San Diego Hypocrisy & Medical Marijuana Distribution on Trial
November 25th, 2009Posted by Kris Hermes
This story would be amusing if it wasn’t so tragic.
The Answerdam Alternative Care Collective (AACC) was a medical marijuana dispensary in San Diego. It was doing the best it could to comply with the law: it was collectively run, it did not make a profit, it verified its member patients, and it paid sales tax to the State Board of Equalization. So, what was the problem? San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis and the lack of a local ordinance with which to regulate dispensaries like AACC.
In September, Dumanis oversaw raids on more than a dozen medical marijuana dispensaries in San Diego simply because they “appear[ed] to be run by drug dealers.” Despite her lack of evidence, Dumanis arrested 31 people, one of which was Jovan Jackson of AACC. Dumanis chose to prosecute Jackson for possession and sale of medical marijuana, claiming that he sold it for profit. Unfortunately for Dumanis, Jackson’s case was a poor choice and would turn out to be an embarrassment to her office.
Unbeknownst to Dumanis at the time, Deputy District Attorney James Pitts was a member patient of AACC, and had purchased medical marijuana multiple times from the dispensary. If AACC was good enough for Pitts, why wasn’t it good enough for Dumanis? Well, we haven’t gotten to the bottom of that, but Pitts did testify in Jackson’s trial today. He confirmed that he was a patient and had signed a membership agreement, but that was about all. He’s probably sufficiently embarrassed, and “I can’t recall” should be good enough at this point. Hopefully, the hypocrisy of the District Attorney’s office won’t be lost on the jury.
It would be one thing if the prosecutor in Jackson’s case provided sufficient evidence of profiteering, but the case is more about the District Attorney’s misperception that medical marijuana “sales” are illegal under state law. Even if the state legislature, the courts, and the California Attorney General hadn’t recognized the legality of sales, Dumanis has yet to base her legal theory on any established law. Perhaps if the prosecutor, the police, and others ill-informed say it enough (“sales are illegal”), maybe it’ll come true. Hopefully not.
Closing arguments in Jackson’s trial are scheduled for Monday. The tragedy is that Jackson shouldn’t be on trial and his life has been needlessly disrupted as a result. Jackson has also endured mistreatment, including being denied the right to represent himself at trial. Hopefully, the jury will see through the “Dumanis charade” to the truth, which is that medical marijuana sales are legal and that Jackson was doing his best to comply with state law in the absence of any local law in San Diego. In order to avoid further tragedies like this, the City Council should promptly adopt an ordinance regulating dispensaries.
November 27th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
Sorry to say it but the judge would not let them say that Mr. Pitts worked for the DA. She said it would enflame the jury. Well it sure as hell did me that they would hide the truth from the jury. If he is found guilty there really needs to be a public outcry about the hidine of the full truth from the jury
November 27th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
This senseless persecution of medical marijuana patients by the office of District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis has got to stop.
Doesn’t she have better things to do with taxpayers’ money than to spend her time busting sick people for using medicine that’s been legal for them for 13 years now?
November 28th, 2009 at 9:22 am
Everyone should go to this web site: http://fija.org/ We need to start letting the justice system know that we are tired of the laws that take away our citizens liberty.
“…This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it…”
– US President Abraham Lincoln, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1861
November 29th, 2009 at 7:22 am
I really don’t think that representing yourself at such proceedings is a good idea at all. But you do have a right to drive yourself off the cliff if that’s what you choose, so any conviction can be overturned on those grounds.
December 4th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
The People vs. Jackson verdict proves that due to the “medical marijuana affirmative defense”, a jury cannot convict anyone of “selling for profit” because “selling for profit” is not strictly forbidden in the referenced law that allows for an affirmative defense.
Therefore, if a jury can not find the defendant guilty BEYOND a reasonable doubt, the defendant must be found innocent based on our justice system. As was made clear with the Jackson case…
The jury was a bit more specific than the media has reported… The media just loves Bonnie and they hate the idea of sales, however subsequent to the Jackson case, SALES ARE LEGAL.
Jurors said regarding collectives & cooperatives, “…the prosecution gave his kind of narrow definition during the closing arguments but there was nothing in the law that really backed that up…”
…other jurors said…
“…when you have an issue of doubt, the law shows that the benefit of that doubt NEEDS to go to the defendant…” and went on to say “…we had no evidence on the table that there could not be a profit in a cooperative…”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
See all Jovan Jackson articles on the Bonnie D.A.’ Mantis Blog (aka. The S.E.P.T.I.C. System)
http://bonniedamantis.wordpress.com/tag/jovan-jackson/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Despite the historic verdict on December 01, 2009, the civil rights violations of a US Navy war veteran and the loud message from the jury in the People v. Jackson, the media still supports Bonnie Dumanis, as of 12/03/09. . .
http://bonniedamantis.wordpress.com/2009/12/04/tracking-media-coverage-following-the-jackson-verdict/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
December 7th, 2009 at 11:13 am
This is an unfortunate event that happened. I personally think its ridiculous how they can disrupt someone’s life like this without any sort of consequence, especially if he is doing everything he can do stay within the state law. I am disappointed to see that stuff like this happens.
December 23rd, 2009 at 2:51 am
The narcs are so desperate to keep their reefer madness schemes going that they refuse to read the law.
The use of the word AFFORDABLE means that money is changing hands.
Proposition 215: Text
(C) To encourage the federal and state governments to implement a plan to provide for the safe and AFFORDABLE distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical need of marijuana.
http://vote96.sos.ca.gov/bp/215text.htm