Re: Choc bar drugs pair will appealOn Sun, 17 Dec 2006 12:38:27 GMT, johannes <johs@sinospamzefitter . com >
wrote:
>mike carley wrote:
>>
>> "Marvin" <kilauea3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:qNadnVhePOUbrBjYnZ2dnUVZ8sHinZ2d@bt . com ...
>> > Phil Stovell wrote:
>> >> < * icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/sundaysun/news/tm headline=choc-bar-drugs-pair-will-appeal&method=full&objectid=18277069&siteid=50081-name page.html>
>> >>
>> >> Choc bar drugs pair will appeal
>> >>
>> >> Dec 17 2006
>> >>
>> >> By Robert Weatherall, The Sunday Sun
>> >>
>> >> A disabled woman found guilty of supplying drugs to fellow multiple
>> >> sclerosis sufferers said she will appeal against her conviction.
>> >>
>> >> Lezley Gibson has not given up her fight to legally supply thousands of
>> >> MS
>> >> sufferers with the class-C drug, which she and other campaigners claim is
>> >> the only effective treatment to alleviate the debilitating condition.
>> >>
>> >> Lezley, 42, of Alston, Cumbria, also says that, following her conviction
>> >> last week, she has been left to celebrate Christmas with the fear that
>> >> she
>> >> and her husband Mark - who was also found guilty - will be sent to prison
>> >> next year.
>> >>
>> >> She said: "I am still in shock that we were found guilty.
>> >>
>> >> "I thought there would have been at least some of the jury who could see
>> >> past the black and white regulations of the law and see we were only
>> >> supplying to people in genuine medical need."
>> >>
>> >> Lezley, Mark, also 42, and Marcus Davies, 36, from St Ives in
>> >> Cambridgeshire, were convicted of two counts each of conspiring to supply
>> >> cannabis at Carlisle Crown Court on Friday.
>> >>
>> >> The trio had distributed by post more than 20,000 chocolate bars, each
>> >> containing around 3.5g of the drug, to people in the UK.
>> >>
>> >> Lezley, who was diag- nosed with the condition at 21, said: "Sentencing
>> >> has been adjourned until next year.
>> >>
>> >> "The judge said we were in no immediate danger of going to jail, but I'm
>> >> not sure what that means.
>> >>
>> >> "If he had ruled it out completely then he should have said so."
>> >>
>> >> Lezley also argues that the judgment will effectively fuel street drug
>> >> dealing.
>> >>
>> >> She claims that the thousands of MS sufferers across the UK who she used
>> >> to supply will now be forced to source the class-C drug from street
>> >> dealers.
>> >>
>> >> She explained: "I used to have to seek drug dealers out in pubs.
>> >>
>> >> "There were times I would be given cannabis that I wouldn't use to polish
>> >> my shoes.
>> >>
>> >> "There were other times I handed over money and the dealer just
>> >> disappeared.
>> >>
>> >> "This ruling is a step backwards for MS treatment in this country.
>> >>
>> >> "Conventional drugs don't work for a lot of people and I can't think of
>> >> any other condition where sufferers are denied medicine.
>> >>
>> >> "You wouldn't deny an asthmatic an inhaler."
>> >>
>> >> And she added: "I will be appealing and my barrister has already started
>> >> to work on that."
>> >>
>> >
>> > Was she profiting from this little venture?
>>
>> Does operating at a loss negate all other obligations?
>
>Probably not, but we're talking 70Kg of about ~£10/gr
Please get your facts straight before posting - wholesale cost of
cannabis is approx £3/g. Street price is approx £5.70/g. Like the
majority of the population you have been mislead by the media and
police. I don't hold this against you or anybody else in your
position. For someone who has presumably never been involved in the
black market a level of naivety on your part is completely inevitable.
The entire operation was intended to operate at "a loss" or not for
profit - however you choose to define it. It was in all senses of the
word a charitable organisation. The three people behind it did it
completely selflessly. They continued to operate for such a long
period due to donations of cannabis, chocolate etc. It was not a
traditional drug dealing operation.
In the strict sense of the law it was illegal and nobody is arguing
that fact. It is the moral issues which are relevant here.
Please answer honestly Johannes, do you really think that MS sufferers
should not be given access to cannabis?
Would you as a reasonable and compassionate human being prefer to see
others suffering just so that an arbitrary law can be upheld?
The physical pain and mental anguish that MS sufferers endure is
something the majority of us cannot even get close to imagining, nor
would we want to.
I know it must be difficult but try and think how you'd feel if you
were an MS sufferer and you had spent years taking numerous
prescription drugs which either don't work or if they do the side
effects are so horrendous they negate the benefits.
Now, imagine that somebody offered you help in the form of a drug
which wasn't legal but increased your quality of life considerably.
Would you refuse merely on the basis that it is illegal? Would you put
yourself through completely unnecessary pain just to keep the
government happy?
I'm not expecting an answer to that question because deep down YOU
know exactly what you'd do. You'd take the cannabis because it is the
ONLY option left.
Please don't take this as a personal insult Johannes, I read a lot of
your posts and you do talk a lot of sense. I just feel you are so far
off the mark here it is ridiculous. I'm eagerly awaiting a reply, am
truly interested.
All the best
Tom
--
Mail me on tommarsden at yahoo com