Court Must Explain Camera Ban In Medical Pot Case

[rafaeltoral]

Court must explain camera ban in medical pot case

 

 

April 29, 2011, 4 a.m. EDT

Associated Press

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (AP) — The Michigan appeals court has some explaining to do.

 

The state Supreme Court wants to know why a three-judge panel in Grand Rapids won't allow a video camera at May 10 arguments in a medical-marijuana case.

 

The court wants an explanation by Monday. So far, the appeals court's only reason to reject the camera was for the "fair administration of justice." That's not good enough.

 

Eric VanDussen (Van-DOO'-zin) of Traverse City asked the state's highest court to intervene. Michigan judges have discretion to restrict cameras, especially at trials where there may be sensitive testimony or other issues. But the appeals court has no jury, no witnesses and few spectators.

 

The judges who rejected the camera are Joel Hoekstra, Christopher Murray and Michael Kelly.

[Kingdiamond]

Its a statewide conspiracy i think hatched at that convention earlier this year for the sitting judges in Michigan otherwise how can so many former lawyers have such a blatant disregard for whats right and wrong and legal or not not allowing the medical defense in court is outrageous judges refusing to even look at cards claiming they look "fake".

 

All i know is something bigger than we are privy to is going on behind the scenes a conspiracy like no other.

[+Silverblue]

Please keep us updated on this.

 

Sb

[Chauncy Gardner]

Its a statewide conspiracy i think hatched at that convention earlier this year for the sitting judges in Michigan otherwise how can so many former lawyers have such a blatant disregard for whats right and wrong and legal or not not allowing the medical defense in court is outrageous judges refusing to even look at cards claiming they look "fake".

 

All i know is something bigger than we are privy to is going on behind the scenes a conspiracy like no other.

 

 

 

I'm with you on this one. There has to be some reason - some reason so big that it is devastating - for the powers that be to be so dead set against loosening up of marijuana laws. But then again, other states are loosening their laws. What is Michigan's problem? Do we have an inordinate amount of religious conservatives? I think that is the case in many states who are way behind even Michigan in the marijuana area (Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, you get the picture). It seems like the East Coast and the West Coast are the progressives in this area. I don't think it is a coincidence that all of the states who are progressive are also "blue" states. There is a pattern here. Republicans wouldn't use this issue as a "wedge issue" for political reasons, would they? I mean, they are against gays, blacks, poor people, and anti-religion folks for a reason other than political, right?

[legacy]

double post - sorry