Experts Weigh In On Medical Marijuana ‘Hotel Certifications’

[GregS]

Here we go. Stalin is alive and in the building. What a joke.

Edited November 7, 2013 by GregS

[GregS]

You might as well delete the whole thing.

[GregS]

No. The venue of the exam is not a determinant in establishing the bona fide relationship.

 

Okaay?

 

Hey zap. You really ought to change the posting rules. They don't even square with what goes on here.

[Dr. Bob]

Yes it is a determinant and is frequently used in court.  Those of us that actually go to court can confirm this.  End of discussion.

 

The matter at hand is:

 

a/  Given the venue can damage a claim of a bona fide relationship in the setting of a section 8 hearing, can that damage be overcome, and if not is it a fatal weakness?

b/  What kinds of policies should certification practices adopt (and patients look for) to overcome the setting?

 

My answers are that yes it can cast a shadow on the bona fide relationship if it occurs outside the traditional setting, but the more important factor, confirmed by careful reading of the attorney responses, is that the setting tends to go with a 'low standard' certification doctor.  A high standard certification doctor doing a housecall on a bedridden patient beats a low standard doctor in an office hands down, if the court allows the procedures and policies of the high standard doctor to be admitted to evidence.

 

I am curious as to how the attorneys would respond to the question 'which is more important, the location or the doctor's standards?'  I feel that is the more telling question, what do you think Jamie?

 

Dr. Bob

[GregS]

All I ask, Townsend, is that you verify your remark that venue is a determinant without being vague. Transcriptions or press reports would be welcome.

 

Is that too much to ask?

Edited November 7, 2013 by GregS

[GregS]

There has been successful defense of Sec 4 in court.  As BobR tries to say, no Sec 4 defense ever before a jury, but definitely in front of  a judge.  Bench trial with Sec 4 defense; no jury trials with Sec 4 defense.

 

 I believe there tends to be confusion on that sometimes.

 

 Trying to figure out a way to skirt the edges of the law is never recommended and no Attorney I know of has ever supported these silly documents GregS has created.  As a matter of fact, they have said it is a waste of time.  *shrug*

Sorry guys. Gotta refute this cheap shot.

 

Please explain how those documents fall short Mal. No attorneys have responded that they do or do not support them. I'm inviting them again, here and now, to comment or for you to provide factual commentary. Short of that your remarks are worthless.

Edited November 7, 2013 by GregS

[Dr. Bob]

All I ask, Townsend, is that you verify your remark that venue is a determinant without being vague. Transcriptions or press reports would be welcome.

 

Is that too much to ask?

www.google.com

 

I'm not here to be your research assistant.  It is my business to know these things, and it comes from years of paying attention and PARTICIPATING in the process (medical, political, and legal).  Believe me if you want, don't believe me if you want, I really don't care.  But I've justified my position, as have other experts in the field, enough to satisfy anyone paying attention without an agenda of their own, and I don't feel the need to continue to do so with you.

 

We are back on topic and staying there.  Go start your own thread if you must, but you are interfering with the discussion.  The potential for the harm you are doing with you 'forms' has been repeatedly pointed out to you.  I would hope the board will not tolerate it much longer, I would hate to see even one patient hurt because of it.

 

Dr. Bob

[GregS]

www.google.com

 

I'm not here to be your research assistant.  It is my business to know these things, and it comes from years of paying attention and PARTICIPATING in the process (medical, political, and legal).  Believe me if you want, don't believe me if you want, I really don't care.  But I've justified my position, as have other experts in the field, enough to satisfy anyone paying attention without an agenda of their own, and I don't feel the need to continue to do so with you.

 

We are back on topic and staying there.  Go start your own thread if you must, but you are interfering with the discussion.  The potential for the harm you are doing with you 'forms' has been repeatedly pointed out to you.  I would hope the board will not tolerate it much longer, I would hate to see even one patient hurt because of it.

 

Dr. Bob

Erm. The topic is exam venue. Whatnhell do your comments have to do with that?

 

The harm with the forms is to your wallet.

Edited November 7, 2013 by GregS

[Dr. Bob]

Ready to give your report about your review of the Green case in Barry Co. or the HydroWorld case in Ingham?  Specifically the reasons they didn't like the activity and the response they had to take due to unclarity in the law- then compare that to the current state of the law as clarified by the legislature and the courts.

 

You want to be viewed as an expert, prove you actually did the research to improve your understanding of the topic.  

 

Your questions have been asked and answered.  My statements have be made and vetted.  I've been there, so have the attorneys.  Now stay on topic and maybe learn something about how this works, rather than rant on about how you think it should.

 

Dr. Bob

[Dr. Bob]

Erm. The topic is exam venue. Whatnhell do your comments have to do with that?

 

The harm with the forms is to your wallet.

 

Again, you show your clear misunderstanding of the issue.  Not only do they still have to pay me to use your forms, they also have to pay me to give expert testimony.  So how does that harm my wallet?  

 

You really are clueless aren't you?

[trichcycler]

 

 

 

I like marijuana

[GregS]

Any worthwhile references B*B? Those were useless, except to rule them out.

Edited November 8, 2013 by GregS

[Dr. Bob]

I've read them and come to the conclusion that they did not find the venue dispositive in proving a crime. That is what I wanted to know. End of report.

 

I hope not to find myself in jail getting beat up. What's that like? I've never had that experience.

You have the quotes?  From the cases?  Care to show, logically, why an inability to question the cert arose in the Lansing case or P2P was ruled allowed in Barry?  What impact did the changes in law and subsequent court cases have on those rules, and how would they likely turn out today.  Publish the name of the prosecutor in the Barry case, and the the one in the Lansing case to show you actually read them.  Then discuss how that relates to the question at hand about venue and how the court would be expected to rule based.

 

Personally, I don't think you have a clue.  As for going to jail and getting beat up, what does that have to do with the question at hand?  And why would I know anything about you going to jail and getting beat up?  Are you suggesting I would go to jail if you did and beat you up?  What exactly is your point and what is the relevance to the current discussion?  Quotes, references, court cases- where are yours suggesting you would be beat up if you go to jail and for what crime would you be there?  Is it related to your form, or where you may or may not have received your cert?

 

Is it possible for you to stay on a topic?

 

Dr. Bob

Edited November 8, 2013 by Dr. Bob

[trichcycler]

ok I need to know the difference btween completing your form, or completing the same attestations that are included in the application. They cover the same points right?  why not just complete the state forms, and send them in, keep a copy?  curious is all. no irons in this fire obviously

[Dr. Bob]

Didn't think so.  

 

Back to the subject, to serious questions and discussion.

 

Dr. Bob

[Dr. Bob]

The CORRECT answer is that you put the attestations in the patient's application or change form to the state so they get a patient card with your name on it and you get section 4 protection for following the act.  The 'advantage' being promoted by ill informed posters here is that by not participating in the registry, but filling out the paperwork, you somehow get more rights and allowances than those actually following the rules- ie unlimited patients whereas those that follow the rules and register only get 5.  In the process you lose section 4 protection in favor of a very weak and difficult to prove section 8 case.  

 

The caregiver would also probably be prosecuted as they would clearly be trying to circumvent the limits of the law to increase sales, but in the short term the risk would primarily be on the patient.  For the entire process to work, the patients would be brought to court and looked at very closely to not only determine if they were qualified but if they were actively participating in a criminal conspiracy with the 'unregistered caregiver'.  

 

These are many of the reasons this entire line of reasoning is foolish and has been roundly condemned by a variety of well informed authorities on the subject.  It is a pet project of Gregs and nothing will dissuade him from continuing to try and push it on others so long as he takes no personal risk himself.  Or does he?

 

It is nonsense and has nothing to do with the venue of your certification.

[+Malamute]

There are many.

 

Take the time to search the district and circuit court records.

 

*roll eyes*

[GregS]

The CORRECT answer is that you put the attestations in the patient's application or change form to the state so they get a patient card with your name on it and you get section 4 protection for following the act.  The 'advantage' being promoted by ill informed posters here is that by not participating in the registry, but filling out the paperwork, you somehow get more rights and allowances than those actually following the rules- ie unlimited patients whereas those that follow the rules and register only get 5.  In the process you lose section 4 protection in favor of a very weak and difficult to prove section 8 case.  

 

The caregiver would also probably be prosecuted as they would clearly be trying to circumvent the limits of the law to increase sales, but in the short term the risk would primarily be on the patient.  For the entire process to work, the patients would be brought to court and looked at very closely to not only determine if they were qualified but if they were actively participating in a criminal conspiracy with the 'unregistered caregiver'.  

 

These are many of the reasons this entire line of reasoning is foolish and has been roundly condemned by a variety of well informed authorities on the subject.  It is a pet project of Gregs and nothing will dissuade him from continuing to try and push it on others so long as he takes no personal risk himself.  Or does he?

 

It is nonsense and has nothing to do with the venue of your certification.

That answers none of my questions. Please try again.

[+Malamute]

Largely because a section 8 defense does not rely on registration. In many cases the AD has been the only remedy at law for folks who were otherwise compliant. Once in court, say a search was made on your property despite your being registered, things can go wrong in a hurry. The pigs are famous for kicking azz first and asking questions later. Or so I've heard.

 

 

 

Tee hee.

 

 

 It's nonsense. Just fill out the state form. Why do we ever need a generally inadmissible piece of evidence?

 

It's like you are making it twice as difficult and adding risk for no reason whatsoever other than to assuage your need for circular arguments and obsessive fascinations.

[+Malamute]

Gregs,...

 

 we have like a zillion more experience in the court rooms on this issue,... we KNOW what happens. You on the other hand are making hypothetical assumptions and fishing for an angle.

 

 YOU take the time to research the court cases across Michigan and prove us wrong. Thank you.

[GregS]

 It's nonsense. Just fill out the state form. Why do we ever need a generally inadmissible piece of evidence?

 

It's like you are making it twice as difficult and adding risk for no reason whatsoever other than to assuage your need for circular arguments and obsessive fascinations.

Not bad Mal. Great vitriol.

 

But you are off topic, dammit.

[GregS]

Gregs,...

 

 we have like a zillion more experience in the court rooms on this issue,... we KNOW what happens. You on the other hand are making hypothetical assumptions and fishing for an angle.

 

 YOU take the time to research the court cases across Michigan and prove us wrong. Thank you.

So court transcripts should be easy enough to produce. Will you please? Links to opinions or other proceedings would be ducky.

Edited November 8, 2013 by GregS

[Dr. Bob]

I put up two definitive cases and he can't even be bothered to review them.  Seriously Mal, you ask too much.  Just an angle on p2p.  That is the final goal and it won't work.

 

Dr. Bob

Edited November 8, 2013 by Dr. Bob

[GregS]

I put up two definitive cases and he can't even be bothered to review them.  Seriously Mal, you ask too much.  Just an angle on p2p.  That is the final goal and it won't work.

 

Dr. Bob

I told you the cases did not involve conclusive arguments regarding the venue, except to conclude that it is not a dispositive issue. We're done with them. They do not support certifications held only in specific venues. Got anything else?

 

Wanna try answering my questions?

Edited November 8, 2013 by GregS

[+Malamute]

Greg, mostpeople do not want to be made public spectacles for our entertainment. The one ever common thread amongst victims of the court is that they do not want their names spread all over the state.  So, unless it is ok with the defendant, I tend not to ever promote or reveal names.  This is also why I am privy to information most are not. Discretion.  I can tell you stories of people receiving cash compensation for stolen medicine by the courts, police officers delivering cannabis, hashish and other items to peoples homes and so many other fun stories,.... BUT, the people do not want it known.

 

 Let me tell you, MANY Sec. 8 defenses have collapsed around physicians.  They are there. You go find them.  District and circuit across the state.

 

 Enjoy.