Marijuana Manifest

Recently I created a site called Marijuana Manifest. The site has tons of information specifically on how to defeat your marijuana possession charge. The following is an excerpt from the front page:

Learn how to DEFEAT your marijuana possession charge at Marijuana Manifest! We have uncovered a little-known, remarkable legal/scientific study by no fewer than 14 scientists, two attorneys, and a U.S. Customs official which unequivocally demonstrated that the Duquenois-Levine color chemical test alone or in combination with a microscopic exam does not prove the presence of marijuana in a seized substance.

When one is arrested for marijuana charges, regardless of the circumstances or what the person believes he/she possesses, the prosecution has to subsequently scientifically prove the presence of marijuana in any seized substance. The most commonly used test is the Duquenois-Levine. But as the study showed, the Duquenois-Levine test does not prove the presence of marijuana. Theoretically then, if the defense attorney working with an expert, challenges the “proof,” the case should be dismissed.

This is exactly what happened with the lead scientist of the study, Marc Kurzman, who is also was marijuana defense attorney. Working with an expert, he challenged use of the Duquenois-Levine test and was able to obtain many dismissals and acquittals. As he reported: “A particularly notable trial recently was held in North Dakota which included this ‘best scientific evidence principle’ – specifically for the testing of presumed Cannabis. The Honorable Ralph B. Maxwell. Presiding Judge of the 1st Jud. Dist. of North Dakota, gave a judgment of acquittal in the marijuana sale case of North Dakota v. Ethyell. Within hours after the conclusion of that trial, three marijuana sale cases, one LSD sale case, and one heroin sale case (scheduled on the court calendar immediately after the Ethyell trial) were dropped by the State Prosecutor’s office (in view of certain acquittals based on the Ethyell decision). . . .

“After an initial flurry of acquittals, we find many state and city prosecutors and/or chemists reluctant to participate in a case where they know they’ll be facing an attorney and a scientist who are fully aware of the inadequacies of the common forensic tests used for marijuana ‘identification.’ Accordingly, prosecutors are beginning to dismiss marijuana cases. In fact, seven such ‘day before trial dismissals’ (out of eight scheduled trials) were achieved by Dr. Kurzman in the weeks preceding completion of this paper. In those instances where the issues presented herein have been carefully prepared and argued by defense attorneys, we have noted exceptional ‘deals’ being offered by prosecutors in an attempt to forego lengthy litigation.”
We are working with two court-certified marijuana defense experts to whom you may direct questions if you or someone you know has been arrested on marijuana charges. One of our experts is a Ph.D. chemist who published a peer-reviewed article confirming the study by Kurzman et al. A one-time, free expert consultation regarding your case is also available by contacting John Kelly at kjohn39679@aol.com.

John has been involved in cases challenging the Duquenois-Levine test wherein charges were dismissed. In addition, he can provide extensive information and documents and concrete advice, in plain English, for effectively challenging all aspects of the prosecution’s case. For example, he can provide all the articles confirming that the Duquenois-Levine test does not prove the presence of marijuana as well as State, Federal, and U.S. Supreme Court decisions which agree.

What I have to present to anyone who is facing a marijuana possession charge is helpful information that is backed by a lot of research in forensic science, evidence, and actual cases that have been successful with using the strategies found here.

Marijuana Manifest 

Skunk Embarrasses Overzealous Drug Raiders

Gatineau, Quebec
Jan. 8th 2001

This is a tail raising story recently from Canada.

Oliver MacQuat recently opened his door to guns pointed at him from an overzealous 10 man drug raid task force who suspected that he had a marijuana grow operation inside his home.
He ended up terrified by the drug task force as they ransacked his home and frightened his son as well who came home to see a slew of cops all over the family property.

So after the terrifying ordeal this family went through the drug task force came up not finding anything drug related.

Come to find out, the family had a wild skunk hunkered down for the winter under their front porch.
Somehow the cops were able to determine by smelling the skunks natural odor that the people who resided there must be marijuana farmers and this warranted a drug raid on an innocent family.

You would think with the special training police officers get, that they would be able to tell the difference between the smell of an animal and a plant!

Pretty soon skunks everywhere will have to be hyper vigilant about where they decide to sleep out their winters as Federal Drug Task Forces will be rooting them out and involuntarily displacing them due to the similar odor to that evil marijuana plant.

How can a smell that is only similar to marijuana simply be probable cause to raid someones home?

MacQuat wants name cleared

Still MacQuat is asking for a formal apology from the Gatineau police and the Quebec provincial police.
Gatineau police refused to call the raid a mistake Friday, telling CBC News they had reasonable grounds (WTF???) to conduct a search.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2011/01/08/ottawa-police-raid-108.html#ixzz1Aa9llDxt

I really do not understand how the police can claim they had reasonable grounds. This is getting ridiculous people. Just this past year I have seen families woken up in the night to having guns in their faces, children being dragged out of their homes, the family pet shot for less than a quarter ounce of marijuana. To a

quadriplegic being arrested for possessing marijuana and going to jail because the marijuana helped them function better.

Luckily no one got hurt in this particular instance, other than a mans reputation as an honest citizen. The skunk was taken in for questioning then released after lab tests confirmed it was negative for marijuana.

The thing is though this is madness that has got to draw the line somewhere. The offense just does not suit the punishment and the indignity it propagates by harassing otherwise law abiding people.

Whats next? Are people going to have their vehicles searched because they ran over one of those involuntarily displaced skunks catching a nap on the road?

Why does Joe the Plumber have to fear having his door kicked in and having guns in his face for wanting to be able to have the freedom to come home after a long hard day of work fixing some shitty drainpipe and be able to relax in the privacy of his home smoking a marijuana cigarette?

And now, we have to worry about pissed off displaced skunks...

Defense strategies: Seeking Justice & Acquittal for Possession of Marijuana

• Recently on a flight I met an ex FBI Agent who happened to be quite infamous for being a government whistle blower citing negligent practices against the FBI Crime Laboratories. We ended up discussing marijuana prohibition and tactics to have evidence thrown out of court due to insufficient lab data.
  His name is Dr. Frederick Whitehurst. He currently is an Attorney at Law in North Carolina. Here is a little bio about him on Wikipedia
  Dr Frederic Whitehurst
  
  
  Dr. Whitehurst is against legalization, but he feels that to many people are being incarcerated for a victimless crime. He understands the need to rethink the punitive measures against people in these cases and has been an advocate for reforms.
  
  
  He has worked alongside author John Kelly, who wrote a small book called "False Positives Equal False Justice" It is distributed freely online in conjunction with the Marijuana Policy Project.
  
  
  Here is a link to the ebook:
  
  False Positives Equals False Justice
  
  Here is a You Tube video of John Kelly talking about how easy it is for police to get false positives field testing for controlled substances. I never knew how easy it was to get a false positive and possibly get arrested for a controlled substance.
  
  
  
  
  
  I have kept in touch with Dr. Whitehurst and he shared with me some valuable resources to help get evidence tossed out of court and summarily getting cases dismissed for marijuana possession charges.
  He has done a lot of research in the subject of laboratory analysis and how it takes more than a simple field test to determine if a substance is actually marijuana. Surprisingly lawyers and judges rarely question the integrity of lab results and many people end up with criminal records.
  
  
  It is my hope along with Dr. Whitehurst to get this information out to as many people as possible. Then hopefully they will get it out to as many as they can.
  
  
  Dr. Whitehurst has many more documents he is willing to share with me regarding this subject that I will gladly share with you folks here at Wag The Gonzo, in hopes that maybe it might help you one day if you end up on the wrong side of the law.
  
  
  Instead of settling out of court, maybe these strategies will empower you to question the validity of how they go about testing marijuana and enforcing the law. If enough people are successful they will have no choice but to re-evaluate their stance on prohibition. Especially if they start losing more and more cases due to this strategy.
  
  
  Take them to the task of proving what they have is actually marijuana. A sheriff with a field kit is not a botanist and just because it looks and smells like marijuana does not mean that it is. The burden of proof is on the prosecutor to prove it in fact actually is. If you can learn the facts behind their research and use it against them due to being unsatisfactory you got a shot at having your case dismissed.
  Just because it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, does not mean you are a duck in the court of law. There are a lot of different ducks out there! Are you a mallard? How about a Muskogee?
  
  
  If you take the time to read the Texas Tech PDF you will be amazed at the shortcomings of the research that was actually done to prove inconclusively that a substance is marijuana and no other type of "green, leafy, vegetable like substance that looks and smells like marijuana.
  
  
  The laboratory protocols used to determine the forensic analysis of marijuana is not logical or valid. So take the time to read these PDF's and find out for yourselves why. Once you see the research I guarantee it will blow your mind.
  
  
  Here is a good example of how the Texas Tech Law Review can help you.
  
  
  According to North Carolina General Statutes 8-58.20 Forensic analysis admissible as evidence
  (My home state)
  
  
  Sections B and C say:
  
  
  (B) A forensic analysis, to be admissible under this section, shall be performed in accordance with rules or procedures adopted by the State Bureau of Investigation, or by another laboratory accredited by the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors/Laboratory Accreditation Board (ASCLD/LAB) for the submission, identification, analysis, and storage of forensic analyses. The analyses of DNA samples and typing results of DNA samples shall be performed in accordance with the rules or procedures of the State Bureau of Investigation or other ASCLD/LAB‑accredited laboratory.
  
  
  (C) The analyst who analyzes the forensic sample and signs the report shall complete an affidavit on a form developed by the State Bureau of Investigation. In the affidavit, the analyst shall state (i) that the person is qualified by education, training, and experience to perform the analysis, (ii) the name and location of the laboratory where the analysis was performed, and (iii) that performing the analysis is part of that person's regular duties. The analyst shall also aver in the affidavit that the tests were performed pursuant to the ASCLD/LAB standards for that discipline and that the evidence was handled in accordance with established and accepted procedures while in the custody of the laboratory. The affidavit shall be sufficient to constitute prima facie evidence regarding the person's qualifications. The analyst shall attach the affidavit to the laboratory report and shall provide the affidavit to the investigating officer and the district attorney in the prosecutorial district in which the criminal charges are pending. An affidavit by a forensic analyst sworn to and properly executed before an official authorized to administer oaths is admissible in evidence without further authentication in any criminal proceeding with respect to the forensic analysis administered and the procedures followed.
  
  
  Now also, since North Carolina is my state of residence I learned about corruption in the State Board of Investigations stated here in this article:
  
  
  SBI veterans wrote and approved bad blood policy
  
  
  Here are a few excerpts that are relative to where I am going with this.
  
  
  

  For nearly two decades, the State Bureau of Investigation's habit of not reporting results of critical blood tests was unwritten and unofficial. Agent Duane Deaver, operating under unwritten orders, withheld test results that would have helped defendants such as Greg Taylor, who spent 17 years in prison for a murder he didn't commit.
  
  
  Then, in 1997, the SBI put the practice in writing, and it didn't change.
  The task of writing the policy fell to Mark Nelson, a 25-year veteran agent who supervised and trained the agents who analyzed blood and DNA evidence. Nelson penned the policy that now is at the center of a controversy roiling the North Carolina criminal justice system.

  
  
  

  That policy, approved by his superiors and then-SBI Director Jim Coman, embraced the practice of reporting positive results and withholding negative results, which favored the prosecution at the expense of defendants.
  
  
  An outside audit of the unit Nelson trained and supervised found 229 cases where the bureau omitted or obscured critical test results from 1987 to 2003.
  
  
  Nelson considered the primary consumer of the lab reports to be law enforcement, according to the audit. Current lab managers and analysts told the auditors they had a different view - their scientific analysis is for the criminal justice system as a whole, not just police and prosecutors.
  Nelson's view also conflicts with the landmark 2009 study on forensic sciences by the National Academies, the nation's top advisory board on science and medicine. The report said forensic scientists should operate independently of law enforcement.
  
  
  A recent News & Observer series reported that SBI lab analysts pushed past the accepted bounds of science to deliver results pleasing to prosecutors. They are out of step with the larger scientific community and have fought defense attorneys' requests for information needed to review the SBI's work.
  
  
  So basically what you have here is shoddy unethical practices in the states investigative forensic laboratories putting out supposedly validated forensics work and helping get convictions favoring law enforcement.
  It's out there that North Carolina' State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) has a record of unscrupulous practices in order to obtain convictions for many years. So basically it is not beyond a stretch of the imagination to honestly question the integrity of their forensic lab results.
  
  The law NC General Statute 8-58.20 paragraphs b and c say that before you issue a forensic report you have to follow the requirements of the American Society of Crime Lab Directors-Lab Accreditation Group.  And you have to sign an affidavit that you have done just that.  In other words you have to swear under oath that you have done that and if you lie then you have committed perjury.
  
  I wonder how many affidavits were signed off by the SBI and caused people to go to jail...
  
  
  Now take the Texas Tech Law Review, if you take the time to read it and check its references you will find that it is up to the prosecution to validate their protocol. 
  
  
  The bitch of it is though is that they actually cant! THERE ARE TOO MANY PLANTS TO CHECK OUT TO DETERMINE IF YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED MARIJUANA TO THE EXCLUSION OF ALL OTHER PLANTS! Out of the hundreds of thousands of plants out there on this planet, they have only tested 600 of them to see if they show up as positive for their field tests they use.

  Its like filling up a 5 gallon bucket with only a drop of water and claiming that they can scientifically prove the bucket is full.

  
  

  Defense attorneys need to learn how to start questioning lab results and not taking them as the gospel when they can easily be proven to be invalidated.

  
  Thanks Gary from A420nation for uploading these PDF Documents so I can share them here with the rest of you. More to come soon!
  
  
  Texas Tech Law Review.pdf
  
  Journal of Forensic Identification of Marijuana.pdf
  
  1937 Conference on Cannabis 1-14-37.pdf
  
  This is from a trial just today. In the courtroom the Defendant's Attorney questions the police officer on how he determined what he had possession of was marijuana. (Third Video Down On the Page) Had the Defendant's Attorney knew about this type of questioning against forensic analysis of the evidence to bring into questioning, it may of potentially gotten the evidence thrown out. To bad the Attorney did not read Wag The Gonzo today!  
  
  Medical Marijuana Hearing 1/08/2011  

2011 Prediction: Trans-Genic Mutations of Cannabis

It's 2011 and as my first blog post of the year I am going to make a prediction.
Sometime this year, it is going to come out that someone has genetically engineered marijuana plants with dandelions, thistles, and other prolific weeds.

That's right, you know those pesky hard to get rid of weeds people spend millions of dollars every year trying to get rid of out of their yards. Well imagine those pesky weeds transgenic-ally mutated with marijuana and growing everyone in epidemic proportions.

Can you imagine how hard it would be for the government to enforce regulation on a common weed?
It would be impossible, and the strains could just as easily be modified for medicinal purposes depending on what types of plants are genetically engineered.

Right now the technology of genetically engineered plants already exists, and it is just a matter of time as to when someone will do this with marijuana.
Take this video for example, explaining how an Easter Lily was crossed with an Asiatic plant.

 Of course there are a slew of regulations already in place to prevent an epidemic of Frankenstein plants running loose, such as Biotechnology, and Regulatory Services (BRS)
So if you are doing this kind of research I would suggest a higher level in discretion with who you told, but if it succeeds, do manage to get the word out.


So take the time to pass this to your friends! I want a million people to see this! Maybe someone who has the technology and insight will be inspired to make this a reality! Imagine how fun it would be blowing the dandelion puffballs into the wind and giving the world a new strain of medicine that was easily accessible!