For the second time in two years Jovan Jackson faced criminal charges against him. The first time he was acquitted. This time, however, he was found guilty.
This is for the same ‘crime’; the same charges, same prosecutor, and same evidence that was used against Jackson that rendered a ‘not-guilty’ verdict. So what changed?
The instruction to the jury.
If “The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” is to be repeated by those on the stand, while at the same time instruction are given to the jury to ignore parts of ‘the whole truth’, perhaps it’s time to revise our rhetoric in our judicial system?
Jackson’s attorney, Lance Rogers, will appeal the court’s decision, along with the ruling to omit ‘THE WHOLE TRUTH” by denying a medical marijuana defense.
Undercover police officers used tax dollars to get a clinical cannabis recommendation from a physician and then joined a collective, Answerdam Alternative Care, to purchase their medicine. Using the excuse of a back pain to obtain a card, the undercover officer lawfully purchased $130 worth of medicine.
This is not illegal according the California Attorney General 2008 Medical Marijuana Guidelines, which is interpreted differently according to the political agenda of a municipality, however because he was not allowed to provide a medical defense in his trial Mr. Jackson now faces the possibility of six years behind bars. He was a productive member of society that now faces the possibility of jail time.
There are a multitude of arguments to suggest financial compensation in America isn’t illegal. For one, aren’t we a capitalist society? Doesn’t our pharmaceuticals industry profit from health care delivery? If I get my medicine from Rite-Aid, can’t I go to any Rite-Aid? Not that I am arguing for a for-profit model, but just because cash is on hand and exchanged for good and services certainly doesn’t imply a crime has been committed. Even if I grow my own crop of medicine doesn’t mean I won’t have other medical needs that are beyond my growing ability (or baking, extracting, etc.).
Is this the America we voted elected officials into the position to harbor us into the 21 Century to create? To deny our brothers and sister the opportunity to do good is a crime greater than Mr. Jackson could ever face. We are all accomplices in that crime if we do nothing but promote the behavior of a Judicial system hell-bent on making examples of law-abiding citizens.
Perhaps it time once again to make examples of those promulgating such infringements?
For instance, San Diego and San Bernardino Counties didn’t find it important to provide access to a medical marijuana program, but according to the law they must and a court decision rendered their position illegal.
Now it appears we must await the appeal process for Mr. Jackson (and put him through one, which is a drain on our already depleted state systems) because part of the truth was legally allowed to be omitted, and instead took precedence over the ‘facts’ of the case.
If the truth must be omitted to secure a court decision in a charge that Mr. Jackson was already found not-guilty of begs the question: how much of our collective monies have been spent by our elected and unelected official to lock up the collective we call “Americans”?
At first they came for the patients, and I said nothing… especially the whole truth.
The Daily Dose
Unfortunately it is the same charge, same District Attorney, same Defendant, but different Judge and different incident.
Wouldn’t the double jeopardy clause of the 5th Amendment to the United States Constitution also apply here?