One year in jail for five plants

Sleeper12

pure.conya wrote:

22 years old dealing charge? anything more than a 5 spot back then and you got a technical dealing charge

That's not exactly true. Most would have gotten the probation act for a first offence. Leaving them without a criminal record. You only got a drug dealing conviction if you were dealing drugs.

This idiot has been at this for years and hasn't learned his lesson when caught. Judge had little options here

jh79

Mellor wrote: »

Have you any evidence to back the part of bold up?

I fully understand how different strains will have different levels. But I’m not sure hiw you make the leap from there to requiring separate clinical trials?

For example, trials could prove that 10mg of a drug is an effective painkiller. If a product with 12mg is available. It’s unreasonable to say we have no idea how it works as no 12mg trial was conducted.

Cannbinoids are a family of drugs. A quick google says at least 113 exist.

It's too big an assumption to make that the artisan oil producers have enough control over the process and/or that the different combinations will have no affect on therapeutic side of things.

Studies similar to those used by generic pharma companies that show equivalency might be sufficient in some cases.

STB.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

That's not exactly true. Most would have gotten the probation act for a first offence. Leaving them without a criminal record. You only got a drug dealing conviction if you were dealing drugs.

This idiot has been at this for years and hasn't learned his lesson when caught. Judge had little options here

Judges have a lot of latitude. Unfortunately until the legislation is changed to make it a medical problem rather than a criminal one, these worst case scenarios will arise. 75% of drug offences before the courts are for possession of small amounts of cannabis. There are many countries that allow having at least 5 plants and it not considered to be a distribution drug dealing network.

Mellor

jh79 wrote: »

Cannbinoids are a family of drugs. A quick google says at least 113 exist.

It's too big an assumption to make that the artisan oil producers have enough control over the process and/or that the different combinations will have no affect on therapeutic side of things.

Firstly it’s compounds not drugs.
Secondly, we aren’t concerned with the many benefits they potentially have. We are talking about the 2 main compounds. If studied show CBD is a benefit, why is the strength in one strain to another relevant.

pure.conya

STB. wrote: »

No I didn't. I'll put it in language that even a naysayer with a PHD in Organic Chemistry cannot attempt to undermine.

One more time, try and pay attention.

I linked a paper published from clinical trials using CBD for epilepsy carried out by Professor Raphael Mechoulam in 1980.

Chronic administration of cannabidiol to healthy volunteers and epileptic patients

It sat for 38 years without the pharmaceutical industry nor the regulatory authorities acting upon it as it wasn't widely accepted.

Suddenly in 2018 a product released under the name "Epidiolex" by GW was finally FDA approved in 2018 (they managed to patent it in 1999 despite it being a schedule 1 drug - i.e. one of of no medical use).

All referenced here.

https://www.ilae.org/journals/epigraph/epigraph-vol-21-issue-1-winter-2019/raphael-mechoulam-and-the-history-of-cannabis-research

ah good old GW pharmacy, with Teresa Mays husband on the board of company licenced to grow 300 tonnes of cannabis a year, selling an extract of thc/cbd from a plant we can all grow ourselves for 26 cents a gram yet GW charge extortionate prices for sativex, these fućkers should be shot!

handlemaster

10 year mandatory term after 10 convictions would stop alot of crime. As for the OP common 1year for this crime is over the top.

jh79

Mellor wrote: »

Firstly it’s compounds not drugs.
Secondly, we aren’t concerned with the many benefits they potentially have. We are talking about the 2 main compounds. If studied show CBD is a benefit, why is the strength in one strain to another relevant.

Just so we are on the same page, you want to know if a pharma version had for example 10% CBD then all strains that had 10% or mor3 would have equal or greater benefit?

pure.conya

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You only got a drug dealing conviction if you were dealing drugs.

thats bs tbh, once you're caught with any amount that can theoretically be broken down to regular deals of 1/8's or 1/4's the charge of possession with intent to supply gets piled on

pure.conya

STB. wrote: »

Judges have a lot of latitude. Unfortunately until the legislation is changed to make it a medical problem rather than a criminal one, these worst case scenarios will arise. 75% of drug offences before the courts are for possession of small amounts of cannabis. There are many countries that allow having at least 5 plants and it not considered to be a distribution drug dealing network.

California allow 99+ for a fee, imagine the yeild from 99 3m x 3m plants

Mellor

jh79 wrote: »

Just so we are on the same page, you want to know if a pharma version had for example 10% CBD then all strains that had 10% or mor3 would have equal or greater benefit?

Medicine isn’t measured in %s for obvious reasons.
And no, that’s not what I’m asking. You said;

Each "strain" has different levels of THC/CBD and terpenes. Each are an entity it their own right and require their own clinical trials.

I’m asking if you any evidence for that claim, or even what’s the basis for the claim? If there’s none, just say there’s none.

If one strain is 100mg THC and 80mg CBD. And another is 100mg of both. I dont believe that is so clinically different as to required separate trials.

jh79

Mellor wrote: »

Medicine isn’t measured in %s for obvious reasons.
And no, that’s not what I’m asking. You said;


I’m asking if you any evidence for that claim, or even what’s the basis for the claim? If there’s none, just say there’s none.

If one strain is 100mg THC and 80mg CBD. And another is 100mg of both. I dont believe that is so clinically different as to required separate trials.

I'm using % because that's how the products are advertised generally. Its easy to switch to mg anyways.

So in your example, the extra cbd might inhibit the thc or cause extra side effects or be exactly the same. The point is you can't just assume from a regulatory viewpoint.

If their was no differences re the delivery system and the other compounds present in either example above then a similar profile in blood plasma levels would probably be sufficient evidence of equivalency.

Sleeper12

pure.conya wrote: »

thats bs tbh, once you're caught with any amount that can theoretically be broken down to regular deals of 1/8's or 1/4's the charge of possession with intent to supply gets piled on

You totally missed the point.



Judges usually don't give a conviction on first offense for a small amount of hash. The probation act is the norm rather than a conviction that can ban you working & living in the US, Australia etc.



This idiot has had convictions for a reason. Him not learning from past court cases left the judge with little choice.

Realt Dearg Sec

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You totally missed the point.



Judges usually don't give a conviction on first offense for a small amount of hash. The probation act is the norm rather than a conviction that can ban you working & living in the US, Australia etc.



This idiot has had convictions for a reason. Him not learning from past court cases left the judge with little choice.

Which brings us back to the point everyone else is making: not learning from past court cases seems to be no problem at all as long as you're just robbing people or committing violent assault, but if some lad has some weed, well, the judge has "little choice". It might make people start to think the judiciary is full of fcukwits.

pure.conya

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

Which brings us back to the point everyone else is making: not learning from past court cases seems to be no problem at all as long as you're just robbing people or committing violent assault, but if some lad has some weed, well, the judge has "little choice". It might make people start to think the judiciary is full of fcukwits.

and they label some pots and soil, an led light and a pack of feminised seeds as a professional grow operation, talk about sensationalism

Dante7

Judge O'Donnabhain strikes again. Four years jail for 1.75Kg of weed. The mind boggles.

Judge Ó Donnabháin said:
“This is a somewhat sad case — a man at this hour of his life who is so committed to drugs he really does not know right from wrong.

"So addicted he cannot even offer himself for treatment. He is an almost total addict.

"This behaviour cannot be tolerated even from a man as raddled as he is from drugs.”

This is weed we're talking about! It's like something out of a Dickens novel. I'm surprised he didn't send him to the poorhouse.


https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/dj-so-committed-to-drugs-he-doesnt-know-right-from-wrong-984323.html

str8talkingguy

At the end of the day a lot of people don't know how the system works,the lawyers worship the gangsters probably spend too much time watching love hate themselves.Half them be looking connections to get some Coke for the weekend,so if you are connected the solicitors get you off.

For the ordinary man that commits a small offence its next to impossible to get a solicitor to adequately defend you.The 200 previous convictions guys more often than not walk out the door,while they pick on soft targets with no connections and throw the book at them

Thats how it works,go in and watch how it works the solicitors worship the ground of the guys with the 100 plus convictions and do damn all for anyone else.

Realt Dearg Sec

Dante7 wrote: »

.

Judge Ó Donnabháin said:
“This is a somewhat sad case — a man at this hour of his life who is so committed to drugs he really does not know right from wrong.

It's the condescension that really puts ire in your hole. To be lectured on right and wrong by a judiciary that will give suspended sentences to people with convictions in the three figures tells us we're a craven race of gob****es to be tolerating it.

Mellor

Dante7 wrote: »

Judge O'Donnabhain strikes again. Four years jail for 1.75Kg of weed. The mind boggles.

I've no problem with weed. It should be legal imo.
You when your cause dealing drugs, the whole "it's just weed for personal use" isn't going to wash.

joeguevara

Without going into sentence or rights and wrongs of drugs, what type of fool who has recent convictions for cultivation continues to keep drugs in their house.

edit_me

Moral of the story - don't grow your own stuff. Buy it.

Optimalprimerib

Two simultaneous things need to happen, the pope needs to visit the Aran islands with free transport from anywhere in ireland for the over 60s with free tea and sandwiches. On the same day, an election should be held to legalise cannabis in Ireland, held at the same time as the three hour mass.

Mellor

Optimalprimerib wrote: »

Two simultaneous things need to happen, the pope needs to visit the Aran islands with free transport from anywhere in ireland for the over 60s with free tea and sandwiches. On the same day, an election should be held to legalise cannabis in Ireland, held at the same time as the three hour mass.

I think you mean referendum. And it's not required.
They can just make it legal, they don't need our permission. The pope can stay at home.

Samuel Vimes

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Do the Gardai not have something better ro do. What a waste of everyone's time

You mean instead of investigating crime? It's their job ffs!
What would you like them to do instead?