http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...69&ft=1&f=1003

I don't know if this got posted yet either

[Nepeta]

Originally Posted by Herbalicious

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...69&ft=1&f=1003

I don't know if this got posted yet either

Really great article Herbalicious. I was glued to my screen. Thank you.

[666]

You will all probably flame me when I say this, but I just have healed my self back for too long. There is an elephant in the room. The reason Lynch and the Feds got together in the frist places was because of a 'sale' that one of his employees did which sparked the bust.

I agree its not fair and that MMJ is being treated like liquor more then it is a medical item, what I’m saying is this:

A bar owner gets penalized when one of his bar tenders brakes the rules, sells to someone under age or to someone who is drunk and several other rules. The bar gets shut down or closed for a month or perennially.

A pharmacy owner is not penalized if one of his employees brakes the law.

I agree its not right, but its how it is.

Our dispensary owners know this; we’ve all heard again and again where a dispensary is closed because of some employee sells to someone that hadn’t been able to buy because they didn’t have a Recommendation that was verifiable.

I’ve been thinking that to protect themselves the owners might want to look at some sort of better screening methods; a background check and drug testing for their employees, that sort of thing, just a thought.

I mean there was even a thread on WT for a while (its removed now) where some one was asking if it was okay to buy for non-legal people.

WE NEED TO WATCH OUT FOR OUR FREEDOMS. WE ALL KNOW THAT THE LEOs FED AND LOCAL SEND PEOPLE IN. ANY OTHER IDEAS ON HOW TO PLUG THESE 'HOLES' WHO ARE THREATS TO THE WHOLE COMUNITY?

If Lynch's door gaurd didn't sell out side the law, Charles wouldn't be facing these problems today!!!

Thank about it!

Originally Posted by 666

You will all probably flame me when I say this, but I just have healed my self back for too long. There is an elephant in the room. The reason Lynch and the Feds got together in the frist places was because of a 'sale' that one of his employees did which sparked the bust.

I agree its not fair and that MMJ is being treated like liquor more then it is a medical item, what I’m saying is this:

A bar owner gets penalized when one of his bar tenders brakes the rules, sells to someone under age or to someone who is drunk and several other rules. The bar gets shut down or closed for a month or perennially.

A pharmacy owner is not penalized if one of his employees brakes the law.

I agree its not right, but its how it is.

Our dispensary owners know this; we’ve all heard again and again where a dispensary is closed because of some employee sells to someone that hadn’t been able to buy because they didn’t have a Recommendation that was verifiable.

I’ve been thinking that to protect themselves the owners might want to look at some sort of better screening methods; a background check and drug testing for their employees, that sort of thing, just a thought.

I mean there was even a thread on WT for a while (its removed now) where some one was asking if it was okay to buy for non-legal people.

WE NEED TO WATCH OUT FOR OUR FREEDOMS. WE ALL KNOW THAT THE LEOs FED AND LOCAL SEND PEOPLE IN. ANY OTHER IDEAS ON HOW TO PLUG THESE 'HOLES' WHO ARE THREATS TO THE WHOLE COMUNITY?

If Lynch's door gaurd didn't sell out side the law, Charles wouldn't be facing these problems today!!!

Thank about it!

Why should Charles Lynch spend 100 years in Federal prison because his security guard sold less than a pound of non-lethal herb to an undercover cop in a big 5 parking lot in a different city than the dispensary? Send that security guard to jails but leave the poor man alone.

As part of Charles Lynch's business license requirements, he had to do background checks on all employees and could NOT let any felons work there. He literally met all his business license requirements, city regulations, county rules, and state law. What more can you ask of the guy?

Check out this NPR blog and leave comments.

[666]

Originally Posted by Herbalicious

Why should Charles Lynch spend 100 years in Federal prison because his security guard sold less than a pound of non-lethal herb to an undercover cop in a big 5 parking lot in a different city than the dispensary? Send that security guard to jails but leave the poor man alone.

As part of Charles Lynch's business license requirements, he had to do background checks on all employees and could NOT let any felons work there. He literally met all his business license requirements, city regulations, county rules, and state law. What more can you ask of the guy?

Never said it was 'right' just said we all need to be aware of it. Like I say on other treads (that were removed) we got patinets asking about buying 'nugs' for their freinds with out rec_s. We need to be TOTALLY DOWN on this danger to the movement!

I wonder if anyone ELSE at the dispencry knew the "security guard" was dealing out side the shop? if they did did they report this? Or did they turn the other way?

I have NO IDEA - I'm just saying that we all need to be aware of this.

Like I say - should a bar owner have his bar closed down (happens all the time) because someone didn't check ID's? Or served someone that looked drunk to the person who checks on that stuff?

I agree with you Herbalicious, it should NOT be that way - but being a realiest - I have to realize that things ARE like that - and i'd sure as heck not like to see anyone else going threw the hell that Lynch is going threw if we can just all keep an eye out, and maybe brake the 'code of slience' about this sort of thing. I can't help but think someone knew what the "securty gaurd" was doing. If someone told Lynch he could have fired the dude - and got around all these problems.

Also Herbalicious Lynch isn't facing 100 years, its 5 FYI, and is appealing it. I'm pertty sure that what ever the securty garud did - was so "thin' that is why it wasn't brought up in Lynch's trial. Still its what brought Lynch on the Radar ... and we all need to remember that.

Just came up for me when is saw that post about that kid asking if it was okay to buy 'nugs' and resell them (Didn't have a clue of what he was saying and ARUGED about his right, when everyone here climbed on him about it!)

It did bring this issue about Lynch and the A__H____ gaurd that put him in harms way!

Just a thought NOT aggreeing with it ... and just like a bar owner - he took the heat for some other idiot!


666

Originally Posted by 666

Also Herbalicious Lynch isn't facing 100 years, its 5 FYI, and is appealing it. I'm pertty sure that what ever the securty garud did - was so "thin' that is why it wasn't brought up in Lynch's trial. Still its what brought Lynch on the Radar ... and we all need to remember that.

Are you 100% sure Charles Lynch is only up for 5 year sentence? I can't get the honest answer. I asked Charlie, he said his lawyers would discuss it with him, they don't want him to worry. Some estimates say 5 years, however I believe that there is a 5 year MINIMUM on all 5 charges. That would be 25 years minimum if Judge Wu gives it to him consecutively and each charge (as far as I know) has a maximum of 25 years each which equals 100 years. I pray to god Charlie can remain free.

What the Head of security did (I'm NOT naming his name...his name is EVERYWHERE but identifying him is not my concern; Charlie is) anyways, what the security guard did was a big part of the evidence presented in court and was the reason why the sheriff turned this case over to the DEA but why should that effect Charlie? It occurred MILES away from the dispensary in A DIFFERENT CITY in a big 5 parking lot. There was more cannabis in that deal than the dispensary ever sold to one individual. They are two different things and the FEDS are trying to tarnish Charlie's good name by associating him with this security guard and some quack doctor because they have NOTHING "dirty" on Charles.

As far as the other thread and what not, I didn't read it and I am not interested in discussing it. I'm in too much pain to care about some idiot. I truly believe cannabis should be legal for all adults even though I am a legitimate patient but that discussion will have to wait until I'm not in so much pain from writing a bunch of stuff to try and save Charlie Lynch's life.

And your bar tender/bar owner analogy does NOT apply here.

The security guard at Charles Lynch's dispensary can NOT be consider a "bar tender" in your analogy. He didn't dispense the product, head up the security. So the analogy would be the Head Bouncer at a bar ON HIS DAY off sold moonshine to an undercover cop NOT in the bar, not in the bar's parking lot, not down the street from the bar BUT miles away in a different city. A bar would NEVER be SHUTDOWN in that instance and the bouncer would be held responsible not the bar owner.

Yeah, we have to self-regulate as much as we can but we also have to expect our government NOT to hold an innocent man responsible for another man's actions.

[happyjack]

I too don't agree with the bartender analogy... I'd much prefer to compare my medicine to other medicines, not inebriants, tyvm

The security guard was NOT accused of illegally dispensing medicine while he was working. Herbalicious is correct - he was not a representative of Charles at the time his alleged crimes were committed. Lots of people (criminals too) have actual paying jobs... employers are NOT responsible for crimes committed by employees while not "on the clock" or at the workplace. Otherwise, my boss owes me some $$$ for that speeding ticket I had to pay last month, and for probably 5 parking tickets since 2000.

There are security guards patroling at the Rite-Aid by my house. If a security guard was legally filling his own Vicodin prescriptions to sell to addicts in some parking lot somewhere on his off hours and he was caught, would Rite-Aid fire the owner or the manager or even the security guard? Would Rite-Aid be shut down or fined? Would they arrest and indict the manager for different crimes entirely then the guard's original Rx offense?

or, if you prefer, a completely left-field analogy:
If someone buys a can of gas, pours it on somebody else and burns them alive, do police arrest the guy with the can or the guy who owns the pump?

Charles followed state and county laws and was shut down as a result of crimes he didn't commit.
Bad guards who make off-site and off-the-clock illegal deals are beside the point.

Charles Lynch would not be under trial if cannabis was not a Schedule I drug.

Listing cannabis as a Schedule I drug is WRONG.
Unjust cannabis laws are the real CRIME!
WE MUST remove cannabis from the list of Schedule I controlled substances.

Please help protect your medicine and play a part in changing the federal law before another innocent person is punished unfairly because of it - next time it could be you or me.

Originally Posted by happyjack

I too don't agree with the bartender analogy... I'd much prefer to compare my medicine to other medicines, not inebriants, tyvm

The security guard was NOT accused of illegally dispensing medicine while he was working. Herbalicious is correct - he was not a representative of Charles at the time his alleged crimes were committed. Lots of people (criminals too) have actual paying jobs... employers are NOT responsible for crimes committed by employees while not "on the clock" or at the workplace. Otherwise, my boss owes me some $$$ for that speeding ticket I had to pay last month, and for probably 5 parking tickets since 2000.

There are security guards patroling at the Rite-Aid by my house. If a security guard was legally filling his own Vicodin prescriptions to sell to addicts in some parking lot somewhere on his off hours and he was caught, would Rite-Aid fire the owner or the manager or even the security guard? Would Rite-Aid be shut down or fined? Would they arrest and indict the manager for different crimes entirely then the guard's original Rx offense?

or, if you prefer, a completely left-field analogy:
If someone buys a can of gas, pours it on somebody else and burns them alive, do police arrest the guy with the can or the guy who owns the pump?

Charles followed state and county laws and was shut down as a result of crimes he didn't commit.
Bad guards who make off-site and off-the-clock illegal deals are beside the point.

Charles Lynch would not be under trial if cannabis was not a Schedule I drug.

Listing cannabis as a Schedule I drug is WRONG.
Unjust cannabis laws are the real CRIME!
WE MUST remove cannabis from the list of Schedule I controlled substances.

Please help protect your medicine and play a part in changing the federal law before another innocent person is punished unfairly because of it - next time it could be you or me.

I love you, man. You're the coolest pumpkin I ever had the opportunity to get to know. Thank you for your support and informative words.

Here's the NPR blog I was talking about and here's my blog comment:

I've lived in California for the last 20 years. 1996 was the first year I was able to vote and I voted for medical marijuana even though I had no need for it or knew anyone who had the need for it. I'm glad I did.

Three years ago I had to go out of work on disability due to chronic pain. The doctors I dealt with misdiagnosed me and prescribed me countless pills. Nothing they did help and actually caused more issues. I turned my limited recreational and social marijuana use into a daily use to help ease my constant pain.

My pain is so bad; my disability is considered permanent and stationary. My workman's comp insurance company refused to pay for any further medical treatment even though I have a new diagnosis from a leading doctor. They don't want to pay for anything more.

I got my doctor's recommendation for medical cannabis less than 2 years ago, after moving to LA to finish my B.A. I had been worried I would be put on some list or my insurance would be affected but I met with a doctor without involving my insurance.
I've done some activism in the medical marijuana community because I want to help where and how I can. I decided to show my support at the Charles Lynch trial after seeing Drew Carey's ReasonTV piece about the situation. I never met Charles until the first day of jury selection.

Upon meeting this mild-mannered, soft-spoke, gracious and compassionate man, I knew I had to do everything I could to help. No one deserves to go to jail for 5-100 years for cannabis-only charges, especially Charles Lynch. He followed all the requirements on his business license; he met all city regulations; and was legal under CA law. There was one employee who did an illegal deal in a big 5 parking lot in a different city than the dispensary but should Charlie go to jail because of that.

During the trial he demonstrated his law-abiding nature in a couple of ways. At one point, while Charlie gave his direct examination testimony, Federal prosecutor, David Kowal objected to the fact that Charles was reading from the phone bill that showed he had called 4 DEA phone #s before opening his medical marijuana dispensary. The defense removed the phone bill from a projection screen which projected the image around the courtroom and Charlie's lawyer began asking him more questions about his conversations with the DEA. Charles stopped the proceedings by announcing he still had the phone bill in front of him in an evidence book. His lawyer told him to close the book. If Charlie was a dishonest man he could have just snuck a look at the phone bill and gotten away with it but he's an honest man and wanted to do the right thing.

In another instance Judge Wu was advising him about his attorney-client privileges, telling Charlie if he answers the prosecutions questions he forfeits his rights. Charlie looked at the judge and asked "How am I supposed to answer then?" He looked to the authority in the matter for guidance. He has a good-natured, law-abiding personality. If he didn't it would have be apparent at some point during the trial. Ask Charlie if having a physician's note to use cannabis in California is a get out of Federal jail card. He himself was a patient before he was busted. Now that he's subjected to random drug test by the federal government he is no longer allowed to use cannabis to relieve his debilitating migraines.

I'm not a terminally ill patient but I have a chronic condition. To just look at me, I look like a healthy, able-bodied person but those who know me know I struggle through life with mild to severe pain on a daily basis. People who suffer chronic pain have their body chemistry change due to the pain and suffer from depression easily. Many of these people end up taking their own lives because of the difficulties associated with being in constant pain.

Cannabis helps me maintain a positive attitude about my life while easing my pain. It's not a cure-all but it's been better than the numerous prescription drugs I've been on which usually hurt my stomach, interfered with my cognitions to the point of not allowing me to study at the prominent university I transferred to.

Pop-culture language and stereotypes do nothing for my current status as a cannabis patient. I don't take "tokes"; I medicate. I am not a stoner; I am a senior at a ivy league school; I attend church a couple of times a week; I am a community volunteer; I pay taxes; and vote.

Before moving to Los Angeles, I lived near Berkeley and purchased my medical cannabis on the black market out of shared-college living space out of a dirty, dingy room. I never really knew what I was getting and had no idea the difference between the strains. It was always a hassle. I always had to buy on the schedule of the dealer and deal with an unsafe, crowded purchase place.

Since getting my physician's note, I've been able to find safe and affordable access to medical cannabis from clean, well organized locations with educated members to help me make the best purchase for my own needs. The insurance companies never have to know one thing about this private medical situation of mine. It's none of their business, especially since their business does not seem to accommodate my own best interest.

California Senate plans to vote for a resolution that would protect California employees from being discriminated against for using medical cannabis on their own time. This new law would override the Ross decision.

I have no paranoia issues, I think that's another stereotype that hurt patients like me more than anything.

Because of my pain, I'm unable to grow for myself. I rely on people like Charles Lynch who run cooperatives and collectives to procure my pain-management medicine.
As far as healthy people with "bogus" recommendations (doctors do NOT prescribe cannabis they recommend it), they do NOT concern me in the least. Cannabis is a non-lethal herb. There is NO amount of marijuana that anyone can consume that would kill them from overdose. That can't even be said of water, not to mention all the deaths from prescription drugs and alcohol. The scientific research is powerful and should be the basis for regulations and restrictions not the government's misinformation.

The "rabbit-hole"-fluff piece, "California Dreaming" article interviews someone from the Office for National Drug Control Policy. That office is required to OPPOSE any legalization efforts of schedule 1 drugs (cannabis, heroin, ecstasy, PCP, meth) for ANY reason, including medical. Don't believe me? Google: Title VII Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998: H11225: Responsibilities. (12). The information that office supplies is inaccurate and the statistics are slanted. They are NOT required to tell the truth.

The bad law is the law that persecutes people like Charles Lynch for helping patients. His dispensary was the only one in his entire county. Now patients have to drive 100 miles away to legally, under California law, buy cannabis.

I've met with the offices of my Senators and I have an appointment with my House of Representative's office tomorrow. Things have to change. The jails are overcrowded with cannabis-only prisoners; we spend billions on cannabis prohibition when cannabis could generate billions more in taxes; federal laws are the most dangerous aspect of cannabis, don't believe me? Ask Charles Lynch, he will tell you the truth.

[Weed Hopper]

If the weed did not come from Charley's club, what is happening to Charley is a travesty of justice.

Where did the weed come from?

If it can be established that the weed came from Charles Lynch's hands, this means Charles Lynch either provided the weed knowingly or he has no control over his inventory of weed and he provided the weed unwittingly. Since he is the primary caregiver and he has a huge legal responsibility, he needs to know where every grain of his weed is at all times and he needs to know exactly who is getting what, when, and where. An "I didn't know..." excuse does not fly in this arena.

Giving Charles the benefit of the doubt, I hope he had no control over his inventory and his employee screwed him and us. I do hope Charles did not knowingly sell marijuana illegally. But, where there's smoke, there is fire. This was probably not the first time the employee did this. Here again, clearly indicating Charley did not have a grip on his inventory.

Either way, this is a dangerous situation. Illegal drug deals bring guns, dirty money, and much misery and suffering.

I agree Charles should not be held accountable for his employee's actions. But I also think that if Charles supplied the weed, he is obviously not in control of his weed and he shouldn't be a caregiver.

Of course, nobody should be in jail for lawful distribution and consumption of medical marijuana. Everybody should have the right to consume marijuana under the care of a doctor, it's a medicine known to successfully treat many ailments. But, there is an old saying; "Only fools rush in where angels fear to tread." I would have never hired any person unless I knew 100% they would not break any laws while employed by me. Hiring that guy was foolish. Charles obviously rushed into hiring that guy, and if he supplied the weed, he obviously rushed into those transactions. Foolish decisions.

On a personal note, "birds of a feather flock together". I'd like to know all the facts. Does Charles routinely associate with people of questionable character? What did Charles do before medical marijuana?

Tough stuff.

[ASA Field]

Originally Posted by Weed Hopper

On a personal note, "birds of a feather flock together". I'd like to know all the facts. Does Charles routinely associate with people of questionable character? What did Charles do before medical marijuana?

Charles Lynch was a successful software developer with no criminal record. When he opened his dispensary in Morro Bay, he was welcomed at a ribbon cutting ceremony with the Chamber of Commerce and Mayor. Need I say mroe?

[Weed Hopper]

Originally Posted by ASA Field

Charles Lynch was a successful software developer with no criminal record. When he opened his dispensary in Morro Bay, he was welcomed at a ribbon cutting ceremony with the Chamber of Commerce and Mayor. Need I say mroe?

Yes. Where did the weed in question come from that the guy sold? Did it come from Charles or somebody else?

Thank you.

Wow, that's a mouth full for your first post. It was never established where the cannabis came from that the Security Guard sold to the undercover. It could have come from any # of places or vendors. There was NEVER any solid proof it came from Charles or Central Coast Caregiver Collective. I'm NOT sure how it can be established WHERE it came from. Charles testified he did NOT supply the cannabis and knew nothing of the transaction and there was no record presented that showed that much cannabis was missing or rung out.

Originally Posted by Weed Hopper

If the weed did not come from Charley's club, what is happening to Charley is a travesty of justice.

Where did the weed come from?

If it can be established that the weed came from Charles Lynch's hands, this means Charles Lynch either provided the weed knowingly or he has no control over his inventory of weed and he provided the weed unwittingly. Since he is the primary caregiver and he has a huge legal responsibility, he needs to know where every grain of his weed is at all times and he needs to know exactly who is getting what, when, and where. An "I didn't know..." excuse does not fly in this arena.

Giving Charles the benefit of the doubt, I hope he had no control over his inventory and his employee screwed him and us. I do hope Charles did not knowingly sell marijuana illegally. But, where there's smoke, there is fire. This was probably not the first time the employee did this. Here again, clearly indicating Charley did not have a grip on his inventory.

Either way, this is a dangerous situation. Illegal drug deals bring guns, dirty money, and much misery and suffering.

I agree Charles should not be held accountable for his employee's actions. But I also think that if Charles supplied the weed, he is obviously not in control of his weed and he shouldn't be a caregiver.

Of course, nobody should be in jail for lawful distribution and consumption of medical marijuana. Everybody should have the right to consume marijuana under the care of a doctor, it's a medicine known to successfully treat many ailments. But, there is an old saying; "Only fools rush in where angels fear to tread." I would have never hired any person unless I knew 100% they would not break any laws while employed by me. Hiring that guy was foolish. Charles obviously rushed into hiring that guy, and if he supplied the weed, he obviously rushed into those transactions. Foolish decisions.

On a personal note, "birds of a feather flock together". I'd like to know all the facts. Does Charles routinely associate with people of questionable character? What did Charles do before medical marijuana?

Tough stuff.

How can anyone be 100% sure someone else will NOT do something? You would never hire any one EVER. Please show some respect and refrain from calling Charles Lynch foolish without proof or facts he was indeed foolish. How is it obvious Charlie "rushed into hiring that guy", what proof do you have?

If you are so interested in the fact, you may have wanted to attend the trial so you can see all the facts.

I do not know if Charles "routinely associates with questionable characters" or not. I am not sure how that could be proved.

I know about Charlie's back ground but I am not sure I want to share it in a public forum without asking him first. It's part of public record as part of the trial transcript.

Originally Posted by Weed Hopper

Yes. Where did the weed in question come from that the guy sold? Did it come from Charles or somebody else?

Thank you.

No one knows and I don't know it can be proved.

[happyjack]

I fail to see any relevence in how the medicine was acquired by the loser who resold it, UNLESS the provider knew it was going to be resold. There is no way for anyone to control anything after it leaves their hands, except by agreement.

We all sign paperwork as patients promising we won't resell our medicine. I'm not supposed to resell my vicodins either.
But nothing really stops me except my own character and conscience. And maybe fear of consequences.

But you can't always look at someone and predict who is "really sick" or who is honest or who will break the rules. And as long as the signatures are in order and the patient has a vaild ID and verifiable recommendation, providers should provide.
BTW the DEA knows this and makes use of it - that's why they are able to falsify an informant's way into a dispensary to buy meds to entrap people with.

IF i break the law THEN i am punished.

IF i resell my medicine, THEN i lose my access to my medicine.

But why would you deny my access to my medicine for something I haven't done yet?

Why would Charles Lynch deny medicine to somebody if he didn't know it would be resold? Why should he be punished... for not knowing the future?

AND, oh yeah, IT WAS NEVER PROVED THAT THE RESOLD MEDICINE CAME FROM CHARLES LYNCH!

If Mr. Lynch (or Rite-Aid) did in fact knowingly provide medicine for resale, or continued to provide medicine to patients who have been caught reselling medicine, then he should share responsibility.

Otherwise, I don't see it.

[Justonevoice]

Originally Posted by Weed Hopper

Yes. Where did the weed in question come from that the guy sold? Did it come from Charles or somebody else?

Thank you.

Well we most likely will never know that answer,but to assume that he must of got it is ignorant and obscene. The DEA will plant seeds of propoganda like this and are you falling for it hook line and sinker?

Birds of a feather flock together? Did it anywhere in the case or does anyone know of Charles hanging out with his "Security Guard" or was he just an employee. I believe that the guard was doing what others have done and it is wrong. Wrong ethically to the MMJ Community and of course to Charlie.

Think about what you are propagating.

[OakSmokeMJA]

its interesting the last paragraph in the story,

Ironically, most growers don't want to see marijuana rescheduled, Peron confesses after class. Prices would plummet, meaning that as the dream of truly legal weed would become reality, the promise of marijuana riches would go up in smoke.

unfortunately, Peron is right. However, I personally don't give a shit about people getting rich ripping me off for my medicine. that is the inconsistency with this movement. The sooner it is rescheduled the faster the people without growing resources will be able to keep thier money.
It seems you can only get "rich" by exploiting someone else, shame on you greedy growers who don't really give a hell about the medicinal aspects of MJ only the profitability.

[Weed Hopper]

Originally Posted by Herbalicious

Wow, that's a mouth full for your first post. It was never established where the cannabis came from that the Security Guard sold to the undercover. It could have come from any # of places or vendors. There was NEVER any solid proof it came from Charles or Central Coast Caregiver Collective. I'm NOT sure how it can be established WHERE it came from. Charles testified he did NOT supply the cannabis and knew nothing of the transaction and there was no record presented that showed that much cannabis was missing or rung out.



How can anyone be 100% sure someone else will NOT do something? You would never hire any one EVER. Please show some respect and refrain from calling Charles Lynch foolish without proof or facts he was indeed foolish. How is it obvious Charlie "rushed into hiring that guy", what proof do you have?

If you are so interested in the fact, you may have wanted to attend the trial so you can see all the facts.

I do not know if Charles "routinely associates with questionable characters" or not. I am not sure how that could be proved.

I know about Charlie's back ground but I am not sure I want to share it in a public forum without asking him first. It's part of public record as part of the trial transcript.

Hi!

I had a brain before WeedTracker. What does a first time post have to do with anything? nada.

Just asking valid questions. Trying to figure this mess out so that I can formulate my own opinion and act accordingly.

100%? Doable. Charley should have hired a human resource expert to weed out the undesirables. If done correctly, you can be 100% sure you won't hire somebody who is gonna intentionally break the law. Again, only fools rush in where angels fear to tread. I would NEVER, EVER hire somebody unless I was 100% sure of them. And, I do trust my instincts, 100%. I'm a real good judge of character. If I had any doubt whatsoever about a person, they would not get hired. Needless to say, I'd be spending a lot of time trying to find honest persons to do the job. It is a mission critical issue and there's no room for error -- can't afford to make that kind of mistake in this political climate. I would do the job alone and on a limited basis if I had to. I would not risk my freedom hoping somebody else is not gonna break the law.

Thanks for your reply!

[Weed Hopper]

Originally Posted by Justonevoice

Well we most likely will never know that answer,but to assume that he must of got it is ignorant and obscene. The DEA will plant seeds of propoganda like this and are you falling for it hook line and sinker?

Birds of a feather flock together? Did it anywhere in the case or does anyone know of Charles hanging out with his "Security Guard" or was he just an employee. I believe that the guard was doing what others have done and it is wrong. Wrong ethically to the MMJ Community and of course to Charlie.

Think about what you are propagating.

Hi!

No. I am not falling for it. That's why I am asking the tough questions so I can figure out what's going on.

Yup. Birds of a feather do flock together. In other words, people who have problems usually gravitate towards each other either in a conscious or subconscious way. I've seen it happen over, and over, and over. Greedy people will present themselves as angles from heaven to their customers, but behind closed doors, they are completely different people. and vicious animals. They hire people who they knew would break the law and then when they do, they lament "why me?"

Like I said, I have no idea what happened, and that's why I am asking questions and putting up ideas.

Honestly? Too many coincidences here. My gut level instinct on this one is not good. Either this was a stone cold setup (from the sheriff to the guard to the sale to taint the movement) or Charley did not do well hiring this employee. Either way, it stinks on both ends to me. Charley hired the guy. I guess what happens at the security guard's hearing will be revealing and will put this discussion to rest.

Thanks for your reply!

[happyjack]

Originally Posted by Weed Hopper

If done correctly, you can be 100% sure you won't hire somebody who is gonna intentionally break the law. ...

No, you can't.

I worked 16 years for an aerospace corporation. They pretty much wrote the book when it came to "trying to find honest persons to do the job".

When I was hired and employed in the beautiful El Segundo corridor...
I passed drug tests.
I passed polygraph tests.
I received clearances: confidential, secret, top secret, and the kind where they are allowed to kill me if I tell you about them, including extensive background checks
I worked designing and building multi-billion dollar "defense" hardware (very well I might add)

And I was by necessity medicating the whole time, thereby intentionally breaking federal law most every day.

And nobody at my job ever knew.

Originally Posted by Weed Hopper

Hi!

I had a brain before WeedTracker. What does a first time post have to do with anything? nada.

Just asking valid questions. Trying to figure this mess out so that I can formulate my own opinion and act accordingly.

100%? Doable. Charley should have hired a human resource expert to weed out the undesirables. If done correctly, you can be 100% sure you won't hire somebody who is gonna intentionally break the law. Again, only fools rush in where angels fear to tread. I would NEVER, EVER hire somebody unless I was 100% sure of them. And, I do trust my instincts, 100%. I'm a real good judge of character. If I had any doubt whatsoever about a person, they would not get hired. Needless to say, I'd be spending a lot of time trying to find honest persons to do the job. It is a mission critical issue and there's no room for error -- can't afford to make that kind of mistake in this political climate. I would do the job alone and on a limited basis if I had to. I would not risk my freedom hoping somebody else is not gonna break the law.

Thanks for your reply!

If you are a good judge of character you should meet charles lynch and make your own judgments of him.

He took every precaution in opening his dispensary and followed all the requirements on his business license NO CONVICTED FELONS ALLOWED to work there (among other requirements), He met all the city restriction, and was legal under California law. His security guard committed a crime NOT CHARLIE not at his dispensary. Again, I'll ask you NOT to call him foolish without proof. You're making judgments with out knowing any of the facts in the situation.

Originally Posted by Weed Hopper

Hi!

No. I am not falling for it. That's why I am asking the tough questions so I can figure out what's going on.

Yup. Birds of a feather do flock together. In other words, people who have problems usually gravitate towards each other either in a conscious or subconscious way. I've seen it happen over, and over, and over. Greedy people will present themselves as angles from heaven to their customers, but behind closed doors, they are completely different people. and vicious animals. They hire people who they knew would break the law and then when they do, they lament "why me?"

Like I said, I have no idea what happened, and that's why I am asking questions and putting up ideas.

Honestly? Too many coincidences here. My gut level instinct on this one is not good. Either this was a stone cold setup (from the sheriff to the guard to the sale to taint the movement) or Charley did not do well hiring this employee. Either way, it stinks on both ends to me. Charley hired the guy. I guess what happens at the security guard's hearing will be revealing and will put this discussion to rest.

Thanks for your reply!

I sat through the 2 week trial and heard the evidence.

Originally Posted by Weed Hopper

Greedy people will present themselves as angles from heaven to their customers, but behind closed doors, they are completely different people. and vicious animals. They hire people who they knew would break the law and then when they do, they lament "why me?"

I hope you're not implying Charlie is greedy, he made little to no profit off of that dispensary. It was the ONLY one in the county.

You're jumping to conclusions and saying there's coincidences but have none of the facts. You say your "gut level instinct" has some bearing on facts.

The undercover sheriff narcotic deputy had a "PAID" employee call the security guard to set up the sale. I'd say that's a set up.

The security guard probably will not have a hearing because he will probably plead out, so no one will ever know.

[Weed Hopper]

Originally Posted by Herbalicious

I sat through the 2 week trial and heard the evidence.



I hope you're not implying Charlie is greedy, he made little to no profit off of that dispensary. It was the ONLY one in the county.

You're jumping to conclusions and saying there's coincidences but have none of the facts. You say your "gut level instinct" has some bearing on facts.

The undercover sheriff narcotic deputy had a "PAID" employee call the security guard to set up the sale. I'd say that's a set up.

The security guard probably will not have a hearing because he will probably plead out, so no one will ever know.

Hi!

I am not implying, just inquiring with zeal and passion, not pulling any punches.

Coincidences are coincidences. When enough of them are present, you gotta start looking for a reason. If it walks like a duck...quacks like a duck.

Bottom line, Charley hired the guy. I know I wouldn't have hired the guy. It is his fault. And yes, I can say that in all confidence.

It all depends upon the terms of the plea as to whether or not we'll ever know.

Thanks for your reply!