|
Anonymous #1
|
Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs.
#17290509 - 11/27/12 12:43 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
A friend was arrested with ur-144, AKB-48, and 5fur-144.
He was charged with wreckless op, and an OVI at the time, but A pipe, some spearmint, and about 3 grams of each drug were confiscated from him.
What is the chance they will try to bring felony charges against him for this? If so how long would it take before these charges would be presented to him in Ohio? This happened roughly 2 months ago.
|
Anonymous #2
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: Anonymous #1]
#17291252 - 11/27/12 03:02 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Anonymous said: A friend was arrested with ur-144, AKB-48, and 5fur-144.
He was charged with wreckless op, and an OVI at the time, but A pipe, some spearmint, and about 3 grams of each drug were confiscated from him.
What is the chance they will try to bring felony charges against him for this? If so how long would it take before these charges would be presented to him in Ohio? This happened roughly 2 months ago.
No one can say for sure. Hasn't he already be arraigned for the OVI? What charges did the prosecutors bring?
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist

Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,392
Last seen: 2 days, 23 hours
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: Anonymous #2]
#17294159 - 11/27/12 10:42 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Assuming those aren't scheduled in Ohio, he should get off. He might get off on the OVI also, as the drug test probably will come up negative. At this point he just needs to wait for the lab results and go from there.
Hopefully he didn't make any incriminating statements...
|
Anonymous #1
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: Alan Rockefeller]
#17294703 - 11/28/12 12:08 AM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
He said he was asleep at the wheel and that's why he wrecked. He was also arraigned and nothing mentioned of further charges. He just stumbled upon a thread where someone mentioned ru-144 being subject to the analog act, and knew that this wouldn't stick due to the fact this is not a JWH analog, he just got nervous. His lawyer thinks they can beat the OVI as well.
|
CidneyIndole
www.shroomery.OG



Registered: 05/16/05
Posts: 4,762
Loc: Love's Secret Domain
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: Anonymous #1]
#17300311 - 11/28/12 09:37 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Anonymous said: He said he was asleep at the wheel and that's why he wrecked. He was also arraigned and nothing mentioned of further charges. He just stumbled upon a thread where someone mentioned ru-144 being subject to the analog act, and knew that this wouldn't stick due to the fact this is not a JWH analog, he just got nervous. His lawyer thinks they can beat the OVI as well.
The DEA has, in fact stated that they consider UR-144 to be an analog of JWH-018. I've heard plenty of people say that's bullshit... but I'd probably be a little more worried about what the DEA thinks. If this stays local, you might get lucky, and things work out like Alan says.
Good luck.
-------------------- ------------------------ I am me. We are You.
|
36fuckin5
Alchemycologist


Registered: 08/11/03
Posts: 12,091
Loc: Diving into Mystical Territori...
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: CidneyIndole]
#17332020 - 12/04/12 11:23 AM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
CidneyIndole said: The DEA has, in fact stated that they consider UR-144 to be an analog of JWH-018. I've heard plenty of people say that's bullshit... but I'd probably be a little more worried about what the DEA thinks. If this stays local, you might get lucky, and things work out like Alan says.
Good luck.
Even if they say it's an analog, that doesn't immediately make it illegal. Under the Federal Analog Act, you also have to show intent of consumption, which a pipe and some inert plant material might be enough evidence to prove.
-------------------- Pat The Bunny said: A punk rock song won't ever change the world, but I can tell you about a couple that changed me. bodhisatta said: i recommend common sense and figuring it out. These are the TEKs I use. They're all as cheap and easy as possible, just like your mom.
|
Anonymous #1
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: 36fuckin5]
#17332051 - 12/04/12 11:27 AM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Pipe and spearmint were also in the vehicle.
The amounts of each drug were under 3 grams a piece. Would the dea go after something so petty?
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist

Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,392
Last seen: 2 days, 23 hours
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: Anonymous #1]
#17332685 - 12/04/12 01:09 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Anonymous said: The amounts of each drug were under 3 grams a piece. Would the dea go after something so petty?
No.
It will be a state level prosecution, so the analog act won't apply.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,521
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: Alan Rockefeller]
#17332746 - 12/04/12 01:20 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
The FEDERAL analog act won't...if your state has an equivalent, that might apply.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
CidneyIndole
www.shroomery.OG



Registered: 05/16/05
Posts: 4,762
Loc: Love's Secret Domain
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: 36fuckin5]
#17338680 - 12/05/12 01:50 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
36fuckin5 said:
Quote:
CidneyIndole said: The DEA has, in fact stated that they consider UR-144 to be an analog of JWH-018. I've heard plenty of people say that's bullshit... but I'd probably be a little more worried about what the DEA thinks. If this stays local, you might get lucky, and things work out like Alan says.
Good luck.
Even if they say it's an analog, that doesn't immediately make it illegal. Under the Federal Analog Act, you also have to show intent of consumption, which a pipe and some inert plant material might be enough evidence to prove.
The DEA has been arresting people who do not meet the "intent to consume" clause, so I do not believe that is accurate any longer. A year ago I would have agreed with you. Not any more.
Look at what happened to Motion Research. I know motion to have been a very careful vendor, in terms of no HC-talk, etc. It's not like they got him like woot, on camera talking about sniffing MXE.
Like I've said before-- they are no longer playing fair. There is much evidence of this if you take the time and look in the right places.
-------------------- ------------------------ I am me. We are You.
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist

Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,392
Last seen: 2 days, 23 hours
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: CidneyIndole]
#17338705 - 12/05/12 01:54 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
The intent to consume clause is still in effect. It's just that they do intend for people to consume it, so it's pretty easy to prove. The DEA and everyone else knows that no one buys MXE to clean their toilet.
The intent to consume clause was never meant to protect people that are selling RC's, it's supposed to protect people like chemistry teachers, plastics manufacturers, etc.
Quote:
Like I've said before-- they are no longer playing fair. There is much evidence of this if you take the time and look in the right places.
I think they are playing by the rules - People selling mxe for "research" are exactly the kind of people the analog act was written to target.
|
36fuckin5
Alchemycologist


Registered: 08/11/03
Posts: 12,091
Loc: Diving into Mystical Territori...
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: Alan Rockefeller]
#17344415 - 12/06/12 01:30 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Alan Rockefeller said: The intent to consume clause is still in effect. It's just that they do intend for people to consume it, so it's pretty easy to prove. The DEA and everyone else knows that no one buys MXE to clean their toilet.
Of course nobody cleans their toilet with it. We're all doing solubility and melting point tests. 
Quote:
The intent to consume clause was never meant to protect people that are selling RC's, it's supposed to protect people like chemistry teachers, plastics manufacturers, etc.
I think they are playing by the rules - People selling mxe for "research" are exactly the kind of people the analog act was written to target.
I agree.it sucks for us, but that's how it's playing out, and they're well within the law.
-------------------- Pat The Bunny said: A punk rock song won't ever change the world, but I can tell you about a couple that changed me. bodhisatta said: i recommend common sense and figuring it out. These are the TEKs I use. They're all as cheap and easy as possible, just like your mom.
|
CidneyIndole
www.shroomery.OG



Registered: 05/16/05
Posts: 4,762
Loc: Love's Secret Domain
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: Alan Rockefeller]
#17345320 - 12/06/12 04:11 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Alan Rockefeller said: The intent to consume clause is still in effect. It's just that they do intend for people to consume it, so it's pretty easy to prove. The DEA and everyone else knows that no one buys MXE to clean their toilet.
The intent to consume clause was never meant to protect people that are selling RC's, it's supposed to protect people like chemistry teachers, plastics manufacturers, etc.
Quote:
Like I've said before-- they are no longer playing fair. There is much evidence of this if you take the time and look in the right places.
I think they are playing by the rules - People selling mxe for "research" are exactly the kind of people the analog act was written to target.
I somewhat agree and somewhat disagree with you.
The point where I disagree most, is that they have any right to arrest a vendor like the one I mentioned above (Motion.) Or more accurately, that if they do, it is done by completely ignoring the human-consumption clause of the analog act.
They can believe all they want that this guy was selling to people whom he knew to be buying the stuff as "legal drugs," but their belief does not constitute proof. They need proof that he intended to use it, or knowingly sold to those who intended to use it. Absent of proof, if they still arrest him, they are arresting him while ignoring the human consumption clause.
I feel that's pretty straightforward, and I don't quite understand how you would see it differently.
The other area where I believe you're wrong is using MXE as an example-- MXE is one of the very few RC's on the market that I don't think this applies to. I have heard of a couple human-consumption related arrests involving MXE, but in those cases LEO had some kind of actual proof of intent. I have seen them charge people with importing MXE, but they are NOT charged the same way as people importing a-pvp or 4-FA or whatnot... the charge is something like "importing an unapproved new drug," instead of an analog charge.
-------------------- ------------------------ I am me. We are You.
Edited by CidneyIndole (12/06/12 04:12 PM)
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,521
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: CidneyIndole]
#17345374 - 12/06/12 04:21 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
CidneyIndole said: The point where I disagree most, is that they have any right to arrest a vendor like the one I mentioned above (Motion.) Or more accurately, that if they do, it is done by completely ignoring the human-consumption clause of the analog act.
They can believe all they want that this guy was selling to people whom he knew to be buying the stuff as "legal drugs," but their belief does not constitute proof. They need proof that he intended to use it, or knowingly sold to those who intended to use it. Absent of proof, if they still arrest him, they are arresting him while ignoring the human consumption clause.
They don't need proof to arrest...they only need probable cause. They need proof to convict.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
CidneyIndole
www.shroomery.OG



Registered: 05/16/05
Posts: 4,762
Loc: Love's Secret Domain
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: Enlil]
#17345603 - 12/06/12 05:01 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
CidneyIndole said: The point where I disagree most, is that they have any right to arrest a vendor like the one I mentioned above (Motion.) Or more accurately, that if they do, it is done by completely ignoring the human-consumption clause of the analog act.
They can believe all they want that this guy was selling to people whom he knew to be buying the stuff as "legal drugs," but their belief does not constitute proof. They need proof that he intended to use it, or knowingly sold to those who intended to use it. Absent of proof, if they still arrest him, they are arresting him while ignoring the human consumption clause.
They don't need proof to arrest...they only need probable cause. They need proof to convict.
Semantics to me.
I understand you need to distinguish this as per your profession, but I would imagine that they don't waste their time making a whole lot of arrests if they don't think they can get a conviction or a plea.
And if you want to go that route, I'm willing to bet that in most of these cases they're hoping / expecting that the person will plea, or try to make some kind of deal... so they're not all that worried about whether the charges will stick, because someone looking at 10 counts of felony distribution of a blah blah isn't going to want a trial unless they have a DAMN good case, a good lawyer, and a whole hell of a lot of faith.
So in that case, they don't actually need to prove this element of the analog act.
My point still stands.
My point is that they are making arrests where the "intent to consume" element of the law is not apparent. People have also long believed (and very much still seem to believe, if you look around here) that arrest is not a real concern with these chems, so long as they're not violating that HC clause. Once upon a time, I think this may have even been true in a lot of cases. Not any more. It used to be that a shipment of an unknown powder inspected by customs would slide right on by if it did not explicitly test positive for a controlled substance. More recently this does not seem to be the case.
Thanks for the clarification, but as I said, i think my point still stands.
-------------------- ------------------------ I am me. We are You.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,521
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: CidneyIndole]
#17345642 - 12/06/12 05:07 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Of course they are counting on a plea...90%+ of cases plead out.
You need to understand, however, that cops never really worry about intent or mens rea when they arrest people. When someone shoots someone else, they don't concern themselves with whether or not the person had malice aforethought....They leave that up to the lawyers to argue about.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
CidneyIndole
www.shroomery.OG



Registered: 05/16/05
Posts: 4,762
Loc: Love's Secret Domain
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: Enlil]
#17346333 - 12/06/12 07:15 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Of course they are counting on a plea...90%+ of cases plead out.
You need to understand, however, that cops never really worry about intent or mens rea when they arrest people. When someone shoots someone else, they don't concern themselves with whether or not the person had malice aforethought....They leave that up to the lawyers to argue about.
I absolutely understand what you're saying. However, in a sane world, the police wouldn't arrest you for possession of a powder which did not field test as a controlled substance. Or, assuming the research chemical in question caused a false-positive, charges would be dropped upon receipt of the lab results. I really believe that, say, five years ago that's just how things would have gone (likely the second example, in some cases). Nowadays it seems like they're specifically targeting people for any "research chemical" when they already know the chemical in question i not explicitly controlled itself, regardless of whether the person possessing it had given any indication of intended use.
I know someone who, a few years ago, had a package of MDPV go through customs, having been opened and inspected and was received just fine with no hassle. Of course, this may not be the best example to use, as at the time MDPV was only an "analog" of a schedule V drug.... so it didn't even come close to the requirements necessary for an analog possession... but I hope you get my point.
-------------------- ------------------------ I am me. We are You.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,521
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: CidneyIndole]
#17346383 - 12/06/12 07:24 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Well..yeah. A few years ago, the vast majority of cops had no fucking clue about any of this shit. It's only the publicity in the last few years that have stepped up enforcement on this kind of thing.
In fairness, a lot of these RCs are a whole lot more dangerous than the drugs for which they are supposed to be "analogues". The more people end up in the hospital because of these drugs, the more the cops are under pressure to do something about it. They only have one tactic to fight this shit, and that is more arrests....as ineffective as that tactic is.
It's becoming more obvious that a sensible solution has to be found. People buy RCs in concentrations that, unless properly diluted, can easily kill or permanently damage people. I believe that this is a direct product of the "semi-legal" status of these chemicals. If they were prohibited, most people would only be able to find the "consumer level" cut product, while the more sophisticated distributors would hopefully be able to cut the product safely. Similarly, if there were some research done on these chemicals to determine safe dosages and/or if certain chemicals are simply too dangerous...Then rational regulation could be written.
As it is, no one knows shit about any of it, so the cops are pressured to get as much of it off the street, and the legislators can't react fast enough to make sensible laws.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist

Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,392
Last seen: 2 days, 23 hours
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: CidneyIndole]
#17347481 - 12/06/12 10:41 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
CidneyIndole said: The point where I disagree most, is that they have any right to arrest a vendor like the one I mentioned above (Motion.) Or more accurately, that if they do, it is done by completely ignoring the human-consumption clause of the analog act.
They can believe all they want that this guy was selling to people whom he knew to be buying the stuff as "legal drugs," but their belief does not constitute proof. They need proof that he intended to use it, or knowingly sold to those who intended to use it. Absent of proof, if they still arrest him, they are arresting him while ignoring the human consumption clause.
The other area where I believe you're wrong is using MXE as an example-- MXE is one of the very few RC's on the market that I don't think this applies to.
Good points, I didn't realize that MXE isn't a clear analog of a schedule I or II substance. If you look at the ketamine and MXE molecule, they are extremely similar, but analogs of a schedule III substance aren't covered in the analog act.
However the DEA's job is to arrest people who seem like they might be breaking the law, and let the courts sort out the details.
It's really expensive for innocent defendants, but that's the system.
Quote:
the charge is something like "importing an unapproved new drug," instead of an analog charge.
What law makes it illegal to import a new unapproved drug?
Quote:
CidneyIndole said: I understand you need to distinguish this as per your profession, but I would imagine that they don't waste their time making a whole lot of arrests if they don't think they can get a conviction or a plea.
Most people will plea out. If the DEA loses their case, they still succeed in stopping a drug distrubution operation, and they don't have to return the siezed drugs. So they win either way.
Quote:
CidneyIndole said: I absolutely understand what you're saying. However, in a sane world, the police wouldn't arrest you for possession of a powder which did not field test as a controlled substance.
All uncontrolled RC's field test positive for a controlled substance.
|
36fuckin5
Alchemycologist


Registered: 08/11/03
Posts: 12,091
Loc: Diving into Mystical Territori...
|
Re: Arrested with synthetic cannabanoid analogs. [Re: Alan Rockefeller]
#17355633 - 12/08/12 02:15 PM (11 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Alan Rockefeller said: All uncontrolled RC's field test positive for a controlled substance.
Sauce plz. I'm not buying this at all.
-------------------- Pat The Bunny said: A punk rock song won't ever change the world, but I can tell you about a couple that changed me. bodhisatta said: i recommend common sense and figuring it out. These are the TEKs I use. They're all as cheap and easy as possible, just like your mom.
|
|