Jump to content

Koon To Serve Up To 15 Years


Recommended Posts

i didnt hear about the sexual assault.

 

http://www.record-eagle.com/local/x1221242831/Koon-to-serve-up-to-15-years

 

“Your honor, I have a disease with alcohol,” said Koon, who added he’s been sober for the past six months and working with Alcohol Anonymous.

 

i thought they got him on drunk driving ? he says he was sober ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know of many alchy's calling themselves sober, because they go to coffee/cigarette meetings weekly. I know one that sees it as a great place to buy/sell wares, and find chicks, albeit drunk ones.

 

This is not the first illegal sexual encounter of a mmj patient/cg. I just saw another here a couple days ago, though not as popular as Koon. I hope he heals soon, and wish his family and victim(s) the best . 

 

How do the folks that donated Koon money for his case feel now ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Driving under the influence of drugs/alcohol has been illegal since I can remember. some cops still let drunk drivers go home without a ticket. My chiro's step son was just pulled over smoking this year, with a 1/4 ounce, two other 19 yr olds in the car, they dumped the sack on the ground, stomped his joint, searched the car, asked if they had cards, they did not, and let them go, just like the old days.

the bulk of my driving is deliveries. I do those in the morning through the afternoon, never speed,and don't use before or during. Then when I get home, I gobble ounces.

Before mmma,  I never gave mj and driving a serious thought, but was always careful when I did use. Only now with mmma is the issue omnipresent in my life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cook, and do laundry too hun !

 

I'm in no way comparing myself or anything like that. but I would like to know some support guidelines. like, if the guy ran someone over wile speeding, and then the dui thing hit with medical marijuana, would we support him? what if the victim died? what if the court found a decision not favorable to marijuana, would he then be just another sob that got our law changed? are we supporting the bad behavior for the good result or what ? 

 

the guy smacking his wife around, gets a visit, and they find he has  1/2 ounce over his limit, in leaves and stems, do we support his case in hopes for a good marijuana outcome?  Where is the line?

 I just dunno about that, and like to explore it, without tippie toeing around the subject. Many here share opposite views on the matter, but are afraid of getting flamed for the opinions.

 

peace though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not my job to judge anothers moral fortitude or the lack thereof.

 

The scenerio you put forth concerns 2 different matters entirely.

 

One he is a wife beater and must face the charges for that behavior.

 

If he is a mmj pt/cg and is indeed over, that is another charge/s and separate. 

Do I support a man who beats his wife, no.

Do I think anyone should go to jail for mj, no.

He should be allowed to present a Sec 8 affirmative defense, maybe because of this wording:

"...a quantity of marijuana that was not more than was reasonably necessary to ensure the uninterrupted availability of marijuana..."

 

Koon is a creep that is certain. 

Can we as a community pick and choose who's cases will go to higher courts?  I don't think so.

Can we choose to support or not, sure.

I am not making that call.

Edited by imiubu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

every publicized case I see raises my eyebrows once the court papers are viewed.

They all have some monkey business of varying degree, causing the initial police response.

I guess a case by case review is fair before support is offered.

 

I couldn't for example help pay court costs for a person who was using his ccw to commit a crime,

just because it looks like courts will further limit or even remove my gun rights as a finding in the case is revealed.

It just wouldn't align with me, a personal thing.

 

respectfully

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm going to posit a logic question that may be offensive.

i only do this because i think it is the logical conclusion to grassmatchs' question.

 

grassmatch, would you rather have someone like rodney koon sit in court for years to get a supreme court answer or would you want an innocent law-abiding cancer patient to do the same?

 

i know i'd rather support someone else to fight the good fight, so i dont have to do it.

but i am a selfish donkey.

Edited by t-pain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

obviously koon in jail over a cancer patient....that can be got from my posts. but where does it end?  read the examples I've laid out and see the quandary. I'm not easily offended tpain, I like the exchange.   "

I couldn't for example help pay court costs for a person who was using his ccw to commit a crime,

just because it looks like courts will further limit or even remove my gun rights as a finding in the case is revealed."

If he hit someone while speeding....who here would pay for his court costs, for the shared charges? Do drunk drivers gain support from other drinkers when they get pulled over, so the limit does not get changed?  not really questions, but illustrative accounts for thought.

 

Koon would be one of those case by case for me, and I did choose to blindly support him in his case, but then wondered where it ends? what types of people

are being supported for our desired result?  where would you draw the line? Is there a line?

 

I fully understand the koon support, he didn't seem like a creep at the time. But what if he was a creep, assaulting the girl, THEN getting pulled over for the rest of the case to unfold, would t-pain, natesilver, imiubu, etc support him still, because one of his charges is important for us?

 

just a question, individual concern, not meant to upset anyone, only question blind support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely Not ! that's the point I was attempting to solicit from others. where is the line?

 

Would you support a murderer with cash for his defense if it meant legal marijuana ?    a rapist?  a robber?  jaywalker?  etc.  Is the line at "non violent" criminal behavior, ? or victimless maybe?   dunno the answer, but wanted to know what others thought. Of course I admit there are "accused criminals" that I would support, depending, to get mj legal for instance maybe.

Grassmatch would you support a murderer if it meant marijuana would become legal? Serious question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely Not ! that's the point I was attempting to solicit from others. where is the line?

 

Would you support a murderer with cash for his defense if it meant legal marijuana ? a rapist? a robber? jaywalker? etc. Is the line at "non violent" criminal behavior, ? or victimless maybe? dunno the answer, but wanted to know what others thought. Of course I admit there are "accused criminals" that I would support, depending, to get mj legal for instance maybe.

If it meant legal marijuana and an end to the arrests and raids and the persecution, then yes I would. Edited by Natesilver
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it meant legal marijuana and an end to the arrests and raids and the persecution, then yes I would.

Go support him/her maybe you will be the next victim!

 

I have to say, people are idiots! you all vote on whether or not people support mm, you dont care about our budget, vets,soldiers or anything else, mm heads are willing to sell their sole for mj, they care nothing of how their country is run, only thing that matters is mm, Im ashamed to even be associated with people of that thought, natesilver you can be sure I wont support you for anything, nothing nada! and anyone that has your mental  aty!  This is the stupidest ive read yet, let a murder go as long as no more pot pts get arrested, would if it was your mom or sis or dad? yea let the murder of my family go as long as I can smoke weed! wtf!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what's interesting is that we all set our own height at the morality limbo. Some, like me might embarrassingly support the fees of one who was pulled over speeding, and had some extract on him, in the trunk, and was otherwise legal, maybe. But what if he ran someone over first? or raped a girl during proceedings ? robbed a store before sentencing? etc of course the rules change.

Civil and criminal infractions happen all day, sometimes the arrested is marijuana non compliant, or just plain stupid, and because of that he's rewarded largely with cash from our readers, under the guise of marijuana freedom.

 

" If a criminal, once again, is considering breaking the law, put some marijuana in the fray, you could get away with a free trial here at the forum, even with an impending capital crime maybe, for marijuana's sake."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what's interesting is that we all set our own height at the morality limbo. Some, like me might embarrassingly support the fees of one who was pulled over speeding, and had some extract on him, in the trunk, and was otherwise legal, maybe. But what if he ran someone over first? or raped a girl during proceedings ? robbed a store before sentencing? etc of course the rules change.

Civil and criminal infractions happen all day, sometimes the arrested is marijuana non compliant, or just plain stupid, and because of that he's rewarded largely with cash from our readers, under the guise of marijuana freedom.

 

" If a criminal, once again, is considering breaking the law, put some marijuana in the fray, you could get away with a free trial here at the forum, even with an impending capital crime maybe, for marijuana's sake."

That sounds like that last big fund raiser, I gave and I gave again, but he was not legal to even be driving a car, so he broke the law first by getting behind the wheel, and that ilegal action hurt alot of people, I know im gonna catch hell for this, but I dont give a sheat!  he should have never got behind the wheel, he could have gotten a legal driver and if than getting pulled over, it was all in the trunk, supposedly, he could have accepted reponsibility for it, maybe it would not have went to the coa and now the s.c!

 

Peace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Justice is blind for a reason.  The case is/was bigger than Koon.  Koon's driving while not high is a different matter than his domestic issues and should be considered separately.   I support patients' rights to internal possession and safe driving.  If that means that a thug gets off on a charge, so be it.  If he is a thug, then the justice system will catch up to him one way or another for his thugness, as has been the case here.  It disturbs me to think that people will say it is OK to railroad someone for a non-crime just because he is guilty of some other crime.  Our system doesn't and should not work that way.  That's government gone berserk.

 

It really doesn't do any good to come up with unrealistic situations...like the idea of letting a murderer go free if it means legalizing MMJ.  If you are a murderer, you should pay for your crime.  If you are a murderer and get caught driving the day after smoking, you don't deserve a penalty for MMJ but do for murder.  Two completely different issues.

 

As soon as we get to a point where one criminal charge opens your entire life to scrutiny and you can be convicted based on your moral character rather than facts, or convicted for one crime simply because you committed an unrelated crime, we are all screwed.

Edited by Highlander
Link to comment
Share on other sites

understood, however, we're not talking about mentally supporting rights of one of the charges but not the other, we're specifically speaking of donating money to their legal defense, in hopes that the marijuana related part will favor marijuana users. maybe if legal teams could separate the money spent on the case parts....(yeah, right)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

understood, however, we're not talking about mentally supporting rights of one of the charges but not the other, we're specifically speaking of donating money to their legal defense, in hopes that the marijuana related part will favor marijuana users. maybe if legal teams could separate the money spent on the case parts....(yeah, right)

 

Yes.  The way around that is to pay money directly to the defense team who is handling the case we care about.

 

Alternatively, a defendant has shoddy representation, and we all end up with rotten case law because some deadbeat thug appealed his case.  I can think of a couple of instances where the MMJ community was harmed because of a crappy, underfunded defense.  So it isn't about one defendant.  It translates to over 100,000 people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so you suggest contacting the defense team to itemize some donated funds to him for a criminals defense , who happens to also be involved in an unfavorable marijuana case at the same time regardless of the initial crime committed ?  

 

Yes.  Because the crimes are different, have different penalties, and the outcomes can be far-reaching and affect many others if a legal precedent is set.  If a guy is a murderer, he should pay the penalty a murderer pays.  If there is insufficient evidence to convict him of murder, then our system presumes him innocent.  Our system is based on the idea that it is better to let many guilty folks walk free than to convict one innocent.  The idea that a murderer does not deserve a proper defense for his crime, let alone some other crime (say, growing MJ) is the philosophy of an oppressive government.

 

Let's say you have a CG with a pound of meds in his freezer that are almost dry...but still a little wet so maybe a legal grey area.  He gets drunk and drives home and kills someone in the process.  He flees, parks in his garage, and lays low.  LEO gets a warrant, which must and does articulate what they are searching for (damaged vehicle) and where they might look for it (in the garage).  LEO can't look in the refrigerator because it isn't reasonable  to think that a vehicle would be in the fridge.  LEO finds the car in the garage with blood on the hood and a smashed grille...Then LEO decides to look in the fridge anyway. They find the meds and the guy gets charged with a 4-year delivery felony because he was over his Section 4 limits.  He ends up losing the MJ case, appeals, and loses again.  Now 100,000+ people in Michigan can get nailed for wet MJ.

 

So let the guy get tried and convicted for murder.  Let him do his time.  And toss a few bucks his way to prevent a bad, precedent-setting miscarriage of justice on the MJ charge.

 

The idea that such a defendant doesn't deserve a proper defense to an MJ charge is simply inconsistent with our entire legal/rights philosophy dating back to 1215

Edited by Highlander
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes.  The way around that is to pay money directly to the defense team who is handling the case we care about.

 

Alternatively, a defendant has shoddy representation, and we all end up with rotten case law because some deadbeat thug appealed his case.  I can think of a couple of instances where the MMJ community was harmed because of a crappy, underfunded defense.  So it isn't about one defendant.  It translates to over 100,000 people.

 It translates to over 100,000 people

we used to think that we where fighting for all the sick in Michigan and it kept me fighting for almost 5 years because of the C.O,A ruled  n 2010 that you don't need a card to be protected for Sec 8 but do need your Rec: before you are raided 

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...