My friend charged for reporting robbery to police...

[MakeSense]

So here is the story. My buddy was robbed for a bunch of equiptment and plants(( by his employees/friends )) . He was in compliance with the law. So he goes down to the police station after months to collect his property and they proceed to tell him that he is under arrest. The DA is charging him with cultivation and distribution. Is there an advocacy group that can help him??? He has retained an attorney and he assures him it is B.S. but that doesn'nt change the fact that he is scared to death.
Any good advice???

[cologrower420]

So here is the story. My buddy was robbed for a bunch of equiptment and plants(( by his employees/friends )) . He was in compliance with the law. So he goes down to the police station after months to collect his property and they proceed to tell him that he is under arrest. The DA is charging him with cultivation and distribution. Is there an advocacy group that can help him??? He has retained an attorney and he assures him it is B.S. but that doesn'nt change the fact that he is scared to death.
Any good advice???

I would question whether he was actually legal or not. If he was legal, then he might qualify for a public defender. However, it doesn't seem like he was 'legal', I doubt a DA would bother bringing charges unless there was sufficient evidence that someone was breaking the law.

You said a bunch of equipment, what does that mean? Did your friend have the proper paperwork for the amount of plants on the premesis? Did he inflate the value/amount of 'inventory' when he called the cops and he fucked himself?

[TheReleafCenter]

Sounds like a job for Rob Corry!

In all seriousness, though, Rob would probably take his case pro bono. Hope everything works out for him, I can't imagine thinking I got all my equipment back and then getting cuffed. :mad:

[MakeSense]

Actually that is his attorney. Not pro bono :)
Equiptment means 30k worth of lighting etc.
That is the messed up thing.... He has all his ducks
in a row.
This just seems like one of those cases that the community
should get behind because it could be you next.
I have no idea why the DA has a hard on for this. I think it is
just that they still can't stand seeing a large grow op in place.
Like I said, Rob seems to think it is no biggy. Still scary for my
bud though.

On top of it all. He is the one who called the police.

[leadmagnet]

Has this particular incident been reported in the press anywhere yet?

[copobo]

where was this?

which DA and which agency charged him?

[Zedleppelin]

I would question whether he was actually legal or not. If he was legal, then he might qualify for a public defender. However, it doesn't seem like he was 'legal', I doubt a DA would bother bringing charges unless there was sufficient evidence that someone was breaking the law.

You said a bunch of equipment, what does that mean? Did your friend have the proper paperwork for the amount of plants on the premesis? Did he inflate the value/amount of 'inventory' when he called the cops and he fucked himself?


So only innocent people qualify for public defenders?

[canaguy27]

Rob would probably take his case pro bono.

:S5: I may need to stop by and see what meds you guys have on your shelves. Pro bono...

[MakeSense]

Has this particular incident been reported in the press anywhere yet?

Not so far.
We are trying to figure out what to do for him. Obviously the attorney
is handling the legal side. But the fact remains that this is going to be
an issue. Why should a legitimate business person be afraid to call the police?
They will collect taxes, and fees, but then arrest you if you need help?
This was in NoCo. Not going to give specifics for privacy
reasons right now.

[MakeSense]

I can't imagine thinking I got all my equipment back and then getting cuffed. :mad:

Oh they did'nt give it back.

[seyaat420]

Fuck that dude, can you say attorney!, I hope all gets fixed, and I send my good thoughts. :thumbsup: Chris :wtf3:

[cologrower420]

So only innocent people qualify for public defenders?

I'm sorry, where did I post that? I thought eligibility for public defenders was based on income, not presumption of guilt or innocence. Am I mistaken?

[copobo]

you want the community on your side. make as much noise as you can ASAP!

Call Jarred Polis's office!

[cologrower420]

Relevant:
Indefensible | The American Prospect (http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=indefensible10)

Indefensible

Five decades after a landmark Supreme Court case establishing the right to a public-defense lawyer, the poor still lack adequate legal representation.

[Zedleppelin]

I'm sorry, where did I post that? I thought eligibility for public defenders was based on income, not presumption of guilt or innocence. Am I mistaken?



I would question whether he was actually legal or not. If he was legal, then he might qualify for a public defender. However, it doesn't seem like he was 'legal'


3char

[cologrower420]

3char

You're smarter than this.

I can't really defend myself without someone complaining that I'm breaking a posting rule, and I don't feel like getting the banhammer today. My original point stands, and you have yet to show me where I said that 'So only innocent people qualify for public defenders?'

Feel free to explain instead of re-posting. That's lazy.

[Zedleppelin]

You're smarter than this.

I can't really defend myself without someone complaining that I'm breaking a posting rule, and I don't feel like getting the banhammer today. My original point stands, and you have yet to show me where I said that 'So only innocent people qualify for public defenders?'

Feel free to explain instead of re-posting. That's lazy.



I would question whether he was actually legal or not. If he was legal, then he might qualify for a public defender.


No explanation needed.....

[JeepGuyCO]

No explanation needed.....

Let's take the bait! It's assumption time!

I'm happy to explain my post but I doubt we'll get to see your explanation of why you choose specific posters to attempt to vilify. "whatever" i guess...

First, let's make a couple of assumptions. I know, ass out of you and me blah blah blah.

Let's assume two extreme scenarios if that's okay with you.

First: We have a completely legal caregiver who grows for a couple of cancer patients 'for the cause'. Let's assume for-profit caregiving went away with 1284/109. Feel free to disagree.

Second, we have an illegal drug dealer who is not legal, not compliant, and there is no paperwork referring to medical marijuana. Let's assume that this grow is 100% NOT COMPLIANT with state law.

Let's disregard the fact that none of this shit matters if you get busted. See: Bartkowitz.

Now, let's assume both of these people get 'busted' by the north metro drug task force.

Assuming both of these guys are sitting in jail, which one might benefit from a public defender? The one who followed state law or the one who didn't? Are you saying you're not smart enough to see what I was trying to say?

You are attempting to pigeon-hole me and make me look like an asshole, and that's fine.

Now that I have explained myself, are you really stupid enough to continue to question me? Do you honestly think I am saying that qualification for a public defender, which you've concentrated on, depends on guilt or innocence? Seriously? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? You act like someone who is smart, yet you seem unable to grasp that simple fact?

I don't expect a serious reply from you, but I would be delighted to continue this thread. It would be a delicate balance between posting replies and getting the ban hammer from your buddies.

Feel free to continue to bait me, this is a fun run around.

Shit, I think I missed a hyphen. You should probably check my grammar when you are being passive aggressive.

Good luck.

edit: I just realized I have different logins for different computers. I'm sure you're smart enough to come up with an insult for that fact.

[Zedleppelin]

Let's take the bait! It's assumption time!

I'm happy to explain my post but I doubt we'll get to see your explanation of why you choose specific posters to attempt to vilify. "whatever" i guess...

First, let's make a couple of assumptions. I know, ass out of you and me blah blah blah.

Let's assume two extreme scenarios if that's okay with you.

First: We have a completely legal caregiver who grows for a couple of cancer patients 'for the cause'. Let's assume for-profit caregiving went away with 1284/109. Feel free to disagree.

Second, we have an illegal drug dealer who is not legal, not compliant, and there is no paperwork referring to medical marijuana. Let's assume that this grow is 100% NOT COMPLIANT with state law.

Let's disregard the fact that none of this shit matters if you get busted. See: Bartkowitz.

Now, let's assume both of these people get 'busted' by the north metro drug task force.

Assuming both of these guys are sitting in jail, which one might benefit from a public defender? The one who followed state law or the one who didn't? Are you saying you're not smart enough to see what I was trying to say?

You are attempting to pigeon-hole me and make me look like an asshole, and that's fine.

Now that I have explained myself, are you really stupid enough to continue to question me? Do you honestly think I am saying that qualification for a public defender, which you've concentrated on, depends on guilt or innocence? Seriously? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? You act like someone who is smart, yet you seem unable to grasp that simple fact?

I don't expect a serious reply from you, but I would be delighted to continue this thread. It would be a delicate balance between posting replies and getting the ban hammer from your buddies.

Feel free to continue to bait me, this is a fun run around.

Shit, I think I missed a hyphen. You should probably check my grammar when you are being passive aggressive.

Good luck.

edit: I just realized I have different logins for different computers. I'm sure you're smart enough to come up with an insult for that fact.


Jeepguy, Cologrower420, how many more names you have on here?

Regardless, I'm not going to waste my time with this backpedaling, you said 'If he was legal, then he might qualify for a public defender' and I questioned your statement, then you said you didnt say it and I corrected you and you write a damn book. You are one funny guy.

[copobo]

Jeepguy, Cologrower420, how many more names you have on here?

seriously! seems psychotic sometimes. dude, (or dudes?) go burn one and relax. quit trying to win the forum debate game and just be a part of the community.

deep breaths

[Zedleppelin]

seriously! seems psychotic sometimes. dude, (or dudes?) go burn one and relax. quit trying to win the forum debate game and just be a part of the community.

deep breaths

This is classic, he's defending himself in other threads.....

http://boards.cannabis.com/colorado-co/189408-private-sales-still-legal-2.html#post2141960

[MakeSense]

Holy crap guys.
This is'nt just a hijacking.... it's frickin hostage taking.
This is a very serious situation and you have devolved this thread into...
hell I don't know.

[ThaiBuddhaMan]

When he called the cops, did he tell them what he was using the equipment for? Did he report his plants stolen too?
All my plants are assigned to patients but if I was robbed - I think I would still only report the stolen equipment and not the stolen plants. I've had rippers take my outdoor plants - I never called the cops on them, just handled the business myself.
Doesn't seem like the DA would have a very strong case, unless he self-incriminated by admitting to the mj plants.

[MakeSense]

When he called the cops, did he tell them what he was using the equipment for? Did he report his plants stolen too?
All my plants are assigned to patients but if I was robbed - I think I would still only report the stolen equipment and not the stolen plants. I've had rippers take my outdoor plants - I never called the cops on them, just handled the business myself.
Doesn't seem like the DA would have a very strong case, unless he self-incriminated by admitting to the mj plants.

Yes, he was honest. And yes they were assigned. You can only incriminate yourself if you have committed a crime. If you are operating under the law than you have every right to report a theft. There is crop insurance available, so growers are going to need proof of loss. So they will NEED to be able to report such losses without fear of reprisal.

"just handled the business myself."

Which was his first instinct. However not the correct one. This would have led to an actual crime, and an actual charge. Not to mention a black eye on the industry. The more people that act like this, the more scrutiny and scepticism will befall the industry.

[SoCoMMJ]

I doubt a DA would bother bringing charges unless there was sufficient evidence that someone was breaking the law.

I know for a fact that this is NOT the case.

[ThaiBuddhaMan]

Yes, he was honest. And yes they were assigned. You can only incriminate yourself if you have committed a crime. If you are operating under the law than you have every right to report a theft. There is crop insurance available, so growers are going to need proof of loss. So they will NEED to be able to report such losses without fear of reprisal.

Very true and good point. I thought I read that he wasn't legal but after rereading the thread, I am mistaken. That wasn't you who post it.



"just handled the business myself."

Which was his first instinct. However not the correct one. This would have led to an actual crime, and an actual charge. Not to mention a black eye on the industry. The more people that act like this, the more scrutiny and scepticism will befall the industry.

This wasn't here in CO and was before MMJ was approved anywhere. But you are right (again) ;) It's not the proper way to handle the situation. Oh to be young & dumb again...


I know for a fact that this is NOT the case.

Correct DA's will throw all kinds of charges out at first. As the whole bloated court legal system runs it's course, a lot get dropped or bargained away. Just more wasting of taxpayer's money... :mad:

[leadmagnet]

This was in NoCo. Not going to give specifics for privacy
reasons right now.

That being the case you can't not but expect the kind of silly responses you've received for the most part so far. Give us a litte more details and maybe we'll give you more legit reponses.

[MakeSense]

That being the case you can't not but expect the kind of silly responses you've received for the most part so far. Give us a litte more details and maybe we'll give you more legit reponses.
Oh I think most of the responses have been legit enough aside from the bickering. I am not going to reveal the town as it is only a couple clicks from that for someone to figure out excactly who my friend is. And I am not about to divulge that to the world at large.....
Nor would it change anything in the context of this conversation at this time.
If we choose to make it a rally or something maybe that will change.

[SoCoMMJ]

Correct DA's will throw all kinds of charges out at first. As the whole bloated court legal system runs it's course, a lot get dropped or bargained away.

True, but once you are even ARRESTED for a felony, that never goes away. Doesn't matter if you are convicted or not. And even to get things dropped or bargained away costs multiple thousands of dollars. They win without winning.

[Delta9Caregivrs]

edit: I just realized I have different logins for different computers. I'm sure you're smart enough to come up with an insult for that fact.

2 handles = BAN

thanks physco

[copobo]

2 handles = BAN

thanks physco

dude seems to have some problem.

I suppose multiple handles help him avoid the ban hammer.

[Psycho4Bud]

2 handles = BAN

thanks physco


dude seems to have some problem.

I suppose multiple handles help him avoid the ban hammer.

This is a medical marijuana forum for ADULTS! THIS type of crap will NOT be tolorated. IF the return of this party is suspected just report the post and it WILL be handled from there.

Have a good one!:thumbsup:

[ThaiBuddhaMan]

What's funny is that in one thread he speaks about the other log-in in third person (as if it was another person). It's all starting to make sense now...