Jump to content

Breaking News Patient Get Home Forfeiture D By Drug Task Force Tuscola


Recommended Posts

A patient who got raided a few days before I did and is being for being few seedlings over and only having only 4 mature plants and has not been convicted is have his home seized by The Tuscola county drug task force and lost his home court yesterday this man is going to need our help his name is Patrick Andrew Mcdonald he also uses the name giggles again this brother needs our support

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main problem I see here is that he failed to comply with the clear part of the law himself..

Seems as though people have forgotten how to count to 12..

1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,200... wait.. did I skip a number or two? Oh well, noone will notice!

 

I have read stories about people being "checked into" and left alone.. Those people knew how to count to 12 as well as how to put locks on doors..

 

It is not unusual for task forces to seize property pending an investigation.. When they bust into an ILLEGAL grow operation they seize EVERYTHING!

I feel for this guy, I really do.. Right now it is very clear that a patient can have 12 plants.. The law that we voted in also included being able to produce enough to keep a constant supply of meds which could mean more than 12 plants depending on his need..

If he CAN prove that he needed more than 12 then he might get by on that.. Good luck to him.

For the rest, keep with the safe number of 12.. Not 12 and a few clones, or 12 and one on the side! At least wait until things are clarified in the laws..

 

 

For example, what would happen if the law enforcement caught you with a bottle of pills that has your name and info on the prescription but there were 25% more pills than the bottle said you should have? It is likely that you would be arrested..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main problem I see here is that he failed to comply with the clear part of the law himself..

Seems as though people have forgotten how to count to 12..

1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,200... wait.. did I skip a number or two? Oh well, noone will notice!

 

I have read stories about people being "checked into" and left alone.. Those people knew how to count to 12 as well as how to put locks on doors..

 

It is not unusual for task forces to seize property pending an investigation.. When they bust into an ILLEGAL grow operation they seize EVERYTHING!

I feel for this guy, I really do.. Right now it is very clear that a patient can have 12 plants.. The law that we voted in also included being able to produce enough to keep a constant supply of meds which could mean more than 12 plants depending on his need..

If he CAN prove that he needed more than 12 then he might get by on that.. Good luck to him.

For the rest, keep with the safe number of 12.. Not 12 and a few clones, or 12 and one on the side! At least wait until things are clarified in the laws..

 

 

For example, what would happen if the law enforcement caught you with a bottle of pills that has your name and info on the prescription but there were 25% more pills than the bottle said you should have? It is likely that you would be arrested..

 

 

This simply is not true. I am allowed 60 plants, I had 57 live plants. By law enforcements count I had 135 plants. During harvest I cut branches off of 12 plants and hung them to dry. They counted every branch that was drying as individual plants. As a result they destroyed everything I had in flower. Then they destroyed my mother plants and took the buds I had drying. They left me with a few clones and some seedlings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This simply is not true. I am allowed 60 plants, I had 57 live plants. By law enforcements count I had 135 plants. During harvest I cut branches off of 12 plants and hung them to dry. They counted every branch that was drying as individual plants. As a result they destroyed everything I had in flower. Then they destroyed my mother plants and took the buds I had drying. They left me with a few clones and some seedlings.

 

 

That is a very interesting circumstance.. what was their reasoning behind destroying the mother plant but leaving clones and seedlings?

Did this make the paper?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A patient who got raided a few days before I did and is being for being few seedlings over and only having only 4 mature plants and has not been convicted is have his home seized by The Tuscola county drug task force and lost his home court yesterday this man is going to need our help his name is Patrick Andrew Mcdonald he also uses the name giggles again this brother needs our support

So John was this patient a cardholder or someone looking to use the affirmative defense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. . It is not unusual for task forces to seize property pending an investigation..

His property is gone. It has been stolen by the largest organized crime syndicate in the world. In 2008 over $25.3 million in cash and assets was "forfeited and placed into the fight against drugs."

2009 Michigan Asset Forfeiture Report

This is why it is so important to the police to keep the "War on Drugs" alive. They get to keep what they steal even if it turns out that no crime was committed.

 

Last Updated: November 12. 2009 2:07PM

Michigan court rulings shape forfeiture law

I-94, Royal Oak cases set precedents for courts

George Hunter / The Detroit News

 

Two Michigan cases have played pivotal roles in the dramatic increases of police seizures locally and nationwide -- regardless of whether the property owner committed a crime.

 

The Michigan Supreme Court in 2007 denied the appeal of Detroit motorist Tamika Smith, who was stopped in 2002 for speeding on Interstate 94 near Paw Paw. The trooper searched the car without Smith's consent and seized $180,000 found in a backpack in the trunk.

 

No guns, drugs or other illegal material were found. A judge later acknowledged that the money was seized improperly -- but following testimony that I-94 is a corridor for drug running, the judge allowed the forfeiture, which the state high court upheld on appeal.

"They were able to keep that money because they said my client was suspicious," said Oak Park attorney Karri Mitchell, who represented Smith.

 

"The Supreme Court's decision gives the police unfettered right to stop and take people's property for any or no reason. It's shocking."

 

Modern forfeiture laws date to 1970, when Congress passed the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act, which authorized the government to seize contraband drugs, drug manufacturing and storage equipment and anything used to transport drugs. The law since has been amended to allow seizure of a widening list of properties.

 

Forfeitures saw a huge jump after 1984, when federal legislation permitted forfeiture proceeds to be funneled back to the police agencies that seized them.

 

The Smith ruling followed the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in 1996 to allow the seizure of a Royal Oak couple's 1977 Pontiac sedan after her husband was busted for using it to have sex with a prostitute.

 

Tina Bennis said she didn't know her husband, John, had used the car to pick up a hooker and argued that she should be entitled to half the car's value, roughly $400, since she had done nothing wrong.

 

The High Court, in a narrow 5-4 decision, ruled there's a long legal history to support owners losing property if it's used for illegal activity, even if they didn't know or approve.

 

The Supreme Court rested its majority opinion on an 1827 case in which a Spanish ship, the Palmyra, was captured after attacking a U.S. vessel. The high court held that since the Spanish ship was used in the attack, authorities were allowed to seize it whether or not the owner was convicted. The case reaffirmed the principle that property itself can be the instrument of a crime.

 

Tina Bennis, who still is married to John, said that argument makes no sense.

 

"If someone is using something illegally, I understand (it's OK) for the police to take their car," said Tina Bennis, 51, who still resides in Royal Oak. "But when the owner doesn't know the car is being used for something illegal, it's not right to punish them. If a teenager had some pot in his pocket while riding in his grandma's car, it's not right to take the old lady's car."

 

In his dissenting opinion, Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens wrote: "While our historical cases establish the propriety of seizing a freighter when its entire cargo consists of smuggled goods, none of them would justify the confiscation of an ocean liner just because one of its passengers sinned while on board."

 

Justice Clarence Thomas joined the majority, but warned that "improperly used, forfeiture could become more like a roulette wheel employed to raise revenue from innocent but hapless owners ... or a tool wielded to punish those who associate with criminals, than a component of a system of justice."

 

It's up to federal departments and the states, he said, to ensure that doesn't happen.

 

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20091112/METRO/911120390/Michigan-court-rulings-shape-forfeiture-law#ixzz0yDFvxSVn

 

"It's up to federal departments and the states, he said, to ensure that doesn't happen." - Justice Clarence Thomas :startle:

 

In other words, the foxes need to guard the henhouse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a very interesting circumstance.. what was their reasoning behind destroying the mother plant but leaving clones and seedlings?

Did this make the paper?

 

 

Well, considering they took the most mature plants, those in flower, my guess is that they wanted to take the most valuable. I wasn't home when they raided, so I was unable to ask them their reasoning. As far as I know it did not make the paper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no one ever answers my question about why would the cops would just stop by your house? Not trying to be mean I feel bad for the guy just trying to figure out what not to do. My card was issued may 18th but I just got it last week I think card in hand is much different than issue date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest finallyfree09

no one ever answers my question about why would the cops would just stop by your house? Not trying to be mean I feel bad for the guy just trying to figure out what not to do. My card was issued may 18th but I just got it last week I think card in hand is much different than issue date.

i live right next to a main road. if i happen to be medicating with my bedroom window open and a police officer has someone pulled over outside and out of my sight there is a pretty good chance that they are going to come and mess with me because they SMELLED what they believe to be illegal activity. theres one way. or maybe they smell the plants growing or what if your a guy like me that has a lot of friends that stop by all the time? leo will see all of that traffic and become suspicious and look for ANY REASON THAT THEY CAN FABRICATE to come into my home.

 

in the end they don't need a reason. if a cop wants into your house they are GOING to come in. the constitution is almost dead my friend. just a few more laws to write and NONE of us will have any rights. america isn't america anymore. hasn't been since reagan perpetuated nixons lie... THE WAR ON DRUGS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no one ever answers my question about why would the cops would just stop by your house? Not trying to be mean I feel bad for the guy just trying to figure out what not to do. My card was issued may 18th but I just got it last week I think card in hand is much different than issue date.

 

re "a card in hand"

 

He had his "card." After 20 days you are fully registered and the paper IS THE ID CARD until the plastic arrives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

peanutbutter I understand but it is just too risky from what I read to do anything until you actually have the card. I have read too many things on here of problems with paperwork only. Do you think maybe it is just the word that you have a card spreads to the wrong person or something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

peanutbutter I understand but it is just too risky from what I read to do anything until you actually have the card. I have read too many things on here of problems with paperwork only. Do you think maybe it is just the word that you have a card spreads to the wrong person or something?

 

Many in law enforcement do not understand this passage in the law:

 

Section 9 (b) If the department fails to issue a valid registry identification card in response to a valid application or renewal submitted pursuant to this act within 20 days of its submission, the registry identification card shall be deemed granted, and a copy of the registry identification application or renewal shall be deemed a valid registry identification card.

 

Yes .. the very clear problem here is the lack of understanding by the system. And they seem to want to stay that way.

 

Over and over again, people say "they didn't have their card yet."

 

We need to stop thinking and talking the way that leo wants us to.

 

This is a situation where the state breaks the law resulting in the patient going to jail.

 

In the cases in Oakland County this is the very issue. Several people that have not yet received their plastic. The police claim these people did not have their ID cards. The law says they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why anyone feels bads for this dude, should anyone lose their house over weed? No I don't think so.

On the other hand if we don't follow the law how can we expectt this thing to survive? Someone said the law is what the law is and there's no middle ground.

Same for us,12 means 12 not 16.

I will follow the rules to a tee. If they raid they raid but I will be by the book... to not be is counterproductive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...