[zbestwun2001]

It's about making money, say prosecutors

JOHN HOEFFEL

October 11, 2009
Dispensations ... a man holds a placard at a clinic at Venice Beach, Los Angeles. Critics say some doctors will prescribe marijuana for people who are not ill. Photo: AFP/Mark Ralston


LOS ANGELES: Californian laws legalising medical marijuana and permitting collectives to cultivate the plant have had some unexpected consequences: one is the challenge local growers are posing to the profits of Mexican drug barons; another is an explosion in the number of marijuana stores, or dispensaries, in Southern California.
Law enforcement is arguing that most are for-profit enterprises that violate the 1996 Compassionate Use Act and the 2003 collective cultivation law.


The Los Angeles County District Attorney, Steve Cooley, has announced he will prosecute medical marijuana dispensaries for over-the-counter sales.


''The vast, vast, vast majority - about 100 per cent - of dispensaries in Los Angeles County and the city are operating illegally; they are dealing marijuana illegally,'' he said. ''The time is right to deal with this problem.''


Mr Cooley recently concluded that state law bars sales of medical marijuana, an opinion that could spark a renewed effort by law enforcement across the state to rein in its use.
This comes as polls show a majority of state voters back legalisation of marijuana, and supporters are working to put the issue on the ballot next year.


The district attorney's office is investigating a dozen dispensaries, following police raids.


''We have our strategy and we think we are on good legal ground,'' Mr Cooley said.


Medical marijuana advocates say the prosecutors are misinterpreting the law.
''I'm confident that they are not right,'' said Joe Elford, chief counsel for Americans for Safe Access. ''If they are right, it would mean that thousands of seriously ill Californians for whom the Compassionate Use Act was intended to help would not be able to get the medicine that they need.''


In the City of Los Angeles, some estimates put the number of dispensaries as high as 800.
In August, Mr Cooley and the Sheriff, Lee Baca, wrote to all mayors and police chiefs in the county, saying they believed over-the-counter sales were illegal and encouraging cities to adopt permanent bans on dispensaries.


Mark Kleiman, a professor of public policy at the University of California, Los Angeles, was not surprised by the move. ''I think it's a natural response to the rather flagrant marketing practices of a bunch of the dispensaries. The medical veneer has been wearing thinner and thinner,'' he said. ''I've always wondered why those things were legal when they didn't look legal to me.''
Mr Cooley said he believed that under state law collectives must raise their own marijuana and can recoup only their costs. ''That's absolutely legal.


''We're going to respect that.'' But he said none of them currently do that. Mr Cooley said he would also consider going after doctors who write medical marijuana recommendations for healthy people.
Critics of medical marijuana say some doctors freely prescribe the drug for people who are not ill.


Medical marijuana advocates celebrated a brief thaw in the enforcement climate after the Obama Administration signalled earlier this year that it would not prosecute dispensaries that followed state law. That spurred many entrepreneurs to open dispensaries in Los Angeles.
As stores popped up near schools and parks, neighbourhood activists reacted with outrage, and police took notice.


A Los Angeles City councillor, Dennis Zine, welcomed Mr Cooley's decision to prosecute dispensaries.


''There are many that are operating illegally, and it's not a secret,'' he said, but added that he believes ''a few'' collectives in the city are operating legally.


When Californians voted for Proposition 215 (also known as the Compassionate Use Act) in 1996, they made it legal for patients with a doctor's recommendation and their caregivers to possess and raise pot for the patient's medical use.


In 2003, the legislature allowed patients and caregivers ''collectively or co-operatively to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes,'' but said they could not do it for profit.


Mr Cooley, after reviewing a state Supreme Court decision last year, concluded that the law protects collectives from prosecution only in the cultivation of marijuana, not sales or distribution.


Medical marijuana advocates note that the state requires dispensaries to collect sales taxes on marijuana, and that guidelines drawn up by the Attorney-General conclude that ''a properly organised and operated collective or co-operative that dispenses medical marijuana through a storefront may be lawful''.


The guidelines, however, do not deal directly with over-the-counter sales.
Los Angeles Times

[mooniegoogoo]

I'm interested in the outcome of all of this. Dont know what to make of it all right this second, but I'm trying to stay informed.

[zbestwun2001]

I posted this less than an hour ago and it is already in Google.

Google Blogs Alert for: zbestwun2001
The Situation..LA Dispensary's ..Are The Police Going To Do What ...
By zbestwun2001
Join Date: Apr 2007. Location: The wrong side of the tracks.... Co-Op: no. Vendor: no. Patient: yes. Posts: 4798. Rep Power: 234739 zbestwun2001. The Situation..LA Dispensary's ..Are The Police Going To Do What They Are Saying? ...
WeedTRACKER - http://www.weedtracker.com/foru

[labud]

Only if we let them....

Hopefully ASA will lead and organize ...

We have the numbers to stop this nonsense..

[zbestwun2001]

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...343,full.story



Los Angeles County D.A. prepares to crack down on pot outlets

Cooley says the vast majority of medical marijuana dispensaries in the county are operating illegally.

Medical marijuana activists protest outside a meeting of police and prosecutors in Montebello. (Bob Chamberlin / Los Angeles Times / October 8, 2009)




By John Hoeffel October 9, 2009


Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley said Thursday he will prosecute medical marijuana dispensaries for over-the-counter sales, targeting a practice that has become commonplace under an initiative approved by California voters more than a decade ago.

"The vast, vast, vast majority, about 100%, of dispensaries in Los Angeles County and the city are operating illegally, they are dealing marijuana illegally, according to our theory," he said. "The time is right to deal with this problem."

Cooley and Los Angeles City Atty. Carmen Trutanich recently concluded that state law bars sales of medical marijuana, an opinion that could spark a renewed effort by law enforcement across the state to rein in the use of marijuana. It comes as polls show a majority of state voters back legalization of marijuana, and supporters are working to place the issue on the ballot next year.

The district attorney's office is investigating about a dozen dispensaries, following police raids, and is considering filing felony charges against one that straddles the Los Angeles-Culver City line.

"We have our strategy and we think we are on good legal ground," Cooley said.

Medical marijuana advocates say the prosecutors are misinterpreting the law.

"I'm confident that they are not right," said Joe Elford, chief counsel for Americans for Safe Access. "If they are right, it would mean that thousands of seriously ill Californians for whom the Compassionate Use Act was intended to help would not be able to get the medicine that they need."

Law enforcement officials have been frustrated by the explosion in the number of dispensaries in Southern California, arguing that most are for-profit enterprises that violate the 1996 voter initiative legalizing medical marijuana and the 2003 state law permitting collective cultivation. Cooley's announcement, coming at a news conference that followed a training session he and Trutanich conducted for narcotics officers, dramatically raises the stakes.

In the city of Los Angeles, some estimates put the number of dispensaries as high as 800. The city allowed 186 to remain open under its 2007 moratorium, but hundreds of others opened in violation of the ban while the city did nothing to shut them down.

In August, Cooley and Sheriff Lee Baca sent a letter to all mayors and police chiefs in the county, saying that they believed over-the-counter sales were illegal and encouraging cities to adopt permanent bans on dispensaries.

Mark Kleiman, a professor of public policy at UCLA and an expert on drug policy, was not surprised that local prosecutors had decided to attack the rapid proliferation of marijuana stores.

"I think it's a natural response to the rather flagrant marketing practices of a bunch of the dispensaries. The medical veneer has been wearing thinner and thinner," he said. "I've always wondered why those things were legal when they didn't look legal to me."

Cooley said he believes that under state law, collectives must raise their own marijuana and can only recoup their costs. "That's absolutely legal," he said. "We're going to respect that."

But he said none of them currently do that.

The district attorney's warning could make the situation more chaotic in Los Angeles, where the City Council has struggled for two years to devise an ordinance to control the distribution of medical marijuana.

In addition to prosecuting dispensaries, Cooley said he would consider going after doctors who write medical marijuana recommendations for healthy people. Medical marijuana critics argue that some doctors freely recommend the drug to people who are not ill.

Medical marijuana advocates celebrated a brief thaw in the enforcement climate after the Obama administration signaled earlier this year that it would not prosecute collectives that followed state law. That spurred many entrepreneurs to open dispensaries in Los Angeles. As stores popped up near schools and parks, neighborhood activists reacted with outrage and police took notice.

Councilman Dennis Zine, a key player on the issue at L.A. City Hall, welcomed Cooley's decision to prosecute dispensaries. "There are many that are operating illegally and it's not a secret," he said, adding that he believes "a few" collectives in the city are operating legally.

Anticipating that police departments will ramp up raids on dispensaries, medical marijuana advocates reacted with dismay to Cooley's announcement.

"What we'll see is a big disruption," said Don Duncan, the California director for Americans for Safe Access. He called Cooley's decision "incredible" and said, "It certainly sounds scary."

Duncan acknowledged that many dispensaries do not follow the law and urged Cooley and Trutanich to focus exclusively on them. "You don't have to cast a net over the entire community, you can target the problem people and not take this extreme adversarial position," he said. "Some good people are going to be caught in the crossfire."

About 100 medical marijuana patients, activists and dispensary owners protested on a sidewalk outside the Montebello Country Club, where about 150 prosecutors and narcotics officers met. Motorists repeatedly honked and shook their fists in support as they rolled by, triggering cheers from the crowd.

Barry Kramer, the operator of California Patients Alliance, a collective on Melrose Avenue, said many dispensaries have responsibly regulated themselves for years in the vacuum left by the City Council's inaction.

"I feel like that gets lost," he said. "It's frustrating to get painted with one brush by the city."

Kramer said he believed that dispensaries would continue to operate. "People have found ways around marijuana laws for as long as there have been marijuana laws," he said.

But he also said that stepped-up prosecutions could resuscitate the criminal market: "Things will go underground. We'll see a lot more crime."

When Californians voted for Proposition 215 in 1996, they made it legal for patients with a doctor's recommendation and their caregivers to possess and raise pot for the patient's medical use.

In 2003, the Legislature allowed patients and caregivers "collectively or cooperatively to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes" but said they could not do it for profit.

Cooley and Trutanich, after reviewing a state Supreme Court decision from last year, have concluded that the law protects collectives from prosecution only in the cultivation of marijuana, not for sales or distribution.

Medical marijuana advocates, however, note that the state currently requires dispensaries to collect sales taxes on marijuana, and that guidelines drawn up by the attorney general conclude that "a properly organized and operated collective or cooperative that dispenses medical marijuana through a storefront may be lawful."

The guidelines allow collectives to take costs into account but do not deal directly with over-the-counter sales.

Jacob Appelsmith, special assistant attorney general, said Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown talked to Cooley on Thursday. "Our staffs are continuing to meet about these issues," he said.

john.hoeffel@latimes.com

[CarlSagan]

Here are some of my thoughts, many of which have been posted elsehwhere...

First off, how can the state require to collected mmj sales tax unless a "sale" is taking place"? Obviously $$$ is needed in one way or another to produce and distribute mmj to patients. And the state must be taking in a lot of money through this sales tax, so I tend to think that the state is/would be supportive, of taxable donations (i.e. cash, as opposed to labor, donated supplies etc) for mmj.

...what a catch 22 to require state sales tax while prohibiting the sale! (of course, many states have tax stamps for illegal drugs...)

Second, if the DA is going to (irrationally and unlawfully) target co-ops that take over-the-counter donations...then maybe there is another co-op model that would not involve over the counter exchanges.

What if there was a co-op where everyone paid a monthly donations (for the cost of fertilizer, rent, to keep a lawyer on retainer etc), in exchange for a monthly supply of mmj (I need about a 1/2 zip a month, so maybe a monthly fee of $180-200????). If the only way I could get my medicine was to pay a monthly donation to a co-op in exchange for a month's worth of medicine, I'd do it because I can't grow my own. But this model for a co-op would require a lot of trust...(if you make you donation in advance, how do you know that the co-op will stick around, supply you with the amout you want, not to mention give you some decent flowers!!!)

This way, when you show up at you co-op, no cash is changing hands and no "over-the-counter" exchange is taking place!!!!

This is just an idea...and I'd rather co-ops not have to operate in a way like this...but I suspect that the DA would have an even harder time prosecuting a co-op following this type of model.

Also, one more thought. Are delivery services being target by the DA? It seems that these operations could be a lot harder to bust. I mean, they can bust a delivery guy, but if they can keep their address private, then LEO won't be able to take their stash!

[canibisssmoke]

It would be a perfect world if everyone one involved in this compassionate Healing world could truly be responsible and true to the cause. Unfortunately there is too many people involved that have seen dollar signs and will do anything regardless of the law to make an extra buck. The whole hardship letter "loop hole" that I constantly hear in the media and news paper is no loop hole. It is in black and white that the application process for a hardship exemption is just that, an application that goes thru a process of expectance or denial, and nothing more. It states clearly in black and white that one must wait for approval of the application from the city counsel to operate and then may open after the process is finalized and approved. So, all of the Clubs that have opened during this process are illegal and operating without the city's permission.

[kusher]

don't forget that the 4th dist. appeals court is going to rule on bans by cities and counties sometime in the next 2 1/2 months. if it goes in the co-ops favor ,then what are the police going to do?

[HappaGuy]

Victory: The cops have admitted that there is such a thing as legal medical marijuana. They have recognized Prop 215 as law.

Defeat: Many have made a mockery of medical marijuana for fun and profit, very much in the face of the LEOs and the voting public.

On the whole, I think this will end up securing the rights of legitimate patients, providers, and our non-profit collectives and cooperatives to use marijuana as medicine in California.

At the same time, it must be said for the commercial dispensaries at risk here that the availability of medical marijuana to legitimate patients in California could never have spread so widely so fast without the cannabis entrepreneurs.

I'd worried that legitimate MMJ had been hoisted by the commercial MMJ petard with this organized assault by the LEOs in LA, but on reflection I'm encouraged.

I'm also enlightened enough to know that no one should be arrested for marijuana.

Marijuana is safer than aspirin, even potatoes, according to DEA Administrative Law Judge Frances Young. (Google it if you don't already know, please. The DEA - well part of it - recommended decriminalization decades ago.) Still, for decades, the LEOs have vigilantly protected the People from this vital medicine, once commonplace over-the-counter at every American pharmacy, and never a death resulting. If only aspirin were so safe! (And potatoes.)

The laws prohibiting marijuana are and always have been the crime.

I wish the best for all concerned.

[ZENITH]

Medical marijuana advocates, however, note that the state currently requires dispensaries to collect sales taxes on marijuana, and that guidelines drawn up by the attorney general conclude that "a properly organized and operated collective or cooperative that dispenses medical marijuana through a storefront may be lawful."

The guidelines allow collectives to take costs into account but do not deal directly with over-the-counter sales.


They would have to hire a poop load of in coop tax collectors to enforce this tax money rembursement.

Uuuhh..ill be glad to be a tax collector for the city..oh,,I WOULD BE VERY..VERY..HONEST!!

[Pitjustice]

Originally Posted by HappaGuy

Victory: .......................

I'm also enlightened enough to know that no one should be arrested for marijuana.

Marijuana is safer than aspirin, even potatoes, according to DEA Administrative Law Judge Frances Young. (Google it if you don't already know, please. The DEA - well part of it - recommended decriminalization decades ago.) Still, for decades, the LEOs have vigilantly protected the People from this vital medicine, once commonplace over-the-counter at every American pharmacy, and never a death resulting. If only aspirin were so safe! (And potatoes.)

The laws prohibiting marijuana are and always have been the crime.

I wish the best for all concerned.

The laws prohibiting marijuana are and always have been invalid and should not be obeyed or respected, but disobeyed and disrespected.

[VooDoo Chile]

Originally Posted by kusher

don't forget that the 4th dist. appeals court is going to rule on bans by cities and counties sometime in the next 2 1/2 months. if it goes in the co-ops favor ,then what are the police going to do?

Hypothetically speaking, the court could issue a ruling in favor of co-ops and the cops could in turn totally ignore it. That's more or less what's going on right now. We all remember Hamilton's famous summation of the powers of the judiciary in Federalist #78- they have neither the power of the sword or the purse. So the judiciary is entirely dependent on the cooperation of the other branches of government to both enforce their decisions and fund said enforcement.

This ain't the first nor the last time the courts have faced a tremendous threat to their legitimacy. This is what's known as a constitutional crisis folks. We're in for a long, hard, bumpy ride. But I'm quite confident that in the end, we will emerge victorious.

[VooDoo Chile]

Originally Posted by Pitjustice

The laws prohibiting marijuana are and always have been invalid and should not be obeyed or respected, but disobeyed and disrespected.

I'm sure the LEOs will be more than happy to listen to you explain this to them.

[Pitjustice]

Originally Posted by VooDoo Chile

I'm sure the LEOs will be more than happy to listen to you explain this to them.

They already fully know it and don't care, they have a monopoly on force and will criminaly use it at will as long as we let them.

[zbestwun2001]

If you listen to the Channel 4 Sat. news video with Trutanich in it you will notice A DEFFINATE SPANISH INFLECTION WHEN HE PRONOUNCES THE PESTICIDE "PRTYETHRUM".

You can hear him say it at 0:30 into the video.

Now I am not a linguist so I looked up the source of that word and this is what it is:

Origin:
1555–65; < L: pellitory < Gk pýrethron, akin to pyretós fever; cf.

It has Greek and Latin origins and this is just another one of Trutanich's tricks to convince the public that the Mexican Cartel is moving next door to them soon.
IF THE TRUTH WON'T WORK, SPIN IT AND LIE TO SCARE THE SHIT OUT OF THE IGNORANT PUBLIC INSTEAD OF INFORMING THEM.

Now about that pesticide, this is what Morpheus posted this a.m. in his forum:

Originally Posted by morpheus

LA City Attorney, Carmen "Nuch" Trutanich, has been all over the media in the last few days trying to sell the idea that a dangerous pesticide used to kill Mexican fire ants provides proof that LA medical cannabis is both dangerous to your health and is supporting Mexican drug cartels. Having abandoned their office's flawed interpretation of the California Supreme Court's decision in Mentch, Trutanich and LA County District Attorney Steve Cooley have latched onto pesticide contamination as their justification for closing LA's legal medical marijuana collectives. Samples of medical cannabis secured by Trutanich's office in "controlled buys" from an LA dispensary were allegedly tested by an "FDA lab" and found to contain pyrethrum, an insecticide that is used to control fire ants. Trutanich claims that this "Mexican fire ant insecticide" is proof that LA medical cannabis collectives are getting their cannabis from Mexican drug cartels.

Except...

There are no "Mexican fire ants". The red imported fire ant - Solenopsis invicta - is from Brazil, not Mexico. It was accidently imported into the US in the 1930's and has spread across the southern United States, becoming a major pest. Any fire ants in Mexico came from the US. You cannot base an argument about whether Mexican cannabis is coming into LA collectives, based on an insect that doesn't exist. Just because I use chopsticks to select cannabis from jars for my patients doesn't mean the cannabis came from China.

Pesticide testing requires a very large sample of plant material to produce accurate results. EMA, the largest pesticide testing laboratory in California requires a minimum 200 gram sample. What dispensary sold Trutanich's undercover buyer a half-pound of cannabis? The reality is that Trutanich most likely had a much smaller sample tested, with the high attendant risk of an inaccurate result.

Pyrethrum, the insecticide allegedly found on the medical cannabis sample, is the active ingredient in Safer Soap, an OMRI-approved organic insecticide derived from chrysanthemum flowers. It is commonly used on cannabis and every other fruit and vegetable species throughout the world. It has minimal toxicity in humans, but is quite toxic to fish and insects, including fire ants.

SO, what messages should we take away from Trutanich's Cassandra call? That the City Attorney and the County DA will say anything in their attempt to close LA's collectives and that you might want to keep that medical cannabis away from your aquarium.

[VooDoo Chile]

Originally Posted by Pitjustice

They already fully know it and don't care, they have a monopoly on force and will criminaly use it at will as long as we let them.

Boy, nothin' gets by you does it, Inspector Gadget!

[ShiningSkull]

Originally Posted by zbestwun2001

If you listen to the Channel 4 Sat. news video with Trutanich in it you will notice A DEFFINATE SPANISH INFLECTION WHEN HE PRONOUNCES THE PESTICIDE "PRTYETHRUM".

...this is just another one of Trutanich's tricks to convince the public that the Mexican Cartel is moving next door to them soon.

IF THE TRUTH WON'T WORK, SPIN IT AND LIE TO SCARE THE SHIT OUT OF THE IGNORANT PUBLIC INSTEAD OF INFORMING THEM.

Nice catch, zb1.
Thanks for outing more of their propaganda.

[kingjoebar]

I don't understand why the System puppets are continuing to try to shut these businesses down? Haven't they read the Prop 215 and SB420? The people have already spoken since 1996!

[cephas]

By definition, nothing a police officer can do is illegal. This is probably the biggest part of the problem. Cop's (correctly) assume they have the right to do what they want based upon their personal understanding of the law...the courts will decide if it was the correct thing to do or not, afterward.

My (least)favorite part of the article is the obvious mis-information planted within by Cooley in his choice of phrasing.

"The vast, vast, vast majority, about 100%, of dispensaries in Los Angeles County and the city are operating illegally, they are dealing marijuana illegally, according to our theory," he said. "The time is right to deal with this problem."

The district attorney's office is investigating a dozen dispensaries, following police raids.

If "about 100%" of the businesses are illegal, why are only a dozen, 12, being investigated?

Then there is the wording, "about 100%", Cooley knows most people when listening to the soundbite or reading the paper will disregard the use of the word "about" (in this context is doesn't really make sense, say 99.9%, not about 100%.) and just remember "100%", meaning all. So the talk around the watercooler will go something like "Man did you hear the DA said all those MJ dispensaries are illegal...". Should someone try to sue him for giving misleading information, then the word "about" would give him an out. He did not say "all", or "100%" he said "almost all", "about 100%", he cannot be responsible if the listener misunderstands.

Then the article doesn't bother to mention that of the "dozens" of dispensaries being investigated, only one is being considered for charges...considered, they haven't been filled yet cause the DA isn't sure if the case is strong enough for a conviction.....

All I can say is I am really glad for the laws about lack of bias in new agencies....

[zbestwun2001]

Originally Posted by VooDoo Chile

Boy, nothin' gets by you does it, Inspector Gadget!

[VooDoo Chile]

Originally Posted by zbestwun2001

LOL. You're too kind sir.

[psomamarc]

anyone know if Cooley and company plan on going after the 186 pre ICO's as well?

[proud420]

This is great information! Great YouTube Video! Keep us informed!!!!

[cephas]

They see nothing special about the ICO Co-Ops. I doubt they are targeting them specifically, but are probably looking at them in the least..

I don't understand why the System puppets are continuing to try to shut these businesses down? Haven't they read the Prop 215 and SB420? The people have already spoken since 1996!

From what I have observed when sitting in court, or dealing with government branches, for myself and/or others, whether it is for a traffic ticket or a real charge of some kind, or some type of business deal or other political interest, is that when a Government employee, or member speaks about "the People", they are speaking about themselves and the other members of their club. They are not talking about the average citizen at all, and they are talking even less about individual groups like MMJ patients.

[jasongood31]

man thats so funny they give us what we want we do what we are supposed to do and now they idian give lol only in cali