<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Jeffrey Schwartz: Arcata’s Own SS Might Come Busting In Any Time – May 26, 2011</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.arcataeye.com/2011/05/jeffrey-schwartz-arcata%E2%80%99s-own-ss-might-come-busting-in-any-time-%E2%80%93%C2%A0may-26-2011/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2011/05/jeffrey-schwartz-arcata%e2%80%99s-own-ss-might-come-busting-in-any-time-%e2%80%93%c2%a0may-26-2011/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=jeffrey-schwartz-arcata%25e2%2580%2599s-own-ss-might-come-busting-in-any-time-%25e2%2580%2593%25c2%25a0may-26-2011</link>
	<description>The mildly objectionable weekly newspaper for Arcata, California</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 04:30:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: tim</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2011/05/jeffrey-schwartz-arcata%e2%80%99s-own-ss-might-come-busting-in-any-time-%e2%80%93%c2%a0may-26-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-39702</link>
		<dc:creator>tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2011 20:07:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=2668#comment-39702</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[last comment made was Speaking of the large bust that happened today and my gratitude that at least it was kept local and some out of state troopers didnt go running home with all of Humboldts Money. October 21st, 2011. when is all this going to end. I was told, at Gun Point, that I was &quot;Illegally Transporting Drugs&quot; the moment I leave a Medicinal Clinic with Medication. I was told that at gun point. If this is the case, what is keeping the law makers from telling people about the laws being made? I was under the impression that if a store, any store, that has a business liscense and gives me a reciept showing that the taxes were paid for the item i am buying, then how can any Human with a tenth of a brain say that i am doing anything illegal.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>last comment made was Speaking of the large bust that happened today and my gratitude that at least it was kept local and some out of state troopers didnt go running home with all of Humboldts Money. October 21st, 2011. when is all this going to end. I was told, at Gun Point, that I was &#8220;Illegally Transporting Drugs&#8221; the moment I leave a Medicinal Clinic with Medication. I was told that at gun point. If this is the case, what is keeping the law makers from telling people about the laws being made? I was under the impression that if a store, any store, that has a business liscense and gives me a reciept showing that the taxes were paid for the item i am buying, then how can any Human with a tenth of a brain say that i am doing anything illegal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tim</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2011/05/jeffrey-schwartz-arcata%e2%80%99s-own-ss-might-come-busting-in-any-time-%e2%80%93%c2%a0may-26-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-39701</link>
		<dc:creator>tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2011 19:56:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=2668#comment-39701</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tuesday Oct. 11th Dale Gieringer with Cal. NORML sent out a warning to Humboldt County about Nevada Co. I quote;&quot;Cal NORML has recieved a report from the Civil Liberties Monitoring Project (CLMP)that Nevada Co. Agents are running a MMJ Sting Operation. Basically, Nevada Co.Agents, pose as a &quot;Legal Collective&quot;  and try to buy MJ from Growers; then they Arrest the grower. the Nevada Co. Agents Came all the way to Humboldt Co. just to bust one of CLMP&#039;s members. BEWARE of unsolicited requests for Medicine from NEVADA CO.-Dale G.,Cal NORML-
Im not Judging, im just saying...when an arresting official comes to Humboldt from out of State, all properties siezed, (CASH), goes back to the Arresters state(NEVADA). If a state has no 215 laws, then they have to come to our state to Legally Steal(bust) the Growers. If all you have is weed then they give it to the Humboldt County Sheriff Dept. If there is $200,000 it goes to the arresting parties county of arrest, which in turn,that Money eventually recirculates back into our Community.When Nevada Co. is allowed to cross the Line and bust in Humboldt then any cash siezed goes back to the communities of Nevada Co. and the wreckage they created is left behind for the Humboldt Co. Sheriff&#039;s to clean up and Pay for. So, Humboldt Tax Payers are paying federal taxes to cover the expenses of this kind of behavior. Its odd to say,but at least this big bust was carried out bythe &quot; Humboldt Sheriffs Dept.&quot; If Nevada Co. had done this. they would be sending that $200,000 back to Nevada state. these are our Laws and this is our State. I truly hope that our State, County, and Cities stand up against this, harmful activity and stop outlining states from being able to Steal Money from the Cities, and Counties of the State of California.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tuesday Oct. 11th Dale Gieringer with Cal. NORML sent out a warning to Humboldt County about Nevada Co. I quote;&#8221;Cal NORML has recieved a report from the Civil Liberties Monitoring Project (CLMP)that Nevada Co. Agents are running a MMJ Sting Operation. Basically, Nevada Co.Agents, pose as a &#8220;Legal Collective&#8221;  and try to buy MJ from Growers; then they Arrest the grower. the Nevada Co. Agents Came all the way to Humboldt Co. just to bust one of CLMP&#8217;s members. BEWARE of unsolicited requests for Medicine from NEVADA CO.-Dale G.,Cal NORML-<br />
Im not Judging, im just saying&#8230;when an arresting official comes to Humboldt from out of State, all properties siezed, (CASH), goes back to the Arresters state(NEVADA). If a state has no 215 laws, then they have to come to our state to Legally Steal(bust) the Growers. If all you have is weed then they give it to the Humboldt County Sheriff Dept. If there is $200,000 it goes to the arresting parties county of arrest, which in turn,that Money eventually recirculates back into our Community.When Nevada Co. is allowed to cross the Line and bust in Humboldt then any cash siezed goes back to the communities of Nevada Co. and the wreckage they created is left behind for the Humboldt Co. Sheriff&#8217;s to clean up and Pay for. So, Humboldt Tax Payers are paying federal taxes to cover the expenses of this kind of behavior. Its odd to say,but at least this big bust was carried out bythe &#8221; Humboldt Sheriffs Dept.&#8221; If Nevada Co. had done this. they would be sending that $200,000 back to Nevada state. these are our Laws and this is our State. I truly hope that our State, County, and Cities stand up against this, harmful activity and stop outlining states from being able to Steal Money from the Cities, and Counties of the State of California.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Oman</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2011/05/jeffrey-schwartz-arcata%e2%80%99s-own-ss-might-come-busting-in-any-time-%e2%80%93%c2%a0may-26-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-35921</link>
		<dc:creator>Oman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2011 17:20:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=2668#comment-35921</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You don&#039;t need research to figure out that busting into houses with guns drawn, just to find out weather a grow is legal or not is WAY OFF and soviet style if not Nazi style. Why not just knock on the door with a badge and search warrant and ask the people to come out side? Why do they have to bust in and put people at gun point? Oh yeah, what&#039;s with using the name SS for the unit. Does anyone know what the guys in Nazi Germany were called that did similar stuff? SS (secret service), oh big whoop they changed one word. Just like &quot;Homeland&quot; Security reeks of Nazi propaganda influence. I thought Arcata had a spine but it looks like we&#039;re not as protected from this slip toward fascism as I had hoped. And of course, if you try to sue them they are probably above the law. Which is absolutely anti American/Constitution any way you slice it. How&#039;s that for Blah Blah Blah. All these games with semantics and acting as if this behavior is justified is ridiculous.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You don&#8217;t need research to figure out that busting into houses with guns drawn, just to find out weather a grow is legal or not is WAY OFF and soviet style if not Nazi style. Why not just knock on the door with a badge and search warrant and ask the people to come out side? Why do they have to bust in and put people at gun point? Oh yeah, what&#8217;s with using the name SS for the unit. Does anyone know what the guys in Nazi Germany were called that did similar stuff? SS (secret service), oh big whoop they changed one word. Just like &#8220;Homeland&#8221; Security reeks of Nazi propaganda influence. I thought Arcata had a spine but it looks like we&#8217;re not as protected from this slip toward fascism as I had hoped. And of course, if you try to sue them they are probably above the law. Which is absolutely anti American/Constitution any way you slice it. How&#8217;s that for Blah Blah Blah. All these games with semantics and acting as if this behavior is justified is ridiculous.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Waldo</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2011/05/jeffrey-schwartz-arcata%e2%80%99s-own-ss-might-come-busting-in-any-time-%e2%80%93%c2%a0may-26-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-31991</link>
		<dc:creator>Waldo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jun 2011 02:22:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=2668#comment-31991</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With so many of our elected folks and community &quot;leaders&quot; financially tied to large growers moving into the County, it is only to be expected that a trivial thing like individual rights will take an inferior place to limiting competition.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With so many of our elected folks and community &#8220;leaders&#8221; financially tied to large growers moving into the County, it is only to be expected that a trivial thing like individual rights will take an inferior place to limiting competition.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Sailors</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2011/05/jeffrey-schwartz-arcata%e2%80%99s-own-ss-might-come-busting-in-any-time-%e2%80%93%c2%a0may-26-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-31714</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Sailors</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 14:21:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=2668#comment-31714</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for the spell check...baby woke up early and I am out of coffee.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the spell check&#8230;baby woke up early and I am out of coffee.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Sailors</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2011/05/jeffrey-schwartz-arcata%e2%80%99s-own-ss-might-come-busting-in-any-time-%e2%80%93%c2%a0may-26-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-31713</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Sailors</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 14:20:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=2668#comment-31713</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As to probable cause as it relates to medical cannabis the California Supreme Court says: Article I, section 13 of the California Constitution guarantees individuals the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, free from unreasonable searches and seizures. As the Supreme Court has noted, in the context of medical marijuana: “To be sure, law enforcement officers must have probable cause before they lawfully may arrest a person for any crime. [Citations.] Probable cause depends on all of the surrounding facts [citation], including those that reveal a person‟s status as a qualified patient or primary caregiver under [the Act].”  (People v. Mower (2002) 28 Cal.4th 457, 468-469 (Mower).)

&quot;An officer must possess “„“facts as would lead a man of ordinary caution or prudence to believe, and conscientiously entertain a strong suspicion of the guilt of the accused.”‟ [Citation.]” (Mower, supra, 28 Cal.4th at p. 473.) Any consideration of probable cause must include the officer‟s consideration of the individual‟s status as a qualified medical marijuana patient. (Id. at pp. 468-469.)&quot;

&quot;Instead, we see an opportunity for an individual to request the same constitutional guarantee of due process available to all individuals, no matter what their status, under the state Constitution. The fact that this case involves medical marijuana and a qualified medical marijuana patient does not change these fundamental constitutional rights or an individual‟s right to assert them.&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As to probable cause as it relates to medical cannabis the California Supreme Court says: Article I, section 13 of the California Constitution guarantees individuals the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, free from unreasonable searches and seizures. As the Supreme Court has noted, in the context of medical marijuana: “To be sure, law enforcement officers must have probable cause before they lawfully may arrest a person for any crime. [Citations.] Probable cause depends on all of the surrounding facts [citation], including those that reveal a person‟s status as a qualified patient or primary caregiver under [the Act].”  (People v. Mower (2002) 28 Cal.4th 457, 468-469 (Mower).)</p>
<p>&#8220;An officer must possess “„“facts as would lead a man of ordinary caution or prudence to believe, and conscientiously entertain a strong suspicion of the guilt of the accused.”‟ [Citation.]” (Mower, supra, 28 Cal.4th at p. 473.) Any consideration of probable cause must include the officer‟s consideration of the individual‟s status as a qualified medical marijuana patient. (Id. at pp. 468-469.)&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;Instead, we see an opportunity for an individual to request the same constitutional guarantee of due process available to all individuals, no matter what their status, under the state Constitution. The fact that this case involves medical marijuana and a qualified medical marijuana patient does not change these fundamental constitutional rights or an individual‟s right to assert them.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kevpod</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2011/05/jeffrey-schwartz-arcata%e2%80%99s-own-ss-might-come-busting-in-any-time-%e2%80%93%c2%a0may-26-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-31712</link>
		<dc:creator>kevpod</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 14:19:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=2668#comment-31712</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Loose ≠ lose.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Loose ≠ lose.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Sailors</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2011/05/jeffrey-schwartz-arcata%e2%80%99s-own-ss-might-come-busting-in-any-time-%e2%80%93%c2%a0may-26-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-31711</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Sailors</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 14:08:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=2668#comment-31711</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Also, since when do you loose the rest of your constitutionally protected rights because you are a patient? Butte county V Butte County superior court( http://americansforsafeaccess.org/downloads/Butte_Appellate_Decision.pdf ) ruled you do not loose your other constitutional rights because you are a medical cannabis patient, so why would it matter if the patients that are raided have legal guns?

This issue is going to find its way to the California Supreme Court soon, where I would bet they rule just like the Oregon Supreme Court ruled recently.

http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/05/oregon_court_rules_medical_marijuana_patients_can.php]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also, since when do you loose the rest of your constitutionally protected rights because you are a patient? Butte county V Butte County superior court( <a href="http://americansforsafeaccess.org/downloads/Butte_Appellate_Decision.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://americansforsafeaccess.org/downloads/Butte_Appellate_Decision.pdf</a> ) ruled you do not loose your other constitutional rights because you are a medical cannabis patient, so why would it matter if the patients that are raided have legal guns?</p>
<p>This issue is going to find its way to the California Supreme Court soon, where I would bet they rule just like the Oregon Supreme Court ruled recently.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/05/oregon_court_rules_medical_marijuana_patients_can.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/05/oregon_court_rules_medical_marijuana_patients_can.php</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeffrey Schwartz</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2011/05/jeffrey-schwartz-arcata%e2%80%99s-own-ss-might-come-busting-in-any-time-%e2%80%93%c2%a0may-26-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-31691</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Schwartz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 01:07:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=2668#comment-31691</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[RangerX.  My piece is about the interpretation of the law in general that police officers believe allow them to crash through doors to find out whether something is unlawful or not. The point I was trying to make is a legal issue not a factual issue.  

APD and every other task force group around the state are going into homes many times, but not all of the time, not knowing one way or the other whether a grow is legal or illegal. Often times there are special facts that lead law enforcement to believe a grow is unlawful. In those circumstances they should go in with a search warrant. 

But there are a huge number of the search warrants based on spinning meters, sounds of fans, and smell. Those three elements suggest that there is a marijuana grow happening but it does not say whether the grow is a lawful medical grow or an illegal grow. In this scenario the police don&#039;t know the legality of the grow until they get inside. Basic constitutional law prohibits this kind of conduct from agents of the state.         

California created a right to grow and possess marijuana for medical purposes. Once a right is created, I opine, the state cannot put strings on it by saying one gives up his or her rights to privacy. The law enforcement community opines just the opposite. 

There is a judge in one of the counties south of here who asks the police officer if he or she knows one way or the other if the grow is unlawful or lawful. If the police officer says, &quot;I don&#039;t know...&quot; the judge does not sign the warrant. 

Can the DA and the courts get away without asking the question, &quot;do you have any facts that suggest it is an unlawful grow?&quot; So far they can, but does that make it right? It should not be what we can get away with; it should be what is the right thing to do. 

Do you want law enforcement crashing into your house in the early morning to make sure your gun is legal?  And then it is magazines and books...and so on and so on.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RangerX.  My piece is about the interpretation of the law in general that police officers believe allow them to crash through doors to find out whether something is unlawful or not. The point I was trying to make is a legal issue not a factual issue.  </p>
<p>APD and every other task force group around the state are going into homes many times, but not all of the time, not knowing one way or the other whether a grow is legal or illegal. Often times there are special facts that lead law enforcement to believe a grow is unlawful. In those circumstances they should go in with a search warrant. </p>
<p>But there are a huge number of the search warrants based on spinning meters, sounds of fans, and smell. Those three elements suggest that there is a marijuana grow happening but it does not say whether the grow is a lawful medical grow or an illegal grow. In this scenario the police don&#8217;t know the legality of the grow until they get inside. Basic constitutional law prohibits this kind of conduct from agents of the state.         </p>
<p>California created a right to grow and possess marijuana for medical purposes. Once a right is created, I opine, the state cannot put strings on it by saying one gives up his or her rights to privacy. The law enforcement community opines just the opposite. </p>
<p>There is a judge in one of the counties south of here who asks the police officer if he or she knows one way or the other if the grow is unlawful or lawful. If the police officer says, &#8220;I don&#8217;t know&#8230;&#8221; the judge does not sign the warrant. </p>
<p>Can the DA and the courts get away without asking the question, &#8220;do you have any facts that suggest it is an unlawful grow?&#8221; So far they can, but does that make it right? It should not be what we can get away with; it should be what is the right thing to do. </p>
<p>Do you want law enforcement crashing into your house in the early morning to make sure your gun is legal?  And then it is magazines and books&#8230;and so on and so on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Sailors</title>
		<link>http://www.arcataeye.com/2011/05/jeffrey-schwartz-arcata%e2%80%99s-own-ss-might-come-busting-in-any-time-%e2%80%93%c2%a0may-26-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-31509</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Sailors</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 May 2011 23:08:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arcataeye.com/?p=2668#comment-31509</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Unless they were making has oil, it was legal.

AG&#039;s Opinion 03-411 regarding Medical Marijuana definition to include hashish and preparations. Note: Bear in mind the Bergen decision above that determined making hash oil using flammable agents (butane, ether, etc.) is not legal, even if intended for medical purposes. It is the extraction process itself that is illegal. 

TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
State of California
BILL LOCKYER
Attorney General
OPINION
of
BILL LOCKYER
Attorney General
GREGORY L. GONOT
Deputy Attorney General
:::::::::::
No. 03-411
October 21, 2003
THE HONORABLE ANTHONY J. CRAVER, SHERIFF-CORONER,
COUNTY OF MENDOCINO, has requested an opinion on the following question:
Is concentrated cannabis or hashish included within the meaning of
“marijuana” as that term is used in the Compassionate Use Act of 1996?
CONCLUSION
Concentrated cannabis or hashish is included within the meaning of
“marijuana” as that term is used in the Compassionate Use Act of 1996.

So &quot;bubble bags&quot; and &quot;bubble hash&quot; are legal for patients.

http://www.chrisconrad.com/expert.witness/Bergen08CalAppB203793hashOil.pdf


People that cook with cannabis cook by weight not volume.

What are &quot;packaging&quot; materials? Sandwich bags? Cooking bags? Trash bags? Who doesn&#039;t have a sandwich bag in there house?

to my Butte County patients:
Posted on May 16, 2011 by admin
Notice to my Butte County patients:
When the Sheriff’s destroy your property TAKE PICTURES.
DO NOT cop a plea. Then bring civil suit for the value of the destroyed property.
Use the past testimonies as to the value of the property destroyed.”]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unless they were making has oil, it was legal.</p>
<p>AG&#8217;s Opinion 03-411 regarding Medical Marijuana definition to include hashish and preparations. Note: Bear in mind the Bergen decision above that determined making hash oil using flammable agents (butane, ether, etc.) is not legal, even if intended for medical purposes. It is the extraction process itself that is illegal. </p>
<p>TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS<br />
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL<br />
State of California<br />
BILL LOCKYER<br />
Attorney General<br />
OPINION<br />
of<br />
BILL LOCKYER<br />
Attorney General<br />
GREGORY L. GONOT<br />
Deputy Attorney General<br />
:::::::::::<br />
No. 03-411<br />
October 21, 2003<br />
THE HONORABLE ANTHONY J. CRAVER, SHERIFF-CORONER,<br />
COUNTY OF MENDOCINO, has requested an opinion on the following question:<br />
Is concentrated cannabis or hashish included within the meaning of<br />
“marijuana” as that term is used in the Compassionate Use Act of 1996?<br />
CONCLUSION<br />
Concentrated cannabis or hashish is included within the meaning of<br />
“marijuana” as that term is used in the Compassionate Use Act of 1996.</p>
<p>So &#8220;bubble bags&#8221; and &#8220;bubble hash&#8221; are legal for patients.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.chrisconrad.com/expert.witness/Bergen08CalAppB203793hashOil.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.chrisconrad.com/expert.witness/Bergen08CalAppB203793hashOil.pdf</a></p>
<p>People that cook with cannabis cook by weight not volume.</p>
<p>What are &#8220;packaging&#8221; materials? Sandwich bags? Cooking bags? Trash bags? Who doesn&#8217;t have a sandwich bag in there house?</p>
<p>to my Butte County patients:<br />
Posted on May 16, 2011 by admin<br />
Notice to my Butte County patients:<br />
When the Sheriff’s destroy your property TAKE PICTURES.<br />
DO NOT cop a plea. Then bring civil suit for the value of the destroyed property.<br />
Use the past testimonies as to the value of the property destroyed.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
