Comments on: Jeffrey Schwartz: Why Prosecute What May Soon Be Legal? – April 21, 2010

By: Levi Hadesty

Levi Hadesty — Thu, 10 Jun 2010 20:51:46 +0000

Hell to the yeehaa!! thank you.

By: Benjamin Okin

Benjamin Okin — Fri, 14 May 2010 01:15:26 +0000

What would be legalized under the Act is no where near the numbers and quantities being prosecuted by the DA’s office. Those cases still have to be worked out in the mess 215 has made. The total and complete legalization is the only thing that will unclog the courts. This new legislation will not.

By: Daniel Wasserman

Daniel Wasserman — Thu, 13 May 2010 03:19:57 +0000

I would suggest that Mr Schwartz is actually campaigning for the benefit of improving his number of marijuana crime related clients and that his spiel is merely a calculated attempt to win over this portion of the demographic.
Lest we forget, Mr Schwartz was once a member of the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office attorney staff. He was responsible for prosecuting multiple marijuana related cases. I will grant that Mr. Schwartz was not very good at his job. It was this poor performance that caused Mr. Schwartz to be given the moniker, “Hugo Freely” by better, more determined deputy district attorney’s, members of local law enforcement, as well as a rather frustrated F.B.I. agent that has since left the area. I find it hard to believe that anyone is able to convert from prosecuting to defending persons charged with marijuana related crimes over some moral conversion. I believe it is the love of the Benjamins not freedom that inspires this advocacy by Mr. Schwartz.

By: No Name

No Name — Wed, 05 May 2010 16:06:22 +0000

i agree with andrew its not the marijuana cases clogging things up its the district attorneys office they make the choices&legalization needs to be further thought through this could cause the northern california economy to crash no ones thinking of the growers just the users& their h*ll bent on legalization just saying look at both sides of the table..b4 its to late

By: Leibel Group

Leibel Group — Tue, 04 May 2010 13:16:01 +0000

Although there are millions spent on the prosecution of marijuana cases, I don’t think that the government is waisting money to enforce laws that were voted in, in the first place and that time and money once used to prosecute the marijuana laws is suddenly going to be freed up once legalized. THAT is a pipe dream.
As a user (illegally) in Canada, I have seen what relaxed marijuana laws do (eg. British Columbia), since possession of small amounts is ‘legal’ in a sense, Police there have no more resources, time or money to prosecute other things, so please, let’s not blame the law for thier inadaquacies when it is the criminals that dictate the resources. If anything, take the money from legalizing the marijuana and apply it directly to the health care bill that is going to come from the millions more smokers you are going to produce.

….just sayin’…..(puff.)

By: Andrew Isaac

Andrew Isaac — Sat, 01 May 2010 18:09:49 +0000

Is it possible that one half the cases filed by the District Attorney are marijuana prosecutions? Would Mr. Schwartz be kind enough to
provide us the statistical basis for this allegation? And is it possible that because resources are being devoted to marijuana cases the District Attorney’s ability to prosecute child molestation, rape and domestic violence is impaired? When and how did that occur? Again, perhaps Mr. Schwartz could tell us what basis he has for this assertion.
I would be astonished if Mr. Schwartz could point to one single case
of rape, child molestation, domestic violence or any other violent crime which the District Attorney’s office, or any law enforcement agency in Humboldt County, did not fully investigate and prosecute because resources were siphoned off by marijuana cases. The idea is pure rubbish.
None of which should deter anyone from voting in support of legalization which many persons who work in law enforcement support in their private capacities of citizen and voter.