I do not say this to be flippant, but in today's environment the only thing that limits your ability to make small possession arrests is how interested in making small possession arrests you are.Originally Posted by Snapshot
I do not say this to be flippant, but in today's environment the only thing that limits your ability to make small possession arrests is how interested in making small possession arrests you are.
Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.
Unforgivable. Innocent people will be fighting to get their lives back for a long time. No matter what, their reputations are forever tarnished. And those people will never be able to fully trust LEOs again. I dont blame them one bit. This is a matter in which I think the punishment should be severe. Damn near capital offense severe. The stakes are absolutely that high. I get it drugs are bad. God knows I've done my share of work in that field, to include being a USCG boarding officer once upon a time. It never crossed my mind to plant a thing on or give false testimony about someone. I dont know where the answer lies, but I have become satisfied that overzealous pursuit of narcotics is not it.
If not life, this guy should be a VERY old man when he gets out.
People like this guy are the reason we have to wear cameras, and have cameras that record our cameras recording.
Like BBI said, there is so much out there, that an officer is only limited by their interest in minor drug arrests.
This practice was more prevalent in the distant past. Last year on an emergency trip to Mississippi, I was pulled over in a one horse town in Texas near the Louisiana border on a bullshit probable cause stop. Time was 3AM. The man asked if he could search my vehicle. I said no. He asked why. I told him that I was a stranger in his town, and I did not know him, his chief, or anything about his department. I told him that I had no information that gave me a feeling of trust and that I was uncomfortable with being stopped. Then, before he could reply, I asked if I could leave. He walked away without replying. I left. I have a 6th sense honed by many years around bullshit. This did not feel right.
The article I read on this said the investigation was initiated because an SA did think something was amiss.
Evil.
There was a law change as part of new Hemp law in Texas. Now for Mary Jane convictions the evidence has to be lab tested. Travis (Austin) and some other counties have come out sayign they will not prosecute small amounts any more. I don't know about Houston and Dallas.
As I understand it, the bill (now law) requires any MJ prosecution to prove a THC content greater than 0.3%. The intent was to enable the production of hemp and products derived from hemp (with a wink and nod to legalizing CBD that met the <0.3% THC threshold).
End of story, right? #notsofast
Since the new law requires accredited laboratory proof of THC concentration in excess of 0.3% for ANY MJ prosecution, and few (apparently only 1) labs in the state are accredited to perform the analysis, municipalities are deciding not to prosecute simple possession cases (>4oz seems to be the emerging threshold for prosecution) due to the difficulty of proving THC concentration.
Unintended consequences.
Text of law: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/86...l/HB01325F.htm
https://www.austinchronicle.com/news...travis-county/
In late June, the Tarrant County District Attorney dismissed 234 misdemeanor marijuana possession charges on the grounds that crime labs are ill-equipped to test the amount of THC in confiscated cannabis. The following week, Harris, Bexar, Fort Bend, and Nueces counties also made it known that they would not prosecute personal possession charges – under a quarter pound – without a lab test proving the evidence seized has illegal THC content.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
Lord knows it's true as a high school teacher. I actually walked in on some young men toking up in the boy's bathroom while trying to take a quick piss inbetween classes this year. I might have used the word "retarded..."
REPETITION CREATES BELIEF
REPETITION BUILDS THE SEPARATE WORLDS WE LIVE AND DIE IN
NO EXCEPTIONS
Don't assume that was unintended.As I understand it, the bill (now law) requires any MJ prosecution to prove a THC content greater than 0.3%. The intent was to enable the production of hemp and products derived from hemp (with a wink and nod to legalizing CBD that met the <0.3% THC threshold).
End of story, right? #notsofast
Since the new law requires accredited laboratory proof of THC concentration in excess of 0.3% for ANY MJ prosecution, and few (apparently only 1) labs in the state are accredited to perform the analysis, municipalities are deciding not to prosecute simple possession cases (>4oz seems to be the emerging threshold for prosecution) due to the difficulty of proving THC concentration.
Unintended consequences.
Text of law: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/86...l/HB01325F.htm
https://www.austinchronicle.com/news...travis-county/
Reply With Quote
