PM MST


Police identified Ken Gorman as the man who was killed in a South Decatur Street home over the weekend, but would not say if they believe marijuana theft was a possible motive in the homicide.

Gorman, a 59-year-old activist who sold marijuana for medicinal purposes, was shot to death sometime after 7 p.m. Saturday in his home.

"The first day he moved here, he came across the street and he was talking to me about how he sold marijuana, but he sold it legally," said neighbor Alexandra MacKay, 79.

Colorado allows authorized patients to use marijuana for medical purposes, but federal law still prohibits its use. Colorado allows patients and primary caregivers to possess up to six plants and 2 ounces of marijuana.

Nearly a year ago, Gorman helped organize a pot gathering in Denver's Civic Center. It was part of an effort to make marijuana possession legal at the state and federal levels. It followed the city's passage of an ordinance that allows adults to legally possess a small amount of marijuana.

Colorado voters in November rejected Amendment 44, which would have allowed anyone 21 and older to possess and use up to an ounce of marijuana.

MacKay said she was not bothered by Gorman's activities, nor all the visitors he received.

"He was very calm," she said. "You never saw him drunk. ... He was a very nice person. ... He never had parties, no big drinking. He just sold the stuff."

She said she believes Gorman was trying to do the right thing. However, she said, she believed it would come to an end.

"I knew something was going to happen," she said.

[palmspringsbum]

Marijuana provider's death stirs questions


By Felisa Cardona
Denver Post Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 02/20/2007 01:27:40 AM MST


While Denver police hunt for a motive in the deadly shooting of medical-marijuana provider Ken Gorman, his brother and marijuana activists said the business of providing the drug to sick people isn't the safest line of work.

"I've heard Ken had dealt with previous attempts to rob him, and it's likely the result (of the fact that) that marijuana is on the black market," said Mason Tvert of SAFER, a group that unsuccessfully tried to get voters to legalize small amounts of pot in Colorado last November.

Gorman, 59, was shot to death Saturday night in his home in the 1000 block of South Decatur Street in Denver. No arrests were announced Monday.

The marijuana activist often led pot-smoking festivals near the state Capitol.

Brian Vicente, executive director of Sensible Colorado, a group pushing changes in marijuana policy, said Gorman was at the forefront of efforts to allow possession and cultivation of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Medical pot became legal in Colorado in 2000, although it is still barred by federal law.

"He was ahead of his time in speaking out for sick people who deserved access to medical marijuana," Vicente said.

Marijuana providers don't feel they can turn to authorities for protection and have to keep their lives a secret because of the political and social controversy surrounding marijuana, Tvert said.

"It's like a basketball game with no referee, and when that happens, people take extra steps to foul individuals without penalties," Tvert said.

Marijuana providers often take extensive security measures around their homes, such as installing cameras, hiring guards and putting up extra lighting, Tvert said.

Gorman recently was profiled on TV station KCNC (Channel 4) in a story about providing medicinal marijuana. Vicente believes the story might have prompted someone to rob Gorman.

"To me, he seems like a victim of the war on drugs," Vi cente said. "If marijuana were legal, there would be no incentive for someone to break into his home and steal it."

Gorman was the kind of person who would have turned over any cash or marijuana to a thief, as he had done in the past, Vicente said.

Gorman's 71-year-old brother, Gregory Gorman, also believes the TV exposure may have contributed to his death. But there also were marijuana opponents who had made threats against Ken Gorman, his brother said.

Ken Gorman - who had an adult daughter - kept cash in his house as a result of his business, his brother said.

[palmspringsbum]

Danger grew along with pot

By Kirk Mitchell
Denver Post Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 03/13/2007 07:19:44 AM MDT


The powerful lamps that threw light on some 50 marijuana plants at Ken Gorman's home were as distracting to neighbors as a blinking neon sign.

Unlike most pot growers, Gorman didn't bother to cover his windows with tar paper to conceal his lucrative cultivations. And neighbors complained to the cops about the bright lights.

Gorman, 59, was well-known as a medical-marijuana provider and a spirited advocate for legal pot. Everyone knew what he was doing - including criminals who robbed him a dozen times, apparently viewing him as easy prey.

Then, on Feb. 17, someone shot Gorman to death.

Police still haven't said whether Gorman was killed for his pot, or his money. They have no suspects, Denver police spokeswoman Virginia Quiñones said Friday, adding that the killer did not take any of Gorman's marijuana plants.

But when Gorman's fellow marijuana activists are asked about his death, they talk about pot.

"What Ken did broke every rule," Allen St. Pierre, executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said Friday. "He was zealous in a very nonconformist way. He ... would broadcast he was growing marijuana. He was almost maniacal."

<span class=postbold>Unwitting martyrs?</span>

The 2000 campaign that won Colorado voter approval of Amendment 20, permitting use of marijuana for medicinal purposes, was led by ardent activists who were so focused on their cause they may not have realized the risks of their openness about growing it themselves, St. Pierre said.

"I have sat down with people and asked them, 'Do you know what you are doing?"' St. Pierre said. "Some are absolutely naive about the product they have."

Their idealism could make them martyrs for a trade still deemed illegal by federal law and largely dominated by criminals, he said.

Amendment 20 allows people with certain debilitating diseases, including cancer and AIDS, to grow as many as six marijuana plants and to possess up to 2 ounces of pot. But the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment doesn't tell sick people where they can get seeds or marijuana.

"How many people make their own jam or beer?" St. Pierre asked. "People buy it. It's the same with marijuana."

The Colorado law allows qualified sick people to designate caregivers to grow the marijuana for them, and people like Gorman grow large amounts of marijuana for registered clients.

But TV station KCNC-Channel 4 reported only a week before Gorman's murder that he was forging registration cards for anyone who wanted one.

"He was giving out caregiver cards like they were Monopoly money," said Nate Strauch, spokesman for Colorado Attorney General John Suthers.

<span class=postbold>It doesn't take much</span>

Established medical-marijuana shops in California have learned to be much more cautious after numerous murders of growers, St. Pierre said.

About 20 people around the nation have been killed in homes growing marijuana for medicinal purposes in the past 10 years, most in California, said St. Pierre, who recently bought a gun after being robbed at home about a dozen times.

The victims include Rex Farrance, 59, the senior technical editor of PC World, who was fatally shot in the chest after four masked men broke into his house in Pittsburg, Calif., in January. His 18-year-old son was registered to grow marijuana and he had a small operation, St. Pierre said.

"Thirty-three square feet of lit soil in a closet can lead to strong-arm robbery and murder," he said.

Many California vendors provide marijuana in pharmacy-like stores protected by armed guards, video surveillance cameras and theft insurance policies, St. Pierre said.

While insurance claims for thefts at state-authorized cannabis shops are commonplace, he has never heard of one filed by a Colorado grower.

Colorado medical marijuana growers must learn to be more careful in talking about their operations, St. Pierre said.

He recalls the day he attended one of Gorman's trademark news conferences in which he brazenly spoke about his own growing operation.

"I was horrified," he said. "My toes curled and I crept away."

[palmspringsbum]

Medical Marijuana User Found Guilty

The Denver Post
Thu, 30 Aug 2007
by Monte Whaley, Denver Post Staff Writer

<span class=postbigbold>"I Saw a Child Abuser Last Week Get Convicted of the Same Class of Felony As My Son. ... How Is This Possible?"</span>

Brighton - A man who hoped Colorado's medical-marijuana law would allow him to use pot to soothe his disease-ravaged body is now a felon.

That doesn't sit well with his mother, who seethed outside of an Adams County District courtroom after jurors Wednesday convicted her son - 39-year-old Jack Branson - of cultivation of marijuana, a felony.

"I saw a child abuser last week get convicted of the same class of felony as my son, and that child abuser is a danger to this community," said Margaret Branson, who watched her son hobble down a hallway using a cane.

"You tell me," she said, "how is this possible?"

But the nine-woman, three-man panel also cleared her son of a second felony charge of possession of more than 8 ounces of marijuana.

The decision to acquit on one marijuana charge and convict on another was "irrational," said Branson's attorney, Robert Corry. He asked Adams County District Judge Thomas Ensor to overturn the guilty verdict.

Ensor refused and sentenced Branson to one year of unsupervised probation. He faced six years in prison.

The verdict will be appealed, said Corry, adding jurors seemingly reached a puzzling compromise.

"The charges against him were all or nothing," Corry said. "This makes no sense."

Jurors couldn't be reached for comment.

Corry argued that Branson - who suffers from AIDS and hepatitis B - received oral recommendations from doctors over the past several years to use medicinal marijuana. The drug eases his nausea and allows him to take his medications and to eat, Corry said.

However, Branson never received a written recommendation.

Police in October 2004 arrested Branson after finding 14 8-foot-tall pot plants, a scale and several bags of dried marijuana at his Thornton home.

Prosecutor Trevor Moritzky told jurors Branson had in his possession far more pot than allowed under the state's medical-marijuana law - which generally stipulates one can have three flowering plants, three replacement plants and 2 ounces of the drug.

"This was a production facility," Moritzky said. "He had far more than he needed."

Adams County District Attorney Don Quick said he never wanted Branson to serve any prison time. "We have no problem with anyone using medical marijuana under the law," Quick said. "We just want to see it applied correctly."

[palmspringsbum]

Marijuana Returned To Caregiver

The Denver Post
Wed, 24 Oct 2007
by Howard Pankratz

A small amount of marijuana and drug paraphernalia was returned by Jefferson County authorities today to a medical marijuana caregiver who was issued a summons at Mount Falcon Park earlier this year.

Anton Marquez, 29, walked out of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department this afternoon with the seized items, ending what Brian Vicente, executive director of Sensible Colorado, said was an ordeal of six months for Marquez.

Marquez provides marijuana to his father and brother, who suffer from epilepsy. He also takes it himself, he said, because of a brain tumor.

"I believe marijuana is the quintessential realization of the term life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," Marquez said.

"I need it. There are some pain levels (that other pain killers) can't touch that some good medical marijuana can alleviate almost instantaneously, not to mention the nausea that is associated with intense migraines, sleeplessness and insomnia," Marquez said.

Vicente said Marquez appeared in court four times on a summons that charged him with possessing under an ounce of marijuana and possessing paraphernalia.

Each time he told the prosecutor that he was a medical marijuana caregiver, presented a copy of his Medical Marijuana registry card to the prosecutor and told the prosecutor she should dismiss the case, Vicente said.

"The law could not be more clear - that when presented with a medical marijuana caregiver card or a patient card, the case is to be dropped," Vicente said.

Finally, Vicente said, Marquez went to Sensible Colorado.

"I met with the prosecutor and I said, 'Listen, you have to drop this charge, you have no case'," Vicente said. "And she said, 'Oh, ok, I guess you are right. We are not going to bring charges'. And ultimately, a judge agreed."

The judge, Roy Olson of the Jefferson County Court, also ordered the seized items returned.

Pam Russell, spokesperson for the Jefferson County district attorney's office, said that prosecutors moved for dismissal of the case because Marquez had a medical marijuana registry card, he could legally be in possession of the small amount of marijuana he had in his car at the park and there was no evidence he had been smoking the marijuana.

Marquez said that he was stopped by a Jefferson County sheriff's deputy as he was attempting to turn around on a road in the park and wasn't permitted to leave. He said the deputy first thought the car was stolen - which proved not to be true - and then he spotted a glass pipe in the car.

Marquez said he explained why he had the pipe and marijuana.

"What we would like to see is police and prosecutors simply not bring these charges and not cite individuals who are indeed state licensed to possess and cultivate marijuana," Vicente said.

[palmspringsbum]

Bad Medicine?

<span class=postbigbold>Local man tangles with American Cancer Society, police in his campaign to promote medical marijuana</span>

by J. Adrian Stanley, Colorado Springs Independent
September 7th, 2007


American Cancer Society officials didn't waste any time removing medical marijuana activist Matthew Schnur from their local event in August.

First, Schnur says, a volunteer scolded him, calling his efforts insulting to cancer patients. Then a director had police escort him out of the Relay for Life gathering.

Schnur is used to the rejection. Though he and others are working to prove marijuana is medicine, the medical community hasn't warmed to the idea.

"I just think because of the recreational use, people have such a distortion about the use of this as medicine," Schnur says. "That's a shame for the people who need it."

A representative of the local American Cancer Society chapter says no advertisers or lobbyists are allowed at the event; Schnur maintains he couldn't have known that before coming, since he says he never received replies from e-mails he sent to the chapter.

David Sampson, national spokesman for the American Cancer Society, says his organization does not condone the use of marijuana, but does support more research. The society takes its viewpoint from a 1999 study by the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies.

"Obviously, if there were major breakthroughs in this area, they would likely be published in a major medical journal, and we wouldn't be the only ones to respond to that," he says.

For Schnur, who's researching the effects of pot while earning his master's degree at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, dealing with such skepticism is a side-effect of working with America's most controversial drug.

<span class=postbigbold>The proof</span>

In Colorado, a 2000 amendment made medical marijuana use legal for patients registered with and approved by the state. Schnur smokes to relieve symptoms of the diabetes with which he was diagnosed as a child, as well as the neuropathy and gastroparesis he developed later. He says he was days away from getting that approval last year when he was arrested and jailed for possession and cultivation of marijuana.

He pleaded guilty and was originally given supervised community service. However, when a diabetic seizure and a swollen foot kept him from the work, Schnur says, he ended up in jail for 16 days. There he suffered more seizures — a rarity for him since he began using pot.

Even with all of those troubles, though, Schnur says his reception in the scientific community still frustrates him most.

He says he's in the process of posting more than 7,000 peer-reviewed medical marijuana studies (including his own) on his Web site, cannabistherapeutics.net. He also works with Americans for Safe Access, a national pro-medical marijuana group, to spread the word about pot's benefits to local patients.

Schnur isn't the only one who thinks marijuana is good medicine. At UCCS, he works with professor Robert Melamede, a nationally known marijuana advocate.

"Cannabis in experimental studies in the laboratory kills the whole variety of cancer cells, including breast cancer, prostate cancer, glioma, leukemia, lymphoma, rectal cancer," Melamede says. "In addition, they relieve pain, they promote sleeping, they promote appetite and they're antidepressants. Well, doesn't that sound like exactly what a cancer patient would need?

"They also turn off the genes that are involved in the metastasis of cancers. You know, they've recently been shown to kill lung cancer. So you would think that [Schnur] would be embraced for trying to help people, and instead the local people were a little uptight and weird about it."

Like Melamede, Schnur is interested in the variety of diseases marijuana may be useful in treating. But considering his personal battle, he has a special interest in its impact on diabetes. Schnur says he will likely lose his right foot within five years due to complications of the disease.

<span class=postbigbold>Making it legitimate</span>

Imagine a bunch of stoned college students playing video games and passing around a joint. Now make those college students cancer patients. This is what a lot of folks think when they hear the term "medical marijuana."

Clearly, the fight for acceptance involves some effort on the PR side.

The first step is to get rid of the joint. Schnur is working on developing marijuana gums, lotions, fruit drinks and more. Losing the smoking element will help patients' lungs, as well.

Another misconception, Schnur says, is that all patients want to get high. Some people are looking for a different benefit, he says, like a reduction in swelling. Schnur, who's now fully registered to self-medicate, says he's developing strains of cannabis to treat specific ailments. Not all strains get you high.

Finally, Schnur is working on ingredient labels for various strains of cannabis. He hopes standardizing pot will give it legitimacy in the medical community.

For now, Schnur is serving his three years of probation and chipping away at 300 hours of community service. He says probation officers are overzealous in overseeing his legal use of medical marijuana, and says they've even threatened to take away his three rescued pit bulls.

His felony conviction will also limit his career choices.

"As a felon, I will never get a legitimate job as a researcher, even with a Ph.D.," he says. "There is nothing I love more than science."

— stanley@csindy.com

[palmspringsbum]

Judge in medical marijuana case scolds state agency

by Sara Reed, The Coloradoan
October 10th, 2007


A District Court judge in Fort Collins issued a strongly-worded rebuke today to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment for not complying with a court order related to a medical marijuana case.

Chief Judge James Hiatt threatened the agency with a contempt citation and told an attorney from the Colorado Attorney General’s office to turn over information on medical marijuana patients for whom James and Lisa Masters of Fort Collins acted as primary caregivers.

"Your client (individuals from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment) needs to get appropriate appellate relief, comply with the order or, option three, someone is going to wind up in jail,” Hiatt told Anne Holton, an attorney with the attorney general’s office, during a scheduled hearing today.

The Masters, who are medical marijuana patients, were arrested and charged with cultivation and distribution of marijuana last summer. Those charges were dropped in June after it was ruled the search of their home was illegal.

Now the couple has been fighting to get back the equipment and plants seized from their home more than a year ago. However, that process was delayed until late next month because the depart-ment still refuses to produce the records.

As part of the process, Hiatt required prosecutors to subpoena the records from the health de-partment, which administers the medical marijuana program. The agency appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court but that was denied.

Amendment 20, passed in November 2000 to establish Colorado’s medical marijuana program, re-quires the department to maintain a confidential database of medical marijuana patients. Holton said that privacy should be balanced against the prosecution’s need for the records. The prosecution’s need for the records does not rise to the level to justify breaching the confidentiality of the medical marijuana program, she argued.

“The process we are in now is not a criminal proceeding,” Holton said. “The DA’s interest is not in prosecuting but in retaining seized evidence.”

Hiatt disagreed and at one point called the delay unfair to the parties involved. Hiatt gave the department until 5 p.m. Monday to turn over the records. If the records have not been submitted by that time, Hiatt said he would issue a contempt citation.

“You can’t just say ‘we still disagree with the order,’ ” he said.

Rob Corry, one of the attorneys representing the Masters, said after the hearing he was gratified that Hiatt and prosecutor Michael Pierson seem to be taking the matter so seriously but that there is some frustration in the delay.

“This is medicine that people need,” he said.

Corry argued in court that because the charges against his clients were dropped that they were en-titled to get back their property, including the seized marijuana. In an order issued in June, Hiatt said a hearing on the matter was necessary because the medical marijuana component of the case was never addressed by the resolution in the case.

Prosecutors have objected to the property being returned, citing that neither James nor Lisa Masters were registered medical marijuana patients at the time of the seizure nor was there any docu-mentation that they were serving as caregivers for other medical marijuana patients.

[palmspringsbum]

Clinical Trial

<span class=postbigbold>Medical marijuana caregivers prepare to open the county’s first dispensary.</span>

by Joshua Zaffos, Rocky Mountain Chronicle
November 28th, 2007


James Masters quotes Abraham Lincoln — “Revolutions do not go backwards” — when speaking about the progress of the medical marijuana movement from inside the PVMC, otherwise known as Poudre Valley Medical Cannabis.

The space is, in fact, Northern Colorado’s first medical marijuana dispensary and since opening its doors in October, James and his wife, Lisa, have sought to emancipate sufferers of cancer, HIV, multiple sclerosis and glaucoma by using cannabis to cope with and alleviate their illnesses.

<table class=posttable align=right width=220><tr><td class=postcell><img class=postimg width=200 src=bin/masters_james-and-lisa.jpg alt="James & Lisa Masters"></td></tr></table>The Masters are the founders of PVMC, and like Sy Sperling of the Hair Club for Men, they’re not just upper management. They’re also clients. James possibly suffers from porphyria, an enzyme abnormality, which causes him severe nausea and once even put him in a coma. Lisa has herniated discs and joint swelling and spasms. As medical marijuana providers, their own run-in with the law in part inspired them to establish the dispensary, after patients outgrew meeting space at the Alley Cat Café in Fort Collins. (Read “High Noon” from the January 18 edition, online at rmchronicle.com and sidebar).

PVMC serves about thirty patients a week, each one registered with the state under Amendment 20, a medical marijuana law passed by voters in 2000. The medicine comes from registered caregivers and patients who grow and provide excess cannabis beyond the two-ounce-per-person limit. Those growers are compensated, the Masters say.


No marijuana is grown at the dispensary, and all medicine is taken off-site every night to an undisclosed location. Before moving into the semi-industrial strip mall off Link Lane outside Fort Collins city limits, the Masters say the building owner called the Larimer County Sheriff’s Office to make sure the operation was legal. He got the O.K., so long as the business is licensed. (As of press time, PVMC has registered as a business with the Colorado Secretary of State and is awaiting final paperwork.)

“The big thing is trying not to mimic what other dispensaries have done,” James says, referring to a string of DEA busts and exorbitant pricing in California cannabis clubs. “What people are calling ‘reasonable compensation’ is profiteering. We want to value our patients over the profit margin.”

The Masters charge only $45 for an eighth of an ounce of marijuana — less than the street price — and customers have told them they are the cheapest supplier in the state.

The most successful dispensaries support patients, not just by supplying them with high-quality medicine, but also teaching them to grow their own and schooling clients on the most effective practices, such as ingesting or vaporizing pot instead of just smoking it, says Paul Stanford, CEO of Portland-based The Hemp and Cannabis (THC) Foundation, which helps people gain medical marijuana permits through clinics, including one in Wheat Ridge, in almost a dozen states.

“Modes of medication” is the topic of a weeknight meeting at PVMC, where James sits before a foldout table displaying different pot paraphernalia. James jokes that it’s show-and-tell night before leading off the discussion and demonstration — sans pot. There are rolling papers, pipes, a very tall bong, something called the Volcano — a plug-in vaporizer that fills a tempered plastic bag with marijuana vapor — and, finally, a ganja-butter treat made with raisins and sugar, which, James says, is “kinda like an energy bar, except if you eat too much.”

James and Lisa envision that PVMC, which will have a grand opening in the next few months, will offer free community-activism resources, massage and Reiki workshops, and for-fee classes on growing vegetables, flowers and weed. The Masters say they intend to eventually direct profits from PVMC back into general community healthcare programs, such as prescription assistance.

Nancy, who asks that her last name be withheld, first came to PVMC two weeks ago, after learning about the dispensary from the THC Foundation clinic in Wheat Ridge, which helped her enlist with the state’s medical marijuana registry for treatment of glaucoma and multiple sclerosis.

“I realized when I had some good cannabis my eyes did not hurt at all, but when I ran out, my eyes hurt so much, and they would bulge,” she says.

Lisa explains that cannabis actually does reduce blood pressure and optic-nerve swelling, adding that certain strains work best for certain medical conditions.

“Finding these guys has been a godsend,” Nancy says. “They’re like scientists. I trust them to make me feel better.”

<hr class=postrule>

<span class=postbigbold>KIND TREATMENT </span>

A county judge has ruled that the Larimer County Drug Task Force must return the marijuana-cultivating equipment that was seized during a raid of James and Lisa Masters’ home in August 2006. He also permitted the couple’s right to information regarding the status of the 39 plants removed from their home during the raid.

This June, a county judge dismissed a criminal case against the couple after ruling that a police search was performed illegally and the county district attorney’s office conceded there was no admissible evidence.

The state’s medical marijuana law requires law enforcement officials to care for and return plants, paraphernalia and equipment upon determination of registered medical marijuana patients and/or dismissal of charges.

In August, Lieutenant Craig Dodd told us that the task force does not have its own grow room and that they do not care for seized plants. The Masters’ have said they will seek compensation for whatever plants have died as a result of their confiscation.

[palmspringsbum]

Medical marijuana access eases

<span class=postbigbold>Policy overturned that set a 5-patient limit per provider</span>

by Sue Lindsay, Rocky Mountain News
November 29th, 2007


Access to medical marijuana will be easier as a result of a ruling by a Denver judge.

District Judge Larry Naves last week overturned a state health department policy that restricted providers of medical marijuana to five patients.

The ruling endorses a settlement reached between the health department and attorneys for AIDS patient Damien LaGoy, who sued after his caregiver request was denied in May based on the five-patient rule.

The denial forced him to buy marijuana on the street, LaGoy said.

<table class=posttable align=right width=300><tr><td class=postcell><img class=postimg width=300 src=bin/lagoy_damien.jpg title="Medical marijuana patient Damien LaGoy, left, listens Monday to one of his lawyers, Brian Vicente. LaGoy, a medical marijuana patient, was a plaintiff in a successful lawsuit challenging Colorado's rule limiting medical marijuana providers to care for only five patients at a time."></td></tr></table>"I was in a very dangerous situation," LaGoy said at a news conference Monday. "I was trying to get medical marijuana from some of the darkest spots in town, risking my life at times. I actually have been robbed once trying to find medical marijuana. Also, you never know what you're getting."

LaGoy, who has AIDS and hepatitis C, said marijuana helps control his nausea and gives him an appetite. "Medical marijuana is about the only thing that helps," he said.

Naves granted an injunction this summer preventing the health department from enforcing the policy, which he said was adopted by the department in a closed meeting in 2004.

That ruling led to negotiations in which the state agreed not to enforce the five-patient rule and to notify patients, caregivers and others when considering policies affecting medical marijuana users.

Naves subsequently overturned the five-patient policy, saying its adoption violated the Colorado open meetings act.

"The health department just randomly selected five as the limit in a secret, clandestine meeting that was not open to patients or caregivers or doctors or the scientific community," said attorney Brian Vicente.

Dan Pope, whom LaGoy chose to be his caregiver and supplier of medical marijuana, said he hopes the ruling "will pave the way for establishing regulated dispensaries to provide medical marijuana in a safe, reliable way."

Supporters say the ruling is a victory for as many as 1,800 medical marijuana users in Colorado.

Health department spokesman Mark Salley said the department will take a new look at a "whether a limit is warranted and what that should be."

Whatever the department does, Salley said, would involve public comment.

[palmspringsbum]

Judge: Pot Plants Must Be Returned To Couple

by Mike Hooker, CBS4 News
November 28th, 2007


A couple from Fort Collins is threatening to file a lawsuit if police don't return their marijuana plants that they seized during a raid alive. Police say there's no way they'll return them.

A judge ruled Monday that the 39 marijuana plants were seized illegally more than 15 months ago. But Wednesday, the Fort Collins city attorney filed a motion asking the judge to reconsider, so returning the pot is now on hold.

The police spokeswoman said the plants are in evidence and they're dead, but the couple's attorney said police are required to keep the plants alive.

"The law cannot be more clear, the Colorado constitution clearly says that any marijuana plants seized in association with the claimed used of medical marijuana need to be unharmed by law enforcement agents," said Brian Vincente, Executive Director of Sensible Colorado. "Essentially, when police confiscate marijuana designated for medical use, they need not to destroy those plants. In fact, they need to upkeep those plants so they don't become damaged."

Sensible Colorado advocates for people who use marijuana for medicinal purposes. Vincente said using government figures, the plants are worth more than a $100,000.

"If the plants are dead, we will take legal action against the city," Vincente said. "We feel they have violated the constitution and we feel that our patients should be compensated for their property which was taken."

Police referred questions about the drug task and the seized marijuana plants to the city attorney. He said he couldn't comment on the case since it's in litigation.

Now both sides are waiting to see if the judge changes his mind about ordering the now dead pot plants returned to their legal owners.

The couple with the marijuana, James and Lisa Masters, was not licensed as medical marijuana caregivers when police searched their home, but earlier this year a judge found they did qualify for caregiver status and threw out criminal charges against them.

[palmspringsbum]

Judge denies request to hold on to pot

by Sara Reed, The Coloradoan
November 29th, 2007


A judge's denial of a city request to reconsider his ruling that returned medical marijuana to a Fort Collins couple was praised Wednesday by the couple's defense attorney.

"We think it was the right thing to do," said Brian Vicente, one of two attorneys who have represented James and Lisa Masters since their August 2006 arrest. "The judge realizes the importance of (medical marijuana) and is abiding by the constitution."


The city of Fort Collins filed a motion Wednesday morning asking Larimer County Chief District Court Judge James Hiatt to reconsider and clarify his motion. He denied it hours later.

"Intervention by the city of Fort Collins and (Fort Collins police services) in this criminal case needlessly expands this litigation and is not necessary for the city to assert any defenses regarding this court's order, and to have its 'day in court,' if relief is sought against it by (the couple) due to the order to return property," Hiatt wrote in the order.

The city won't appeal the decision, Assistant City Attorney Theresa Ablao said.

Cultivation and possession charges against the couple were dropped in June after Hiatt ruled the search that led to the search warrant was illegal.

On Monday, he ruled the property seized - which included paraphernalia, growing equipment and 39 marijuana plants in various stages of growth - be returned. The plants, being held by Fort Collins police, are dead, and they've said they'll seek financial compensation for anything that was destroyed.

The plants could be worth more than $100,000, Vicente said.

In the motion, Ablao wrote the police department objected only to the return of the marijuana, not the other items because, despite the medical marijuana amendment to the Colorado constitution, as it is still illegal under federal law, Ablao wrote.

"We just want him to fully understand the full picture and to get clarification from him whether federal law applied or not," she said.

Hiatt did not address that aspect in his ruling, but Vicente said he thinks state and federal law can co-exist.

Ablao also argued the marijuana was contraband because the Masters did not have a valid medical marijuana certificate, did not present evidence that they or other patients had been diagnosed with a "debilitating condition" or that the amount seized was medically necessary.

"It really kind of illuminates the lengths the city and county will go to deny people access to medical marijuana," Vicente said of the motion.

There is a provision in the amendment, passed by voters in November 2000, that requires plants seized from medical marijuana patients and caregivers be maintained, but police spokeswoman Rita Davis said that didn't apply in this case.

"They didn't have proof or documentation of that," she said. "It was treated like any other confiscation case."

It's possible the couple could get their property back Friday, but nothing has been set, Vicente said.

[palmspringsbum]

Medical Marijuana Growers Payback

<span class=postbigbold>Should Colorado Police Stations Have 'Grow Rooms'?</span>

by Emil Steiner, Columnist, Washington Post
December 5th, 2007


<img src=http://www.palmspringsbum.com/bin/icon_video.gif> <a href=http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2007/12/04/pkg.pot.returned.kusa class=postlink target=_blank>Click to view CNN video</a>

A Colorado couple is threatening to sue local law enforcement to get its bongs back -- as well as its marijuana plants, which they say they grew for medical purposes.

According to their lawyer, James and Lisa Masters will be seeking "in excess of $100,000" from the Larimer County Drug Task Force, which illegally seized 39 plants and failed to preserve them. Under Article XVIII, Section 14 of the Colorado State Constitution, "any property ... used in connection with the medical use of marijuana... shall not be harmed, neglected, injured, or destroyed while in the possession of state or local law enforcement officials." The Constitution also reads in part: "Marijuana and paraphernalia seized by state or local law enforcement officials from a patient or primary care-giver ... shall be returned immediately."

According to the Masters's lawyer, Brian Vicente of Sensible Colorado (which advocates "a system where drug use becomes a health issue, not a crime issue"), officers broke the law when they confiscated 39 plants, growing equipment, about eight ounces in loose marijuana and several bongs and pipes, in August 2006.

The cultivation and possession charges were later dropped. In November Colorado Chief District Judge James Hiatt found that the Masters were legitimate caretakers who use the drugs to treat people and said law enforcement was wrong to seize their property. On Monday, the Masters picked up their property from the Fort Collins Police Department.

But there was a problem.

According to Vicente, the plants were all but dead, one having turned into a "moldy, black pool of goo." The glass bongs were also destroyed, their shattered remains handed back in plastic bags, and the couple is currently testing whether their grow equipment is still functional.

Vicente's clients are seeking monetary compensation for their lost property, which is estimated at more than $100,000. We're "just asking police to follow the law," Vicente said. Fort Collins police spokeswomen Rita Davis says that the department was under no obligation to care for the Masters' plants or compensate the couple, saying the Masters were not registered care-givers with the state at the time of their arrest.

The lawsuit may be filed next week. My question to OFF/beat readers is this: Given the requirements of state law, should police stations in Colorado be required to have grow rooms?

[palmspringsbum]

Ill couple seek recourse after police killed marijuana plants

by Howard Pankratz , Denver Post
December 4th, 2007


More than three dozen marijuana plants seized by authorities from a Fort Collins couple were returned to them dead Monday by police.

The couple, James and Lisa Masters, along with their attorneys, said they will take legal action against the Fort Collins police and the Larimer County district attorney's office, who they said by law had to return the plants undamaged.

Rita Davis, spokesperson for the Fort Collins Police Department, said that police were under no obligation to preserve the marijuana.

"The normal process of confiscating contraband does not require jurisdictions to keep it alive," Davis said.

Larry Abrahamson, district attorney for the 8th Judicial District, said that if a lawsuit is filed, the question will be whether the Masterses have a valid medical marijuana claim. If they weren't on the medical marijuana registry, they don't have a claim, said the district attorney.

The couple claimed that when police came to their home in August 2006, they were medical marijuana patients using the plant to help their medical conditions and to assist other medical marijuana patients. They had a doctor's recommendation to use marijuana, but they were not state licensed at that time. They are now licensed.

[palmspringsbum]

Compensation sought for dead pot plants

<span class=postbigbold>Couple says law requires medical marijuana be maintained</span>

by Sara Reed, The Coloradoan
December 4th, 2007


It took 16 months, but a Fort Collins couple Monday finally retrieved the medical marijuana seized from their home in August 2006. But the battle is far from over.

The cultivation and possession charges against James and Lisa Masters, medical marijuana patients and caregivers for other patients, were dropped in June, but it wasn't until late last month that Chief District Court Judge James Hiatt ruled the police had to return the property.

What they got back, however, was dried, musty and moldy.

James Masters said he was "very, very happy to see this come to fruition," but he was sad to see the plants had not been maintained as required by law.

"This is a resounding, decisive victory for Colorado voters, compassion and medical marijuana," said Brian Vicente, one of the attorneys who represented the couple throughout the case.

Voters approved the amendment in November 2000. There are 14 states with medical marijuana laws.

The charges were dropped after Hiatt ruled that the search warrant used to seize the plants, growing equipment and paraphernalia resulted from an illegal search.

But none of the plants seized, including about 15 that were nearly ready for harvest, survived. The Masters' attorneys plan to go back to the judge later this month and request financial compensation for the destroyed plants, which could be valued at more than $100,000.

The couple could sue for the damages, but they're going to go to the judge first, Vicente said.

Police have said they don't have the resources to care for medical marijuana plants, something James Masters has offered to help them with.

Fort Collins police spokeswoman Rita Davis has said that, because the couple did not have valid medical marijuana certificates at the time of their arrest, the pot was treated like any other confiscation case.

The Masters' attorneys said the amendment is clear on the issue that all marijuana seized in connection with the claimed use of medical marijuana must be maintained.

"You'd expect the police to follow the law," said Rob Corry, co-counsel in the case.

The couple did not have medical marijuana certificates from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Safety at the time of their arrests, but James Masters advised that anyone with a doctor's recommendation for it should get their certificate before starting treatment. He acknowledged that some patients aren't comfortable with having their names in a state database.

"What I hope this really accomplishes is that (patients) realize the safety the department of health offers," James Masters said. "Before you do anything else, put that (doctor's) recommendation in the mail."

The couple said they plan to continue providing medical marijuana to their patients and building the medical marijuana community.

"We're here to provide safe, legal medicine," Lisa Masters said.

[palmspringsbum]

Couple reclaim marijuana

<span class=postbigbold>Some see handover of 39 moldy pot plants as precedent-setting</span>


by Julie Poppen, Rocky Mountain News
December 4th, 2007


James and Lisa Masters pulled a broken 2-foot glass bong, large sacks of moldy marijuana - a total of 39 dead plants - and a small, usable quantity of the drug from the back of a white minivan.

The public display of illicit drugs in the parking lot of the police department Monday morning marked a critical step in a 16-month saga that began with the Masters being busted for growing pot in their home.

Supporters view the return of the substantial amount of marijuana as a precedent for how law enforcement agencies comply with the state's voter-backed medical marijuana laws.

"This is a historic day," said Brian Vicente, one of the Masters' attorneys and executive director of Sensible Colorado, a drug policy reform organization.

Vicente said this was the largest quantity of medicinal marijuana ever returned to a grower since voters backed the law in 2000. Attorney Robert Corry Jr. called the return of the pot "a victory for the voters of Colorado" and "a victory for compassion."

"I'm hoping this sends a message to police departments around Colorado that the Constitution is the highest law of the state and voters put it in there for a reason," Corry said.

Not everyone is convinced of the significance of Monday's action, though.

Larimer County District Court Judge Larry Abrahamson said the city attorney filed a request Wednesday to have the ruling reconsidered, but it was shot down. City Attorney Steve Roy could not be reached for comment.

Abrahamson said he was hoping a higher court would offer clarification on how federal drug laws - which ban the cultivation and use of cannabis - intersect with the state's implementation of medical marijuana laws.

Because the law was a constitutional amendment approved by voters, "we don't have a way to fix the law through the legislature," Abrahamson said, "only through a Supreme Court ruling."

"We were anxious to see a ruling," Abrahamson said.

<span class=postbigbold>Medical-use paperwork filed</span>

The court-mandated return of the Masters' marijuana is the most recent in a string of court cases related to medical marijuana.

Colorado is one of 14 states that allow the medical use of marijuana under strict regulations. After getting a doctor's recommendation, patients can pay $110 to be listed on a confidential registry and receive an ID card saying they have permission to grow a small amount of marijuana or more, if medically necessary. Other states, such as Michigan, are considering similar laws.

"There is a lot of momentum," Vicente said. "I think public sentiment is really behind us on this issue."

Supporters estimate that as many as 1,800 people use medical marijuana in Colorado - at least 1,458 are on the state registry. Some 636 people are designated "caregivers" who may legally provide them with the drug.

Licensed patients are able to designate "caregivers" who legally can grow small amounts of marijuana and are immune from prosecution. The Masterses subsequently have completed all the paperwork and are licensed medical marijuana users and caregivers, their attorneys said.

<span class=postbigbold>Judge: Pair met requirements</span>

The Masters case began in August 2006, when their home was raided by authorities. They spent a night in jail. Their two daughters, ages 6 and 7, were taken from them for eight weeks.

James Masters admitted that, at the time, neither he nor his wife was on the state's medical marijuana registry, nor did they have the card required to grow medical marijuana. He said they didn't have the money and his doctor's recommendation had expired.

Masters, 30, said he was using the drug to alleviate chronic hip and knee pain and cyclic vomiting and nausea. His wife, Lisa, 32, uses the drug to alleviate symptoms of fibromyalgia, carpal tunnel syndrome and three herniated discs in her neck. The couple were also helping several other people licensed by the state by providing them with medical-grade marijuana.

Masters said he was open with the police, who accompanied social services workers on a child welfare visit to their home, thinking he was protected by the law. Later, police raided the home using the earlier visit as the basis for a search warrant. In June 2006, Larimer County District Court Judge James Hiatt ruled the search warrant was illegal.

Hiatt ruled Nov. 26 that the plants and growing equipment must be returned, saying that while the couple weren't on the registry, they had fulfilled the definition of medical marijuana caregiver in the practical sense.

At the time, the law allowed caregivers to grow five cannabis plants per patient. Each caregiver could provide marijuana to six patients. In court, Vicente said he proved that the Masterses grew an amount that was medically necessary for their licensed patients. Four of their patients testified in court, describing how they were helped by the Masterses.

Fort Collins police spokeswoman Rita Davis disputed that the Masters home was raided. She said police accompanied social workers to the home and responded when they saw illegal activity.

"At the time the marijuana was confiscated they did not have any documentation that they were on a list or were registered," Davis said. "It wasn't until after the fact that they started to claim it was medical marijuana."

Not every court challenge has gone well for the pro-medical marijuana supporters.

But Corry believes even the losses help draw out supporters.

"The harder prosecutors and police come down on people, they are only helping our cause," he said.


<span class=postbigbold>What's next</span>

* The Masters' case isn't over. Attorneys plan to pursue compensation because most of the marijuana was destroyed. In a previous interview, the couple's attorney put the value of the plants at $100,000.

[palmspringsbum]

Fried: Fort Collins' Finest Foul Up Yet Another Masters' Case

by Eric Fried, Columnist, Fort Collins Now
December 12th, 2007


What is it with Fort Collins cops taking the law into their own hands in the Masters case?

No, not the Tim Masters' case, where police and prosecutors are embarrassed almost daily by new revelations of misconduct and withholding evidence. I mean the case of James and Lisa Masters, who apparently threaten the very foundations of western civilization by self-medicating their many and varied ailments with marijuana.

Here are the facts: Fort Collins police arrested the Masters in August 2006 for possession and distribution of marijuana in their home. They seized their plants, their paraphernalia, and their two daughters, who were cruelly separated from their loving parents for two months. The Masters were serving as a local arm of the Colorado Compassion Club, a state network of providers for medical marijuana patients, including themselves. Colorado voters in 2000 agreed to legalize medical marijuana, over the objections of drug war zealots who see the relatively harmless, naturally occurring weed as the devil's handmaiden. The Masters were not on the official state medical marijuana registry at the time of their arrest, but did have doctor's recommendations. In January 2006, in a related case, a jury in Gunnison County ruled that doctor's recommendations were sufficient grounds for medical marijuana use under the state initiative.

The Masters got their daughters back late last year, and this June a county judge declared the police search illegal and dropped all charges. Last month the same judge ruled the Master's property—pot and all—must be returned to them. The city appealed, and lost again. Finally the cops turned over the plants, which had long since died, with the lame excuse that it wasn't their responsibility to keep the evidence alive. But according to the Masters' attorney, under the terms of the voter-mandated state law, that is precisely what they were required to do. The Masters plan to go back to the judge to ask for about $100,000 in damages.

Imagine if the police seized your dog in an illegal raid, held it as evidence, and finally returned it 16 months later—dead. Would their argument that feeding the dog was not their job make you feel any better? I thought not.

It is true that marijuana is still illegal under federal law, and police insist federal law in this matter trumps state and local laws. Funny, I thought conservatives favored more local control, and less federal control. I guess that is void where localities take more liberal positions than the feds, whether it comes to gun control, assisted suicide, or victimless crimes like marijuana use. Then our hypocritical “small government” Puritans want Uncle Sam to come in, guns blazing, and put those uppity locals in their place.

Advocates for more rational marijuana laws in Denver are fighting the same battle. Voters there have passed several initiatives to basically decriminalize pot use, but some elements of the police insist they will continue to ignore the will of the people.

Therein lies the heart of the problem. The job of police officers is to enforce the law, not to write the law or interpret the law, whether they like it or not. Sometimes they act as if they answer to a higher authority, and that actual facts must give way to Truth as they see it. If that requires violating the law, or stretching the facts to frame someone they “just know” is guilty, then so be it. At that point, they have taken the law into their own hands, and become an uncontrolled, rogue force answerable to no one but themselves. In a democracy, where there is no higher authority than We the People, that cannot be allowed to stand.

Besides, with a rampant meth epidemic tearing us apart, why are we wasting any time and money on the ridiculous, failed, anachronistic War on Marijuana, whether people are using it as medicine or mild intoxicant?

[palmspringsbum]

Former Marine Wants Seized Marijuana Returned

MyFox Colorado
Last Edited: Monday, 17 Dec 2007, 10:31 AM MST
Created: Monday, 17 Dec 2007, 10:31 AM MST


AURORA -- A former Marine is asking Aurora police to return 71 marijuana plants seized at his home, saying the pot helps him deal with war injuries.

Criminal charges were dropped Friday against 38-year-old Kevin Dickes (dix), a state-certified medical marijuana patient.

Officers had seized the plants in April after a neighbor of Dickes reported he was growing marijuana in his home.

Dickes attorney Robert Corry Junior says the plants ought to be returned to his client.

Dickes says the marijuana helps him deal with nervousness, pain and mood swings resulting from his service during Operation Desert Storm.

Corry says police are required by state law to maintain the quality of anything they confiscate, and planned to filed a motion today seeking return of the plants.

[palmspringsbum]

Aurora Veteran Fights For Return Of Pot Plants

December 17, 2007


<table class=posttable align=right width=300><tr><td class=postcell><a class=postlink target=_blank href=http://www.cbs4denver.com/video/?id=37338@kcnc.dayport.com><img class=postimg width=300 src=bin/dickes_kevin.jpg alt="CLICK TO VIEW - Kevin Dickes, a former Marine, said he smokes marijuana to ease pain from a war injury."></a></td></tr></table>CENTENNIAL, Colo. (CBS4) ―
A former Marine from Aurora who argued that marijuana helps him deal with injuries suffered during Operation Desert Storm planned to ask for the return of his plants on Monday.

Criminal charges were dismissed against Kevin Dickes, 38, on Friday in Arapahoe County District Court. Dickes is a state-certified medical marijuana patient, and the district attorney dismissed marijuana cultivation charges against him following his not guilty plea.

Dickes was wounded by shrapnel from a grenade in 1991.

"It helps with my nervousness, it helps with the pain, with my mood swings," Dickes told CBS4. "When I'm in pain, I kind of get upset, angry; it calms me down and it's better than narcotics."

Police seized 71 plants from Dickes' home on April 27. A neighbor told police Dickes was growing the marijuana in his house, but Dickes' attorney, Robert Corry Jr., says police were not told the pot was for pain and the DA said officers didn't know he has a medical card allowing it.

Corry said state law requires the police to maintain the quality of whatever they confiscate.

"The police officers must maintain it, must cultivate it, they must water it, feed it, preserve it," he said.

Dickes was set to file a motion for the marijuana plants' return and said that if the plants are dead, he'll be asking for hundreds of thousands of dollars ($2,500 per plant).

In a similar case in Fort Collins earlier this month, police returned 39 plants seized from another couple with a medical marijuana card. Those plants were dead and now the couple is suing the police department.

[palmspringsbum]

TheDenverChannel.com

<img src=http://www.palmspringsbum.com/bin/icon_video.gif> <a class=postlink target=_blank href=http://mfile.akamai.com/12930/wmv/vod.ibsys.com/2007/1218/14876506.200k.asx>Video: Gulf War Vet Wants Pot Plants Back</a>


Gulf War Vet Asks Court To Give Marijuana Back

<span class=postbigbold>71 'Medicinal' Plants Confiscated In Raid</span>

By Lance Hernandez, 7NEWS Reporter
POSTED: 6:11 pm MST December 17, 2007


AURORA, Colo. -- The April raid is still fresh in Kevin Dickes' mind.

"Police came into my house, handcuffed me, pointed their guns at my face, then pulled me outside and sat me in my driveway in full view of my neighbors," said the Operation Desert Storm vet.

Police then confiscated 71 marijuana plants while executing a search warrant at Dickes' house.

Dickes said he has a medical card that allows him to grow the plants, but police said he never told them that until he was at the jail.

On Monday, the vet asked to get his marijuana back.

"This is a historic moment," said Dickes' attorney, Robert Correy, Jr. "If this property is returned it will be the most plants ever returned in Colorado."

Dickes was injured by an exploding hand grenade during the first Gulf War.

Ten years later he suffered frostbite after getting stranded during a snowmobile expedition in Colorado's High Country.

"The pain (in his right leg) is mostly in the afternoons after being on it all day. It's extremely painful," Dickes said.

When asked why he doesn't use regular pain medication Dickes responded, "The Percocets, the Vicodins, the Oxy-Contins, they're more addictive. They make you sick."

Dickes filed a motion for return of property early Monday, after the Arapahoe County District Attorney dropped charges against him. A hearing has been set for Wednesday.

"He was facing up to six years in prison on a felony charge of marijuana cultivation," Correy said.

Dickes added that the worst part of the ordeal was that it happened in front of his neighbors.

"Police embarassed me in front of the neighborhood. Now, they (neighbors) are thinking I'm a thug or a drug dealer, and I just grow it for my personal use."

Correy said there's a learning curve when it comes to enforcement of relatively new medical marijuana laws.

"Police and prosecutors have 70 some years of prohibition behind them. That's what their mindset is and it's a difficult mindset to change," Correy said.

"It's like telling pit bulls that cats are now your friends, and it's going to take a while for them to learn," said Dan Pope, a fellow medical marijuana user and supporter of the Gulf War vet.

Police said that learning curve is a two-way street.

"When officers executed the search warrant at his house, Mr. Dickes never told them he had a medical marijuana card," said detective Shannon Lucy.

When Dickes' girlfriend told officers that Kevin was certified to grow marijuana, they stopped what they were doing and called the district attorney.

"They were told to leave him six plants, 2 ounces of marijuana, the lights and other growing equipment," Lucy said.

"If something like this happens to you," Lucy added, "tell the officers that you have the (medical marijuana) card. Let them see it. I think most people will find things might be handled a little bit differently."

<hr class=postrule>

<small>Copyright 2007 by TheDenverChannel.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.</small>

[palmspringsbum]

Judge: Return marijuana to former Marine

Air Force Times
By Andrew Tilghman - Staff writer
Posted : Thursday Dec 20, 2007 17:18:28 EST

A Colorado judge ruled Wednesday that police should return dozens of marijuana plants to a former Marine and 1991 Persian Gulf War veteran who is a licensed medical marijuana user.

“It’s great — I need my stuff back,” said Kevin Dickes, 39, a Denver-area construction worker who left the Marine Corps as a lance corporal in 1993.

Aurora, Colo., police raided Dickes’ home in April and seized plants growing in his basement. He was handcuffed, arrested and charged with a felony count of cultivating marijuana, which carries a maximum sentence of six years in prison.

But last week, prosecutors dropped the charge after confirming that Dickes is licensed to grow the plants under the Colorado state medical marijuana laws that voters approved in 2000.

In early 1991, Dickes was with 1st Battalion, 4th Marines, in Kuwait helping to transport Iraqi prisoners of war when one of them detonated a grenade that sprayed him with shrapnel.

Years later, doctors diagnosed him with a chronic vascular condition that stems from his wartime injury and causes severe pain and swelling in his leg. Earlier this year, he took his Department of Veterans Affairs records to a Denver-area clinic and obtained the growing license.

Arapahoe District Judge John Wheeler granted Dickes’ motion requesting return of his plants, but Dickes and his attorney are skeptical that police have maintained the hydroponically grown plants for eight months.

“I doubt they have the resources to have a grow room at the police station. Are they going to pay some guy to sit there and take care of my marijuana?” Dickes said in a telephone interview.

Growing marijuana takes time, care and expertise, he said, adding that he may seek financial damages if police fail to deliver the plants in good condition.

“We’re going to get the property back, and then we’ll make our assessment as to whether compensation is warranted,” said Dickes’ attorney, Robert Corry.

Police reports said they seized 71 plants, but Corry said it wasn’t that many because some of the plants were “clones” and not fully grown.

The Drug Enforcement Agency applies a price of $5,200 to each pound of marijuana; if that standard applies, Dickes’ plants could be worth more than $100,000, depending on the weight.

Since police took his plants, Dickes said he has obtained marijuana only sporadically from friends and “caregivers.”

[palmspringsbum]

Police Return Marijuana Plants to Veteran
<table class=posttable align=right width=300><tr><td class=postcell><img class=postimg src=bin/dickes_kevin-returned-plants.jpg alt="click to view video"></td></tr><tr><td class=postcell><span class=postbold>Kevin Dickes sorting through a brown paper grocery sack that contains what's left of the marijuana plants that were seized by police. January 8, 2008.</span></td></tr></table>
MyFox Colorado
Last Edited: Tuesday, 08 Jan 2008, 8:51 PM MST
Created: Tuesday, 08 Jan 2008, 8:51 PM MST


By TAMMY VIGIL, Reporter


AURORA -- An historic day in Colorado. The Aurora Police Department had to return the largest number of marijuana plants ever to a marijuana grower.

Gulf War veteran Kevin Dickes--once facing jail time for growing medical marijuana--went back to the police to get it back Tuesday.

"By all rights, they should be fully grown, 5-foot tall, 71 cannabis indicus plants. But I'm expecting that not to be the case," says Dickes' lawyer, Robert Corry, Jr.

And he was right. The plants all fit into a brown paper grocery sack. "Seventy-one plants, you guys, are in this bag. Seventy-one," said a disappointed Dickes.

His medicine to ease the pain from chronic vascular disease is ruined. "We're missing the buds that we grow on a marijuana plant. That's the medicinal quality of the plant. This is stuff that would end up in the trash can," says cannabis expert, Dana May.

And that destruction likely means the police will have to pay. Another cannabis expert, Daniel Pope says, "The law is very clear, the plants should not be neglected, harmed, injured or destroyed."

State law also allows Dickes to be compensated for his loss--a value of $5,200 per plant. "There's 71 plants here. So do the math," says Corry Jr.

Police Chief Dan Oates said this about the law. "I think it is the height of absurdity and death of common sense for me to go to my city council and ask for money from the taxpayers of Aurora to run a grow operation in my property locker."

Besides Oates says Dickes brought this on himself by not telling officers the day he was arrested he was a registered medical marijuana user.

Police only stopped their search when Dickes' girlfriend told them a half hour later.

Chief Oates says had they known immediately Dickes was registered to have marijuana, they would have simply taken pictures of the plants, taken a small sample and let the district attorney decide how to proceed.

Corry Jr. though says Dickes wasn't thinking clearly at the time because police busted down Dickes' door with full black masks on, their guns drawn and pointed to his head. He was then hauled away to jail just 10 minutes later.

Corry Jr. plans to file his motion for compensation next week.

[palmspringsbum]

Medical Marijuana Users Seek $200K For Lost Stash

<span class=postbigbold>Suit May Encourage Colorado Police to Reexamine Drug Raids</span>

The Washington Post
January 17, 2008


<table class=posttable align=right width=291><tr><td class=postcell><img class=postimg src=bin/prescriptions_cabinet.jpg title="Is medical marijuana different from other prescriptions?"></td></tr></table>(AP) Today in Fort Collins, Colo., a lawyer will walk into a court house and ask the city to pay his clients for destroying their marijuana. The motion for compensation asks Fort Collins to fork over $202,800, the most money ever sought for the destruction of a drug.

In August 2006, police confiscated the plants from the home of James and Lisa Masters, both of whom (on their doctor's advice) use marijuana to cope with a variety of debilitating illnesses. Their house also serves as the county chapter of the Colorado Compassion Club, a statewide network that provides pot for medical marijuana patients.

Since 2000 Colorado, like 12 other states, has allowed registered users to grow pot. But police officers have scant training and less guidance for handling a legal marijuana growing operation. They are not instructed to ask for permits, for example, and many officers believe medical marijuana protection inhibits their ability to bust illicit users.

In June 2007, Larimer County Chief Judge James Hiatt dismissed charges against the couple and ruled that the 2006 raid was illegal. With that decision he set into motion a test of Article XVIII, Section 14 of the Colorado Constitution, which calls for the immediate return of any marijuana "seized by state or local law enforcement officials from a patient or primary care-giver."

In November Judge Hiatt ordered a return of the Masters' property, including the medical marijuana plants. In December the Masters went to pick them up, but after more than 16 months, their medicine was unusable.

"We are not equipped with hydroponic growing equipment," police spokesperson Rita Davis explained. Few evidence rooms are, but Colorado law states that "any property ... used in connection with the medical use of marijuana... shall not be harmed, neglected, injured, or destroyed while in the possession of state or local law enforcement officials."

According to their lawyer, the Masters want more than just monetary compensation. "We want police to stop destroying people's medicine and start following the law," Brian Vicente says. "The goal is to get police to change their procedures."

[palmspringsbum]

Couple seeks compensation for pot

<span class=postbigbold>Medicinal plants worth more than $200K, they say</span>

BY TREVOR HUGHES
TrevorHughes@coloradoan.com
January 18, 2008

In what is believed to be a first-of-its-kind request for Colorado, a Fort Collins couple is demanding police pay them more than $200,000 for improperly confiscating and destroying 39 marijuana plants.

"We are not going to stop the fight," James Masters said Thursday afternoon after filing the request at the Larimer County Justice Center.

Masters and his wife, Lisa, say they use marijuana to manage their medical conditions as allowed under Colorado's Amendment 20, approved by voters in 2000.

Police in August 2006 raided the couple's home, confiscating plants, pot and glassware. However, a judge ruled that the search warrant for that raid was improperly obtained and threw out the case. In June, he ordered Fort Collins police to return the plants.

The problem: The plants were already dead.

Thursday's filing sets the stage for a court hearing to determine just how much the plants were worth to the Masterses, and whether city taxpayers will have to shell out to cover the damages.

The Masterses' lawyer, Robert Corry Jr., likened the situation to that of having a pet accused of attacking someone. Police have a duty to care for the animal while they investigate, and the same should hold for the marijuana plants, he said.

"It's like any other case: Police need to return the property or compensate you," Corry said, noting that some estimates put the per-ounce price of marijuana higher than that of gold.

"This is a historic day. We are seeking compensation for medical marijuana," Corry added.

Police have said they don't have the resources to care for medical marijuana plants, something James Masters had offered to help them with.

At the time of the initial ruling, Fort Collins police spokeswoman Rita Davis said, because the couple did not have valid medical marijuana certificates at the time of their arrest, the pot was treated like any other confiscation case.

Thursday, Davis declined to comment, citing the pending litigation.

Amendment 20 requires the "preservation of seized property interests that had been possessed, owned, or used in connection with a claimed medical use of marijuana and limiting forfeiture of such interests ..."

Thursday's filing values the plants at $5,200 each, for a total of $202,800. According to the High Times Web site, the nationwide average for an ounce of marijuana is $388. Medicinal marijuana, the Masterses and Corry said, is worth more because it is far more potent and grown "with love."

"Medical marijuana is expensive," Corry added

[palmspringsbum]

ACTION ALERT: Stop CBS4 Attacks on Cannabis Patients

Tue, 01/29/2008 - 02:46 — Anonymous Stoner

<span class=postbigbold>Stop CBS4 Attacks on Cannabis Patients Tell CBS Not to Air the Attack on Disabled Veteran Kevin Dickes CBS4-Denver</span>

(303) 830-6464

CBS4-Denver has been attacking medicinal marijuana patients and their caregivers in Colorado. The last person to be the focus of a CBS4 medicinal cannabis "investigation" (Ken Gorman) ended up murdered less than a week after the story aired. Now they are trying it again by attacking a disabled veteran. These attacks have to stop.

This Thursday (Jan. 31), CBS4 is scheduled to air an "investigation" of Kevin Dickes, former Marine and disabled Gulf War veteran. Dickes was prescribed cannabis for a war injury and has a valid Medical Marijuana Registry identification card issued by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. In 2000, Colorado voters approved an amendment to the state constitution that allows patients to legally use cannabis as medicine with their physician's approval. Dickes was arrested in Aurora in March 2007. He was charged with felony cultivation and faced 6 years in prison. Because he was a registered patient, all charges against Dickes were eventually dropped. Colorado law says that police shall return the cannabis "unharmed", so Aurora police were forced to return his medicine to him. The CBS4 "investigation" scheduled to air this Thursday allegedly shows a former Marine who served with Dickes in the Gulf War who says Dickes' injury was not caused in the Gulf War. The fact that Dickes was injured is not in question. In the promotion for the CBS4 story, it clearly shows the 36-inch scar on Dicke's leg. Apparently, all that is in question is the cause of that injury.

Dickes has provided medical records to CBS4 proving he was injured in the Marines, but CBS4 is still airing the story. Read the letter from Dickes' attorney, Robert Corry, here: http://www.vflog.com/action/dickes.corry.let.html

This is a blatant attack on a law-abiding citizen for using a plant he grew himself to ease his pain. The cause of his injury is none of CBS4's business! This is an invasion of medical privacy. This sensational story is designed only to boost ratings at the expense of a disabled veteran. Kevin Dickes has already suffered with his arrest, prosecution and destruction of his medicine. This "investigation" serves no purpose other than to attack Dickes' and make him suffer more for his use of a legal medicine. All citizens should be outraged! In Feb. 2007, CBS4's Rick Sallinger aired a story about medical marijuana caregiver, Ken Gorman. Less than a week later, that caregiver was found brutally murdered in his home. Denver police have made no arrests and have no suspects in the case. See the story that aired one week before Ken was murdered: http://cbs4denver.com/investigates/Denver.Colorado.medical.2.556420.html

See the story about Ken's death: http://cbs4denver.com/local/Ken.Gorman.Murder.2.556598.html "I don't want to end up dead in my own home like Ken Gorman because of Rick Sallinger," Dickes says. What's next for Rick Sallinger? Will he start investigating all Gulf War veterans and their private medical histories? Is he going to continue to attack other medicinal cannabis patients just to boost his ratings? Why doesn't he do an investigation of Ken Gorman's murder and find out why the Denver Police refuse to investigate this case? Please call CBS4 to protest this attack on sick patients. Ask them not to air the story on Thursday:

CBS4-Denver (303) 830-6464 kcncnews@cbs.com

If CBS4-Denver does not pull the story, there will be a protest at their offices (1044 Lincoln Street) at 3pm on Thursday (1/31). Please check this website for updates before you go http://www.vflog.com Bringing the 1st Amendment into the 21st Century

[palmspringsbum]

Medical marijuana story draws protestors to Channel 4

The Denver Post
By Joanne Ostrow
Denver Post Television Critic
Article Last Updated: 01/30/2008 08:58:47 PM MST


Protestors are stoked to congregate at KCNC-Channel 4 Thursday afternoon in advance of a story about a former Marine and medical marijuana.

Trouble is, they haven't seen the story, which will run in Channel 4's 10 p.m. news Thursday. And they are misguided in terms of what the story reports, station officials say.

In fact, it's not an attack on medical marijuana or the propriety of that treatment. It's an expose of one veteran who apparently abused the system.

Kevin Dickes, a former Marine, was arrested in Aurora in March 2007 and charged with felony cultivation. Police confiscated 71 marijuana plants from his house. Because he was a registered medical marijuana patient, all charges were dropped.

Reporter Rick Salinger was contacted by an out-of-state former member of Dickes' platoon, Rich Taylor. Taylor tipped Salinger to the fact that Dickes injuries were not sustained as a result of a war injury, as Dickes claimed.

After much legwork, Salinger confirmed there was no suicide grenade attack at the time and place Dickes claimed.

"Our intent in the story is pure," said Channel 4 News Director Tim Wieland. "This guy obtained a license under false pretenses. Nowhere do we question the value of medical marijuana."

A coordinated email, phone and in-person protest against the station misses that point.

But it does draw attention to a Channel 4 news story at the start of the February ratings sweeps.

Joanne Ostrow: 303-954-1830 or jostrow@denverpost.com

[palmspringsbum]

Man plans to sue Aurora over confiscated marijuana

9news.com
posted by: Jeffrey Wolf , Web Producer
written by: Paula Woodward , 9Wants to Know Investigative Reporter
created: 1/30/2008 9:44:52 PM
Last updated: 1/31/2008 1:56:24 PM


<table class=posttable align=right width=300><tr><td class=postcell><a class=postlink href="http://www.9news.com/video/player.aspx?aid=47662&bw=" title="click for video" target=_blank><img class=postimg width=300 src=bin/dickes_kevin_30jan08.jpg></a></td></tr></table>AURORA - Desert Storm veteran Kevin Dickes is planning to sue the city of Aurora for destroying his medical marijuana. However, because of some discrepancies in what he's told police and reporters, Dickes may have hurt his own case.

Dickes was arrested in April 2007 and arrested for possession of marijuana after Aurora Police found 71 marijuana plants growing inside his home. Dickes has a doctor's card authorizing him to use medical marijuana, but he didn't tell police about it during his arrest.

They found out about the card when his girlfriend came home and told them. Police also then found his medical marijuana use card.

By then, Dickes had been taken to the police station and most of the marijuana had been confiscated and destroyed.

Aurora Police Chief Dan Oates says Dickes could have prevented the whole thing.

"Had we known up front, we would have taken pictures of his grow operation, taken samples from a couple of plants and we would have left everything, but he didn't tell us," said Oates.

Police videotaped the raid of Dickes' home, which is routine on drug arrests. However, there are now two versions of the video.

The Aurora Police Department version, which is the one on file with the court as evidence, shows that officers learned about Dickes' medical marijuana permit 20 minutes and 29 seconds into the tape.

The other version of the video tape, that Dickes told 9Wants to Know he posted on his own onto YouTube, has the audio of the officers who found the permit at the front of the tape.

Eleven seconds into the video of the arrest, according to the version of the tape on Dickes' Web site, police can be heard talking about the marijuana permit card.

Rob Corry, who represents Dickes had also posted the edited version of the Aurora arrest on his attorney Web site. When 9Wants to Know told him about the discrepancy, he removed it.

Oates calls the edited tape "doctored and malicious spinning of what occurred."

Then there's Dickes' story about how he was injured and why he needs medical marijuana. He has a doctor's card to prove he needs it and permission from the State Department of Health to grow enough to be a caregiver for other medical marijuana users.

There are questions about his credibility. Dickes has told reporters and the police over the past year that he suffers from pain from a grenade that landed next to him during Desert Storm.

Corry says he wasn't there, but from what his client tells him, "a grenade that exploded close to him when he was escorting some Iraqi prisoners" caused injuries to his leg and arm.

A subsequent snowmobiling accident complicated the problem and Dickes says both injuries prompt his use of medicinal marijuana.

Corry says he doesn't have proof Dickes was injured by a grenade, but he's requested the paperwork from the Veterans Administration of America. That could take up to three months.

Dickes received an honorable discharge and has a 10 percent disability.

Corry says they'll file a lawsuit against the city of Aurora in the next week for the loss of the plants. Whether Dickes' actions with police and reporters will affect the lawsuit will be decided in court.

There's a lot of money involved. According to the Drug Enforcement Administration, one mature medicinal marijuana plant is worth $5,200. Sixty-five plants were seized from Dickes' home. Even though they were half-grown when they were confiscated, if Dickes is awarded full value, he could get $338,000.



(Copyright KUSA*TV. All rights reserved.)

[palmspringsbum]

Jan 31, 2008 10:00 pm US/Mountain

Vet's Medical Marijuana Story Under Friendly Fire


<a class=postlink href=http://www.cbs4denver.com/video/?id=38569@kcnc.dayport.com target=_blank>Click to watch video</a>

Written For The Web By Rick Sallinger
Contact reporter Rick Sallinger at rsallinger@cbs.com


Rick Sallinger AURORA, Colo. (CBS4) ― A CBS4 investigation has found a former Marine with a medical marijuana permit may have lied about his war injury.

Kevin Dickes is considering a lawsuit against Aurora police for more than $300,000. He claims police destroyed his marijuana after seizing it during a raid on his home.

Acting on a tip from a neighbor and carrying a warrant, Aurora police raided the home of Kevin Dickes in April 2007.

They entered Dickes' marijuana growing room and confiscated 71 of his plants, which were later placed in a police evidence locker. Several others were left behind.

The case was later dropped and what was left of the plants was returned when it was learned that Dickes was listed on the state registry to legally use medical marijuana.

He claimed to police and others he needs it to ease pain from a 1991 Gulf War injury. He even showed off his scar, claiming it happened in Kuwait while serving in the Marines.

CBS4 reporter Rick Sallinger asked Dickes how he was wounded. "Sharp metal from a grenade" was the reply. Dickes previously said it happened in Kuwait, but he told Sallinger it happened at Bahrain's international airport.

Former Gunnery Sgt. Rich Taylor disputes that. He was in Dickes platoon (1st Batallion, the 4th Marines). He knew Dickes and sent CBS4 pictures of him from back then, insisting the grenade incident never occured.

"It looks like he has an injury, however he didn't receive that injury during that deployment. He may very well rate that license, but he lied to get it in my opinion, and I didn't like that very much," Taylor said.

Military records CBS4 obtained confirm Dickes was most definately a Marine for 2 years and 11 months, receiving several commendations and exiting as a Lance Corporal.

Dickes told CBS4 he was injured when a prisoner of war committed suicide with a grenade, killing two others.

"Yeah, he had it around his belt. I had shrapnel on my leg and arm," he said.

That would seem to be a newsworthy event, but a search of news stories from the Gulf War period with the assistance of the archiving company Lexis-Nexis could find no reports of that. The Marine archives from Dickes' unit did not mention it, either.

Taylor claims that's because it never happened.

"I didn't like the idea of someone taking advantage of the current environment and situation in Iraq to garner sympathy to gain permission to do that kind of stuff," he said.

Combat injuries are often acknowledged by awarding the wounded a purple heart, but Dickes acknowledged he didn't receive one.

"No, I didn't. I got compensation 10 percent ... disabililty," he said. Former platoon member Rich Taylor responded in the following way:

"It looks like he has some kind of injury, however taking advantage of the system and lying to gain a license to do that kind of stuff is not what Marines do."

CBS4 asked the Veteran's Administration to supply information about Dickes' injury but were told he would need to agree. Dickes' attorney said he would think about it.

When CBS4 did not hear back, Sallinger and a photographer went to Dickes' home.

"I came over here in hopes we could clear up how you got injured. I can't find any record of it," Sallinger said.

"I'm not going to release my military record," Dickes said.

He did admit the scar he had previously shown us was actually from an operation he had after a snowmobile accident. Dickes still claimed he was injured in a suicide grenade attack.

Since then CBS4 News obtained military records for Dickes dated December 1991 that found him "unfit for duty." The reason stated was: "while on a ship ... he fell." Due to complications from that knee injury, a year after it occurred, he was dismissed from the service.

There's no mention of Kevin Dickes being wounded by a prisoner's grenade.

Dickes served his country as a Marine. He received an honorable discharge. But his story of why he needs medical marijuana stands in conflict with the U.S. military records that state why he had to leave the service.

Dickes offered a Veteran's Administration hospital card that says "service connected" and a stack of medical documents as proof he was injured by a grenade. He said while the documents did not indicate a grenade shrapnel injury, he was trying to obtain military records that could verify his story of how he was hurt.

<hr class=postrule>
<center>(© MMVII CBS Television Stations, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)</center>