James Story Part 2

[Habenero]

 

 

I told he lots of thing most where tune into PGT every Thursday nights at 8-10 pm  i wish i had a calling card  of some kind too hand out to everyone i talk too but last time i asked if i could make one i got confused because of some king of logo i couldn't use 

:::::Shakes head super fast like a cartoon character:::::  What?  Dude, I thought I was the world's worst writer!!!

[Hayduke]

I looked through the relevant legislative journals, and there was no documented discussion.  If any documentation exists at the committee level, I don't know how to go about finding it.

 

There were three substitute bills in the senate and seven in the house.  I don't have access to those previous version of the bills (S-1 and S-2 and H-1 through H-6).  This information would be important to determine legislative history - to see how the bill was developed because interpretation by the courts will take into account proposed language that was stricken. (As in, if we found a previous bill that said "all sides, including the top and bottom" then that would be proof that the legislature didn't intend to require a top)

 

The house adopted a substitute bill H-7 (to reflect amendments in the senate).  H-7 did not include the outdoor language.  Before the bill was voted on in the house, on 5-2-12 Cavanagh moved to add the outdoor language.  The motion was successful, the house adopted the amendment, and the final bill was passed by the house the following day.  The senate adopted the amended H-7 as S-3 and passed the bill in December.

 

I don't know the circumstances surrounding the adding of the outdoor grow language.  Maybe Cavanagh's committee discussed it, but I doubt it because H-7 was recommended by the judiciary committee.   It would seem that if the outdoor language was the recommendation of the judiciary committee, it would have been in H-7.  And if you look at the House Journal, it says that Rep. Cavanagh moved to add the outdoor language (just prior to the final vote); it says nothing about his judiciary committee or if he was moving for an amendment endorsed by his committee. 

 

It very well could be that Cavanagh slipped this language in at the last minute before the vote with no previous legislative record.  If that is the case, then there probably won't be any legislative history.

I sat through virtually every meeting on the outdoor language, and have posted on this topic before, quite specifically.  The legislative intent from Rep Cavanagh was as ruled in this case, that the "top" was to be considered in the same vein as a "side"... he also wanted the sides to be obscured so as not to be visible to the property next door, or by a passerby.  It was interesting to me that the judge in this case mentioned the reference to the "ground".  It further shows the judiciary was trying to follow the legislative intent.

[Habenero]

 

Couldn't something be done for "cruel and unusual punishment"?  Really, a 4 x 8 piece of chickenwire gets this?

 

 

I doubt it because the punishment isn't for not having a top the punishment is for growing marijuana. Not having the top isn't the crime here it is only what takes you outta the umbrella protection of section 4.

 

But I ain't a lawyer so me doubting it doesn't hold a lot of authority on the topic. Maybe one of the lawyers here can answer it better.

[bobandtorey]

:::::Shakes head super fast like a cartoon character:::::  What?  Dude, I thought I was the world's worst writer!!!

Sorry i will try to do better next time

[GregS]

:::::Shakes head super fast like a cartoon character:::::  What?  Dude, I thought I was the world's worst writer!!!

Don't get out much?

[Habenero]

Don't get out much?

Guess not bro.

 

Bob, dude, not criticizing, just that some of your stuff is an awful hard read but that sentence I quoted seems completely meaningless. But oh well. No prob.

 

Greg, your pet gorilla is smoking a whole pack at once. Maybe you can get him on the patch?

[GregS]

Guess not bro.

 

Bob, dude, not criticizing, just that some of your stuff is an awful hard read but that sentence I quoted seems completely meaningless. But oh well. No prob.

 

Greg, your pet gorilla is smoking a whole pack at once. Maybe you can get him on the patch?

They make marijuana patches? I did not know that (in my best Johnny Carson).

[GregS]

 

 

These issues are in the methane judicial scholars blow out their asses.  On their birthdays they can make a wish.

We can only hope.

 

 

...toooo yooooooooooo.

Edited October 19, 2014 by GregS

[trichcycler]

They make marijuana patches? I did not know that (in my best Johnny Carson).

Think, DMSO, and you'll have a patch in no time!

The biblical recipe for the anointing oil is also designed to quickly permeate

skin through osmosis, effectively creating the basis for our patches. Some oils and

will facilitate the travel without using dmso, a less scary approach maybe.

[GregS]

Better living through chemistry?

 

 

This interlude is brought to you by cannabis; because you did not remember to be ready when the moment was right. Ask your doctor if cannabis is right for you.

Edited October 19, 2014 by GregS

[Habenero]

yikes

[JohnB RPh]

I'm faced with either going through with section 8 defense or a possible plea deal in which I will be found guilty, placed under probation for 6-12 months and then if completed successfully, expunged off my record. I mean not really, not in today's technology driven computer systems. It will always be there, every time a background check is done. A felony takes away my school job and prohibits me from ever being able to get another job anywhere in my field, education. It's all I know, it's all I have ever done.

 

Don't know what I did wrong, your quote didn't work quite right so italicized it.

 

I went the plea deal and probation.  Upon completion of probation, I received a signed statement from the judge ordering authorities to destroy all written and electronic records concerning my case.  Shortly thereafter I received a letter from the Michigan State Police stating they had complied with judges order XXXX and all records pertaining to my case had been destroyed.  I have both letters framed.

 

I have since passed a fairly extensive employment background check with no issues.  If I had not taken the offer I am 100% sure I would no longer be an employed professional licensed by the state.

 

Are you a member of the Teachers Union?