Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Piffer Thread on Political Rantings and Ravings -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (11494)	8/7/2003 6:55:41 PM
From: Alan Smithee	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14610

The jury said they'd have reached a different result if they'd known it was medicinal marijuana. That is likely precisely why the judge didn't let them hear the evidence, because possession of marijuana with the intent to use it medicinally is most likely not a defense to the charge. If its not a defense, it's simply not relevant, as the evidence doesn't have a tendency to make a fact to be proven more or less likely. (Help me out here Minnow) Jury nullification is an issue and its out there. Have you ever heard of the OJ Simpson case? That's jury nullification at its worst.