Dopecast 168 - Marijuana/Hemp Conspiracy in UK Government - Court Case

Dopefiend.co.uk: The Cannabis Podcast Network
===========================================================================
Dopecast168
===========================================================================

Independence Limited
Unravelling the illusions of media and people

Cannabis/Dope/Weed/Marijuana/Hemp Conspiracy in UK Government

For reasons unknown the very thing that the Drug Equality Alliance has been campaigning for since 2006, which is the release of the latest Report on the Drug Classification System, has been delayed yet again. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to work out the release is being delayed because of the Election, if you look at the dates (14th April 2010), it’s just too suspect. As I posted the other day, the MoD were silenced by the Government (which was quickly taken down from the MoD site once I linked to it) on posting anything that could rock the Election boat, why would it be any different for the Home Office? I suppose it cannot be surprising that the media are in cahoots with the Political Parties and will just cover the issues that have been painstakingly prepared by their PR companies, not the real issues like how prolific drug use is in the UK… to be exact, the largest percentage of Cannabis use amongst Teens in the EU!

The Drug Equality Alliance is also working with a gentleman named, Edwin Stratton, 43, of Leyton in East London,

‘who seeks to achieve equal protection and equal rights for all users of equally-harmful drugs, in the High Court.’

The podcast is found at the links below and it’s an absolute pleasure to hear a man who really knows Drugs ‘Laws’ better than the Authorities themselves and giving them what for! This case has been dragging on for over 2 years now and his final hearing will be on the 26th April 2010.

Listen to the podcast here
Download the podcast here

The following summary of Edwin’s case is taken from here: http://www.drugequality.org/cases.htm#edwin

In May of 2008, Edwin was at home when a fire broke out in a neighbouring wine bar requiring the evacuation of tenants in adjacent properties. In the process, police discovered the cannabis plants Edwin was growing for his medical condition.

Fully co-operating with police, Edwin admitted the fact that he privately grew cannabis plants in his home, in order to combat his medical condition. Edwin rejected a police caution, reasoning that the denial of property rights in cannabis is discriminatory under the Human Rights Act 1998. This is understood in light of the analogous comparison, that identical property rights are not denied to people who choose to brew the equally or more harmful drug, alcohol.

On his refusal to accept a caution and thus acknowledge culpability, Edwin was charged with production of a controlled drug of Class C, by another, in contravention of section 4 (1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.

Edwin attended court on October 1st, 2008, accompanied by Darryl Bickler of the Drug Equality Alliance acting as his “McKenzie Friend”. Edwin declined to plead, and instead moved to quash the indictment as an abuse of process, using the “Mackeson” application format. The Magistrate properly declined jurisdiction and adjourned proceedings, giving Edwin leave to apply to the High Court for permission for Judicial Review.

___________________________________________________________________________

This a sample of what the Drugs Equality Alliance have formulated about the Misuse of Drugs Act:

We believe the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 c.38 (“the Act”) is being administered in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner based on historical and cultural factors that lack a consistent and objective basis contrary to Article 14 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and within the ambit of other convention rights. This denies equal protection to persons engaged in property activities with “controlled drugs”, s2(1)(a), with respect to persons engaged in identical property activities with the drugs alcohol and tobacco.

At the outset, it is vital to bear in mind these facts about the Act: