Jump to content

Section 8 - The Good,bad And Ugly


Recommended Posts

Thanks, I've watched that a few times, it's horrible that they put you two an so many others threw so many hoops... I wish the PA would have to pay out of their pocket, instead of the tax payers.. Or even ask the tax payers if they would like to continue to prosecute a couple medical patients with a approximate amount that they will pay in the long run. Keep your heads up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a mess Zap, he did a few things wrong, but what I have understood there is his lawyer( if he even had one) didn't make a good defense at all what so ever, 2) it tells me that any caregiver will need to know the medical history of their patients, keep a documented log, very detailed one of what he/she gives to his patients, w/o compensation (or it would be a "sale") 3) the court would only consider patients with debilitating illnesses only, spasms, chronic pain, migraines ect.. In other words if was ONLY a CG then his patients would have to be dying in a short time, very short life expectancy for a better defense...

 

Greenthumb, you don't need to, those that are victims do, you will read this stuff later when you fall victim, hope you don't but most people do. We use to read "organic grow" "what strains work best for certain illnesses".. Then we fall victim. So carry on, thanks 8-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a mess Zap, he did a few things wrong, but what I have understood there is his lawyer( if he even had one) didn't make a good defense at all what so ever, 2) it tells me that any caregiver will need to know the medical history of their patients, keep a documented log, very detailed one of what he/she gives to his patients, w/o compensation (or it would be a "sale") 3) the court would only consider patients with debilitating illnesses only, spasms, chronic pain, migraines ect.. In other words if was ONLY a CG then his patients would have to be dying in a short time, very short life expectancy for a better defense...

 

Greenthumb, you don't need to, those that are victims do, you will read this stuff later when you fall victim, hope you don't but most people do. We use to read "organic grow" "what strains work best for certain illnesses".. Then we fall victim. So carry on, thanks 8-)

i can agree most people have no idea of so many court case's that our going on the only time we here from them is after they fall victim and most have not even been to anyones court date

 

i do my best in telling as many as i can your best defense is don't end up in court but if you do have $$$ and a great Lawyer and some luck 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not like we have not addressed the issue. Conversation has been heated, with some here insisting that there is no protection, for instance, under section 8 for a caregiver or patient who is not registered, but for which there exists a bona fide physician statement that attests to the law's requirements for a bona fide doctor/patient relationship. That position has been clearly shown to be wrong.

 

Most of us, to include me, recommend adherence to sec. 4 to maintain the best protection the law affords. That has its obvious shortcomings. There are cases wherein people who were absolutely compliant in that they were duly registered, remained within possession limits, and otherwise had their ducks in a row have been prosecuted. At that point sec. 4 protections are just about useless and the Affirmative Defense under sec. 8 has become the only way to avoid prison.

 

There has been documentation devised that is intended as a prophylactic measure that intends to clearly lay out a patient, caregiver, and physicians' good faith and covers two of the three required elements of the AD: that a physician has stated need, and a caregiver has agreed to help. What remains is to prove that quantities in question are necessary to provide an uninterrupted supply. The physician statement attests to the veracity of the medical opinion. All documents are required to be notarized and they supplement the protection of sec. 4 with sec. 8 compliance, just as the law intends. There are concerns regarding admissibility. Judges with bad attitudes and reactionary prosecutors who do not like any kind of cannabis use can be counted on to work to keep them out of evidence. There are, however, statutory rules of evidence that clearly permit them that can be ignored by rogue judges, and sometimes are, resulting often in a plea or an appeal.

 

There are regular posters here who are for some reason livid that these sec. 8 protections are available. Perhaps they can be counted on to comment. If they do, you will see that they do not argue facts, but use insults, lies, and fallacies, somehow expecting those to carry their arguments. The discussion that remains is here. It has been truncated and many pertinent posts censored to hide ridiculous arguments on the part of those who follow the company line. You can expect that to continue if you seek the truth of the matter: http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/topic/44846-gregs-wants-to-argue-section-8/

 

Here are the documents:

 

This should be the final draft of a workable document to present as a preponderance of evidence in defending oneself under the Affirmative Defense along with any pertinent supporting documents. Please note the inclusion of a confidentiality clause and do not overlook the supporting documents. It is not intended as legal advice, and should be considered by an attorney at law before use. This and the supporting documents may be used in any circumstance where protection under the law is wanted by a patient or caregiver, registered or unregistered.



Patient/Caregiver Agreement to Engage in the Medical Use of marijuana

I,______________________________________, swear and affirm that I am a patient under the Michigan Medical marijuana Act, Initiated Law 1 of 2008.

__Dr._____________________________, a physician authorized under Part 170 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.17001 to 333.17084, or an osteopathic physician under Part 175 of the public health code, 1978 PA 368, MCL 333.17501 to 333.17556, physician license I.D. number____________________ ,has stated that in the physician's professional opinion, on or about (date)___________________________, and after having completed a full assessment of the patient's medical history and current medical condition made in the course of a bona fide physician-patient relationship, that I am likely to receive therapeutic or palliative benefit from the medical use of marihuana to treat or alleviate the debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition (copy attached) .

Or:

__A registry card duly issued by the State of Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) , number______________________(copy attached), has been issued to me which attests to a physician's recommendation that in the physician's professional opinion, and after having completed a full assessment of my medical history and current medical condition made in the course of a bona fide physician-patient relationship, I am likely to receive therapeutic or palliative benefit from the medical use of marihuana to treat or alleviate the debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the debilitating medical condition.

I hereby designate_______________________________ as my caregiver under that law, and agree to conform to the Act in the medical use of marijuana.

I, ______________________________________, swear and affirm that I am at least 21 years of age and have agreed to assist with the above named patient's medical use of marijuana. I have not been convicted of any felony within the past 10 years and have never been convicted of a felony involving illegal drugs or a felony that is an assaultive crime as defined in section 9a of chapter X of the code of criminal procedure, 1927 PA 175, MCL 770.9a.


Confidentiality: Each party agrees and undertakes that it shall not, without first obtaining the written consent of the other, disclose or make available to any person, reproduce or transmit in any manner or use (directly or indirectly) for its own benefit or the benefit of others, any Confidential Information, save and except that both parties may disclose any Confidential Information to their legal advisers and counselors for the specific purposes contemplated by this agreement. Presentment or disclosure of this information is not prohibited as required by law or in any prosecution pertaining to the medical use of marijuana.

For the purpose of this Agreement, Legal advisers and counselors shall mean, with respect to any party, any person licensed to practice at law, or any paralegal, legal assistant, or other person directly supervised by an attorney at law who is ultimately responsible for any and all work product.

Subscribed and sworn before me this date: ____________________________


Patient sign here: _________________________________

Subscribed and sworn before me this date: ____________________________

Caregiver sign here: ________________________________

/s/_________________________________

Print Notary Name: ________________________________

Notary public, State of Michigan, County of _____________________

My commission expires ___________________

Acting in the County of ___________________

Supporting documents are here: https://sites.google...attredirects=0, and here
https://sites.google...?attredirects=0

 

Gratis to Greg Schmid, Esq.

Edited by GregS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This case goes to show that a section 8 hearing is not a form, it isn't an 'unregistered caregiver' or any of the other nonsense that has been put forth in these forums.  It is a solid medical evaluation, it is a medically based caregiver assigned to the patient through the registry, and it is a solid certification.  Every bit of documentation, after you start the process from a standpoint of section 4 and a bona fide dr/pt relationship, will help.

 

While I've not written my response to this ruling, and it is in the works, it just goes to show not only is section 4 the way to go, you need to be careful about that as well.  Solid standards and good practices.

 

Dr. Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I believe we are safe for a dismissal, it's just the loops the sick have to go threw, it's No ones fault but our own, we still believe in MM and the card that protects us, unless you go outside of the scope of the act, then you are asking for trouble. People NEED to know their Dr. And make darn sure it's a legitimate Dr. In which ours is. When we looked for alternatives to the pain killers we found relief in MMJ, we live a healthier, more active life that no one can disagree with. I researched "how to" and "best organics" all the methods of frowning and the strains that would fit each one of our illnesses, what I want to stress to the new guys/girls on this forum is to educate and WAIT for your hard card from the state. Learn the rules of the MMMA before you spend months, even years on "how to grow medicinal canabis" like I did, we were never recreational smokers growing up, but when you get fed so many pharmaceuticals and zombie'fied that you need to step back and look at the situation and the family that your destroying, your almost a walking lab rat for the pharmaceutical company's.. Well this is where I draw the line.. And I'm not saying canabis is the cure all drug, it won't take away the seriouse pain that most have to live with, they do need a pharma drug to ease the pain, but when the courts want you darn near dead to smoke a herb that has NO bad side effects? Then they want the money, and we alllll know this and have for a very long time.. End of my rant. Everyone pull together and we will win. Stay safe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But for those who try to pull us apart and will not advocate for the law in its entirety, I would agree that we can win. To demean sec. 8 is irresponsible. The shortcomings of sec. 4 in the hands of corrupt judges and law officers are obvious.

 

For crissake Townsend. Sec. 4 failed in this instance. Your insistence that it is all we need to sit around singing kumbaya is silly and stupid. The goons need to be slapped down again.

Edited by GregS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hey Redden. You said recently that Larry King's case has been decided. I am asking again where we can find that.

i can't answer that you should ask Larry he can post it if he wants to or Matt A you know him better then me i would give him a call and ask if you can post it

don't take this post the wrong way i do think that everyone should be able to read it on here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i can't answer that you should ask Larry he can post it if he wants to or Matt A you know him better then me i would give him a call and ask if you can post it

don't take this post the wrong way i do think that everyone should be able to read it on here

Sry. It was you who stated something to the effect that his sec. 8 case had been concluded, and thought you might have something to back it up.

 

Silly me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All i know is when i did talk to Matt A about this case he told me that he was writing a brief about the judges opinion that was in the summer time at the last Expo at the river front

 

i was also told that the opinion from the judge was unpublished and thats why there is no where we can find it unless your a Lawyer i don't know how that part works

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...