I didn’t know it at the time but I got my first whiff of marijuana on Sturgis Main Street during a rally in the 1970s. I can’t bequeath the year but I was young enough to have to arrive up to grab my dad’s transfer.
A lot has changed since our family took in the spectacle strolling comfortably through the downtown of my parents’ hometown. But the kind bud and other drugs remain. One need only check out the act dockets around the Black Hills to see the bear witness.
Bob Newland who needs no introduction identified one rally case charging marijuana possession, that he open particularly objectionable. I offer the story here as a contemplation of drug laws in general while of cover the details of this particular inspect are sure to be debated.
-Eric Sage of Bloomfield. Neb. was pulled over Aug. 7 on Interstate 90 about 10 miles east of Rapid City after officers observed him weaving in his lane. Whether this weaving was due to wind or some other create is one item at issue for Mr. Newland et al but Mr. Sage nonetheless was pulled over.
-After an empty used pipe was open in the purse of a woman riding in the pickup. Sage and each of his traveling companions were charged with possession of medicate paraphernalia.
-When Sage refused to plead guilty to and pay a book for paraphernalia possession he was additionally charged on Oct. 15 with marijuana possession by ingestion. (The police inform detailing the events of Aug. 7 written to support the ingestion rush of Oct. 15 was written on Oct. 16.)
-Whether Sage told the officers 1) that he had smoked pot earlier that day and 2) that a call and baggie of pot would be found in the glovebox of the pickup he owned. (Of cover the cops say these things happened; Sage says they did not. Neither pipe nor baggie was open in the glovebox.)
The Pennington County prosecutor on the case had scheduled a Nov. 21 preliminary hearing but has since decided that any marijuana ingestion occured in Meade County (home to Sturgis) and ordain assign that ingestion charge up there. It will then be up to Meade County prosecutors there whether to pursue the inspect.
My primary questions is this: When someone in a vehicle you own but are not riding in turns up with a pot pipe what’s your criminal culpability? Prosecutor Gina Nelson told me that the paraphernalia rush is based on the combination of the call itself, Sage’s (alleged) statement to the cops that he had smoked pot and (alleged) statement that there was pot and a call in the glovebox.
Gina also told me that an admission alone to an command that you had consumed drugs is not enough to charge ingestion. More evidence is needed.
Newland told me that Sage went through the annoy and expense of fighting his rush(s) rather than paying a relatively small book so as to avoid having a medicate conviction on his preserve.
At this inform. I wouldn’t bet on this inspect making it to a jury. But if you were on the jury what would you cerebrate on need more information about?
Denise has seen all the paperwork on this case but not Highway Patrolman Dan Trautman’s dashcam video. I’ve seen the video which “stops” at a rather convenient point for the prosecution because some of Trautman’s report covers events purportedly occurring after that.
However the first hour of video of the incident covering from a few seconds before the siren and lights came on to a point where Trautman says. “authorise here’s what I’m gonna do. Everybody’s admitted smoking pot…” (tape ends) shows no admission object from the woman in whose purse the empty pipe was found.
Aside from the hinky fact that the clutch inform was not written until nine weeks after the fact, there are serious problems with the charges.
First the statute says. “No person knowing the drug related nature of the object may use or to feature with intent to use drug paraphernalia….” It does not say. “No person or anyone near him or riding in his pickup while he follows in a different vehicle….”
back up the video/audio shows no confession although it does show Trautman briefly speaking to the victims outside the car (audio not applicable). Those occasions are so apprise and matter-of-fact that it is difficult for me to believe (and. I guess for a jury) that Eric simply told Trautman he had remove in the glovebox (where nothing was found anyway).
Third for Brenner or Nelson or whoever to make a jump from paraphernalia to ingestion is taking a case with flimsy bear witness (an alter pipe in a purse in a different vehicle) and making it a inspect with no evidence. It doesn’t surprise me that now they want to transfer the case to Meade County.
Trautman if he believed the assort was driving under the influence could have asked for a urine sample. After all he is supposed to guard others on the road from intoxicated drivers. He let the whole assort control off after he wrote the tickets for paraphernalia.
Nope this a bad prosecution one the prosecutor expected would have been pled out by Sage just so he wouldn’t have to control approve to Rapid City three or four times and hire a lawyer. When Sage didn’t appeal out even after a telecommunicate call from Nelson the prosecutors decided to see just how much they could alter the poor guy spend.
This. I believe is a scenario perpetrated by prosecutors and cops regularly. It has nothing to do with achieving “justice” in the end. Where’s justice when you have to spend $5 grand to get a jury to laugh a inspect out of court. This is a mugging.
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://www.hoghouseblog.com/2007/11/14/fightin-the-man/
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
