More charges filed in Manley pot bust
Details emerge about secret growing room
Published Friday, June 26, 2009
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!FAIRBANKS — The mining claim near Manley where more than 600 marijuana plants were found earlier this week was a ruse to cover the illicit drug operation there, according to newly filed documents.
The second criminal complaint filed Thursday against John T. Larson, 49, of Fairbanks, also details the elaborate lengths he allegedly went to hide the marijuana grow, which might have been operational for as long as 20 years. Prosecutors said the operation was worth $2 million per year.
Larson, already charged with two counts of felony drugs misconduct, has been charged with two more felony counts of marijuana possession, felony assault and interfering with official proceedings.
No additional charges have been filed against alleged co-conspirator Brandon Phillips, 33, of Texas.
The Alaska Bureau of Alcohol and Drug Enforcement was told last week about the Eureka Gold Mine operation, where an estimated 200 pounds of marijuana was seized, by a man who worked Larson’s mining claim until several weeks ago.
The former employee, who was not identified in court documents, told investigators that he had a falling out with Larson in April after he took offense to comments that Larson made about his children.
He quit the next month, but Larson invited him to the claim two days later to make amends. There, the former employee was taken to a diesel generator shed where Larson pushed in the rear concrete wall and showed him a larger room with a bigger generator and hundreds of marijuana plants.
The wall had no seams in it and was “very well disguised,” according to a criminal complaint filed in court.
The room contained two carved out culverts about 20 by 30 feet in size that contained “football stadium lights” and marijuana in various stages of growth. The man was re-introduced to Phillips, whom he apparently thought worked at the mining claim.
“Now you know what I do for 10 hours every day,” Phillips is quoted as saying in the complaint.
Phillips was allegedly paid $500 per day to harvest marijuana, which would sell for $4,000 per pound on the street.
The room had an “elaborate filtering” system that would remove the odor of marijuana from the room but keep the heat of the lights in the room from melting the snow outside, according to the complaint.
Larson told the former employee that the room was the “real mine” and offered him a job harvesting marijuana for $1,000 per day, according to the complaint.
The man turned him down, at which point Larson allegedly told him that he had never had his offer rejected before and he had “killed people for less.” He also claimed to have taken down a suspicious Black Hawk helicopter that flew over the grow and asked the man if he knew “how many ways a miner can get rid of a body?” according to the complaint.
The man left the property, and alerted authorities several weeks later.
Evidence at the scene indicates that the operation processed 10 pounds of marijuana per week, which was loaded into duffle bags and possibly flown to Fairbanks on Larson’s Cessna 170B.
When in custody, Larson told investigators that other miners at the claim knew nothing about the marijuana grow and to “treat those people nice,” according to the complaint.
Neither Larson nor Phillips has any prior criminal history.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
Wow. Guess Mom was right when she told me not to talk to strangers.
How stupid can you get? Why would you disclose your illegal activity to someone you were not on the best of terms with? It almost seems like he wanted to get caught. We should legalize it and quit wasting time and resources on the unwinnable war on drugs.
Who would turn down $1000 a day?
Probably someone who thought it was only a matter of time before he was to become one with the earth. I dont think I would have taken any chances my self
What a great use of our tax money and government resources.
I have to admit that I would be dangerously tempted by that rate of pay. Personally, I would never get involved, simply because no amount of money is worth risking my life with my children. I don't think anything involving marijuana should be considered criminal activity. This man is an entreprenuer, and instead of him being able to pay taxes on his earnings, our taxes are paying to prosecute him! What kind of backwards system are we living with? I can only hope the next generation gets things right because my generation obviously hasn't figured it out.
Yup, I shot down a guberment helicopter, I'm just that bad.
Im kinda surprised pot goes for 4K a pound though. Was it high quality or something?
I kinda want to go see the operation just to look at the hidden room and engineering system, they sound pretty complex/interesting
1000 a day,i think id work a month or two and take that vacation ive been much needing.no wounder his other employee (phillps) is testifying against the boss man,he was getting $500 less per day then the other guy was offered.how about you t-bone would you take on that job?Iam not sure if i would or not,McDonald treats me pretty good.plus i get 20% off on all my meals.
Oh crap now theres gonna be a shortage of herb in Fairbanks. Everyone begin hording now! Save your seeds and stems!
Life can go sideways on you and throw some real challenges. Not many can handle them. I wonder how I would of handeled it if my life was threatned? And sure I could of used some quick money to. Would be nice to pay some bills off, get a better car, fix the house up, and put a little of the money away. So yes, this was a real challenge and the man rose to the occasion.
TAX pot.
1000.00 a qp.=4000.00 wholesale.lots of money in growing very little overhead.
I have never seen seeds in Fairbanks pot.
tax pot to pay for healthcare
What is the criminal sentencing guidelines for possession & sale in Alaska?
The criminal sentencing guidelines for possession & sale in Alaska is castration and decapetation.
Guy has falling out with Larson.
Larson invites Guy to property to show off his grow.
Larson makes a boat load of threats to Guy when Guy declines work.
Larson lets Guy walk.
Either this whole account is entirely fabricated, or Larson's just a bit of a dummie.
eureka, ak aka copperhead road. better stay away from copperhead road.
Legalize marijuana and stop spending money on eradicating a plant that millions of adults want to buy! Come on Alaska, write your legislators and tell them to stop wasting our money putting pot growers in prison. It's just a ridiculous practice.
We should have another Tea Party!
I agree, just legalize it for cryin out loud. Alcohol is worse and we spend more money on that every year. Give us a break that are taking anti depresants because we cant smoke pot any more.
$1000.00 a day is good,but no benefits?
you want to de-criminalize pot? i'll smoke to that, but if you tax it, you had best stay away from copperhead road.
Legalize and tax it... People will figure out they don't need it when it costs them $100 a joint. Don't think they won't charge that much too.
What gets me, is the freakin' taxes on cigarettes!!!!!! Yeah sure they know tobacco is more addictive than cocaine, marijuana, heroine, and alcohol combined......but are there any IN HOUSE Rehabilitation Centers for tobacco users? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooOOOOOOOOO.
Talk about taxation without representation! You think the potheads in the USA can ban together to make that kind of lobby???? That's what it's going to take. Till it's legal throughout the states, it won't be legal here. Alaska likes her road money.
Geek...go choke on your teabag! hahahahaha!!!
Another vote for de-criminalizing marijuana. This is just a ridiculous waste of our tax money.
I'm serious, legalize and tax it. Cost of Marijuana itself will go down but they'll tax you to death on it. Legalize it (if you can) then see what happens! $10 dollars to the "regulated grower" (and don't think you won't get busted for growing your own) and $90 dollars for tax. Then penalties and jail time for smoking it in anyone else's air space. WATCH.
Gives a whole new meanting to "Alaska Gold".
I would really, really, like to see how this place was constructed. I have worked with super insulated buildings and experimented with my own home. That these people were able to maintain the higher temperatrues needed for near tropical plants and not disturb the snow cover takes skills.
Did I mention GOOD tax source?
Ditto Glacierwolf, I'd like to see this super-design. It should be on the Princess, Holland-America bus Tours sights to see in Fairbanks.
Shokd said:
Either this whole account is entirely fabricated, or Larson's just a bit of a dummie
Or maybe smoking a bunch of that weed was really messing up his mind. Telling the guy he did a take down of a Blackhawk helicopter also makes you wonder where his mind is.
Why Marijuana should not be legalized:
Fact 1: We have made significant progress in fighting drug use and drug trafficking in America. Now is not the time to abandon our efforts.
Fact 2: A balanced approach of prevention, enforcement, and treatment is the key in the fight against drugs.
Fact 3: Illegal drugs are illegal because they are harmful.
Fact 4: Smoked marijuana is not scientifically approved medicine. Marinol, the legal version of medical marijuana, is approved by science.
Fact 5: Drug control spending is a minor portion of the U.S. budget. Compared to the social costs of drug abuse and addiction, government spending on drug control is minimal.
Fact 6: Legalization of drugs will lead to increased use and increased levels of addiction. Legalization has been tried before, and failed miserably.
Fact 7: Crime, violence, and drug use go hand-in-hand.
Fact 8: Alcohol has caused significant health, social, and crime problems in this country, and legalized drugs would only make the situation worse.
Fact 9: Europe’s more liberal drug policies are not the right model for America.
Fact 10: Most non-violent drug users get treatment, not jail time.
NP79, your "facts" are quite subjective.
I've always wanted to have a secret room like that... ever since I was a child.
The police love busting grow operations because they get to use all the money and equipment (including cars) they confiscate for official use. Conflict of interest? YES. There should be no monetary incentive to bust growing operations.
All posters should try to get a group get together at the 'mine' maybe with 'pot tasting' options. With name tags should be fun.....
north pole79 - opinions and facts are two different things.
The drug war is another conservative dream of throwing government money at a problem and pretending it has an effect despite 40 years of evidence to the contrary.
Here's the support:
http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/demand/speakout...
Show me the scientific evidence that proves these facts are wrong.
north pole,
Pot is readily available to anyone that wants it. If your precious drug war is so effective like you claim it is, then the money we've spent on said drug war in the past 40 years would be reducing availability. The DEA is not exactly a credible source. Of course they are going to say that their programs are effective. Have you ever known a government agecny that said "no, what we doing isn't working and hasn't been for 40 years? Open you eyes, dude. The drug war is one of the most ineffective government program ever and that is saying something.
This is from the current issue of Rolling Stone:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/sto...
Uh, North Pole 79, your first "fact" is wrong.
See:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/opinio...
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/041720...
http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2009...
http://www.reason.com/news/show/131131.h...
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/1...
North Pole 79, I know a lot of people, who smoke pot....myself not included, because pot just doesn't do anything for me. Some of these people work in GOVT! some of these people are professionls, some are just everyday folks, and most are over 30 years of age, and WAY older.
People smoke pot > FACT.
It's stupid to incarcinate people for smoking pot or dealing pot. It costs tax-payers a fortune in legal costs, prison time. Legalize it, TAX it, and let the people decide for themselves "IF" they want to smoke pot or not.
Tell me pot is more dangerous than alcohol. It isn't. In fact, alcohol is more dangerous than pot, especially when driving.
TAX pot!
Be sure your sins will find you out....I wonder if the judge has since upped the bail.
I would like to see the blue prints to the growing operation, and a virtual tour online of the grow rooms. For Academic Use Only.
Some Facts:
http://www.mpp.org/assets/pdfs/download-...
The site has even more!
I'd like to see the whole thing too: sounds really cool: then I think Alaska Grown should buy it and start producing better tomatos!!
I don't think rollingstone is a credible scientific research group, nor the oped page of NYT! laughable, bro. I thought batman fought criminals not appeased them like Chamberlain...
You may not think DEA is a credible source based on your own prejudices... but they do cite real science unlike the pro-legalization lobby.
The Legalization Lobby claims that the fight against drugs cannot be won. However, overall drug use is down by more than a third in the last twenty years, while cocaine use has dropped by an astounding 70 percent. Ninety-five percent of Americans do not use drugs. This is success by any standards.
Anyone know who we can contact and ask for pictures of this cool hidden mine-base? Maybe the mayor?
NP79 wrote: "Ninety-five percent of Americans do not use drugs."
How was your coffee this morning?
teeball: well, I've never participated in any form of illegal drugs, nor do I drink, or smoke. And yes, I am bad news for the prolegalization lobby. I will continue to speak out against the conspiring evils of all forms of drug abuse.
The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) is a United States federal-government research institute whose mission is to "lead the Nation in bringing the power of science to bear on drug abuse and addiction."
http://www.drugabuse.gov/ResearchReports...
NP79...you believe in God, right?
Well those cannibinoid receptors you wrote about only have one purpose. Why do you think we were created with them?
The CB receptors are meant for the endogenous cannabinoids. Currently, there are three general types of cannabinoids: phytocannabinoids occur uniquely in the cannabis plant; endogenous cannabinoids are produced in the bodies of humans and other animals; and synthetic cannabinoids are similar compounds produced in a laboratory.
Just as nicotine binds to nicotinic acetylcholine receptor readily; just because the shoe fits, it doesn't mean you should necessarily wear it.
I know the wiki article you just got that from touts the medical benefits of THC. Do you refute them?
sick, he got narc'd. that sux.
The drug war is aimed at folks like NP79. The objective anymore isn't to win the war on drugs. The objective is to create the image of winning the war on drugs for NP79 and at the same time provide an endless source of funding for countless govt agencies such as the DEA, US Coast Guard, the US Forest Service, the justice dept, the DAs office, state police, county police, borough police, city police, etc, etc. It's the biggest welfare / workfare program in the history of government. Results in the drug war are irrelavent. What's relevant is the image it creates for folks like NP79.
NP79 hates drugs. Government declares war on drugs. NP79 is happy cause there is a war on something that NP79 hates. NP79 sleeps well knowing that the government is protecting him / her from the bad people that smoke marijuana.
>>>""(and don't think you won't get busted for growing your own)""<<<
Like they bust persons for brewing their own (non-commercial) beer and wine??
---
np79, between 8 and 12% of America uses illicit drugs, including cannabis. Of course, ALL of these stats are based on self-reporting in a country that felonizes as much behavior these days as it can, and many persons hesitate to voluntarily lay their necks on the proverbuial chopping block..
The 'Stop-The-Insane-Drug-War' crowd has ample quality research supporting their position, and, unlike the DEA, doesn't necessarily receive $70,000.00 to $100,000.00 per year per 'mercenary' to tout their findings. Yes, the DEA has a -glowing- conflict of interest. One day, perhaps they'll acknowledge this. Just as one day the ONDCP may acknowledge that many of the 'studies' that they continue to list on their web site have already been booted from various court rooms as lacking scientific cribility; some of them -years- ago.
More than a few DEA agents will, btw, tell you privately, 'off the record,' that cannabis ought to be legalized or decriminalized, or, at a bare minimum de-prioritized in this 'War On (Some) Drugs.'
America's not a drug-using nation?
The American Revolution, allegedly fought over taxation without representation, chose, as an early act of defiance, to dump what was then a controlled substance (tea, controlled by virtue of a required tax stamp, not unlike those on cigarettes today) into Boston's harbor.
(cont'd)
Good call TunaFingers,
Let’s not forget all the medication doctors are pushing down everyone’s throats. I do believe most medications give you more chronic side effects than illegal drugs. Not to mention the side effects may be worse than the original problem. So I’ll pass on the anti depressants and sleeping pills. Keep the valium though.
(cont'd)
Most persons in this country wake up and ingest caffeine, which by itself has a colorful litany of research re. everything from sleep-deprivation disorders to addiction, etc.
Then there's the billions upon billions of dollars that persons spend in this country for everything from anti-depressants to tranquilizers and amphetamines (albeit often with a Rx), and often to treat what are otherwise (more or less) natural phenomoenon, such as situational depressive disorders, with some/many docs receiving 'percs' from the Pharmaceutical Industry to push their poisons, even for off-label uses, which can have devastating consequences.
Pull out a recent Physicians' Desk Reference, and read the lists of side-effects for almost any Rx drugs; they make your lists of (often unproven) assertions about cannabis look pleasant in comparison.
The various branches of the U.S. military sometimes gives out Rx amphetamines, though they tend to call them 'Go Pills.' When the Air Guard pilots, 'wired' on those same pills, strafed the Canadians in Afghanistan, the Air Force JAG filed briefs claiming that there was no significant disruption to coordination or performance caused by these pills, contrary to what the DEA and other conflicted mercenaries continue to blabber on about. Who was lying?
Elvis, James Dean, Edgar Allen Poe, Carl Sagan, Willie Nelson, Gerry Garcia, Sammy Davis Jr., Dean Martin, and hundreds of other well-thought-of American icons were -regular- recreational druig users!! And we haven't even addressed the country's appetite for the lethal and physically addictive depressant, alcohol.
Not a drug-using country?? Since when?
But heart disease resulting from fatty foods and inactivity kill more than most illicit and licit drugs combined, until you factor in nicotine/cigarettes, cigars, and various forms of chewing tobacco.
Jail Colonel Sanders and Ronald McDonald!!
I have never disputed that there may be some benefit for marijuana in rare cases. This is a different debate than widespread legalization.
I forgot to add Michael Phelps, and that Canadian snow-boarder kid from a few years back...
Losers? Not until the neo-witch-hunters got ahold of them; then they were losers for sure...
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/conten...
I just noticed the first article is this one,,the second is "rural schools face closure do to lack of funding"...HELLO?,,,you dont see the problem?..how about the amswer??,,,*snickers*
Cannabis and driving (The 'kicker' is that this study originally appeared in my archives in a National DOT NTSB cover) ;^>):
http://casr.adelaide.edu.au/T95/paper/s1...
Sounds like the guy is quite the story teller or he has rolled one to many. Yeah the guy got his money then called the authorities, had to get his take first. Just as guilty only he squealed first.
http://www.iom.edu/?id=12668
Marijuana Use is not Associated With Head, Neck or Lung Cancer in Adults Younger Than 55 Years: Results of a Case Cohort Study
Daniel E. Ford, M.D., M.P.H.
H.T. Vu, C. Hauer, K.L. Helzlsouer, J.C. Anthony
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
Dr. Ford is Associate Professor of Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Policy and Management at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. He graduated from Cornell University and received his medical degree from the State University of New York, Buffalo, completed his residency in internal medicine at Johns Hopkins, and received a masterÕs of public health degree at the same institution. After 2 years of postgraduate training at the National Institute of Mental Health, Dr. Ford rejoined the faculty at Johns Hopkins. For more than a decade he has been a member of the team conducting research on the relationship between psychiatric disorders and physical health in the Baltimore Epidemiologic Catchment area study. Dr. Ford has completed several studies related to tobacco smoking cessation and currently is funded by the National Cancer Institute to develop an Internet-based smoking cessation program. He directs a fellowship program in primary care health services, has published more than 60 articles and book chapters, and is currently Associate Editor for the Journal of General Internal Medicine.
Marijuana smoke contains carcinogens. Several small case series and one potentially flawed small case-control study have provided evidence that marijuana is associated with head and neck cancer. We conducted a large case-control study to address this issue. We recruited 164 participants with consecutive incident cases of head, neck, or lung cancer (adults younger than 55 years) in the Baltimore region from four hospitals between 1994 and 1999. Also recruited as controls were 526 individuals (younger than 55 years) from the Baltimore Epidemiologic Catchment Area study based on a random household sample. Cases and controls completed identical assessments of exposures via self-report, direct computer entry. Lifetime and current uses of marijuana, tobacco, and alcohol were assessed with detailed questions of use by 5- to 10-year intervals of their lives, by weekend and weekday consumption, and by mode of administration of the substance. Control patients were younger (44 vs. 49 years, p<.001), more likely to be female (62 percent vs. 34 percent, p<.001), and less likely to be white (55 percent vs. 69 percent, p<.01).
(cont'd)
(cont'd)
Substance use was commonly reported in both cases and controls (lifetime means, 125,000 tobacco cigarettes, 27,000 alcoholic drinks, and 8,700 marijuana joints). Consistent with other studies, use of tobacco and alcohol was associated with these cancers. Ever use of marijuana (66 percent controls vs. 60 percent cases, p=.17) and lifetime marijuana joints (8,135 vs. 8,946 joints, p=.64) were not associated with cancer. Marijuana use every day for 1 month or longer also was not associated with those cancers, with or without adjustment (19 percent controls, 12 percent cases, odds ratio=.74, 95 percent confidence interval .38, 1.43). Age of first use of marijuana, depth of inhalation of marijuana, and use of pipe versus joint for marijuana were not related to these cancers. Although power was limited, marijuana use was not associated with cancer for those who never used tobacco. Adjusting for all sociodemographic factors, family history of these cancers, lifetime tobacco use, and lifetime alcohol use did not change the relationship between marijuana and cancer. The balance of evidence from this study, the largest case-control study addressing marijuana use and cancer to date, does not favor the idea that marijuana as commonly used in the community is a major causal factor for head, neck, or lung cancer in young adults.
(**See Drs. Tashkin's and Abrams' research involving an even larger group of participants (over a thousand), -concluding- that there's no significant increase in risk for various respiratory cancers from cannabis ingestion.)
Are you reading these, ONDCP? Drug Bi-Czars? Drug nazis?
I feel bad for his family. He screwed up not just his life, but everyone who was close to him, too. Jerk.
of course they're not Dirk...propagandists only read and believe what supports their bias
I find it absolutely hilarious that twits like NP79 actually quote statistics from government websites, which are nothing but propaganda portals, especially when the DOJ posts something.
To NP79:
How presumtuous are you to decide what your God intended when he made you. Does the human body come with some kind of owners manual that says: "these receptors are for internally synthesized compounds only?" Or maybe it says that in the Bible somewhere. I can't recall. The Bible does say, however:
And God said, "See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. "Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food"; and it was so. Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Genesis 1:29-31
Seems to me that God made everything in the universe for us to use and enjoy, so why would he make marijuana (yes, *God* created marijuana, believe it or not) *and* give us the receptors to enjoy it, if he didn't want us to?
Nay, I say that those who do *not* condone the use of marijuana are the ones who are sacrilegious. Or, at least, intolerant and petty.
I see that you do not smoke, drink, consume caffeine or nicotine, eat sugar or red meat, have sex, fun or friends: that is admirable! You are truly "he who is without sin." So cast your stone, NP79. Too bad that yours shall be the only one thrown.
people who wish to legalize illegal drugs face a major stumbling block. there is too much money involved. some people have vested intrests in maintaining the status quo and we have the best politicians that money can buy.
Dirk: You are just picking and choosing scientific articles that best fit your predetermined conclusion.
"Highway and urban driving studies conducted in the Netherlands show less impact on actual driving. However, these driving studies used very low doses of marijuana for safety reasons, Dr. Heishman said. Future research using appropriate safety measures should test the effect of higher doses of marijuana on driving as well as the combined effect of marijuana and alcohol on driving, he concluded."
http://www.drugabuse.gov/NIDA_Notes/NNVo...
Here is a more comprehensive list that has the study you mentioned and a whole lot more explaining health effects of MJ. There are at least two other studies on this list that refute the "no risk" cancer of head and neck theory.
http://www.drugabuse.gov/MeetSum/marijua...
Guitarzan: I have not once mentioned God. I am purely using the scientific approach today. Have you ever tried white hemlock? That is another plant that God created, but I would not suggest ingesting it!!! :)
Guitarzan,
What you quoted was before the fall, after which God cursed the ground, hence the things you shouldn't eat.
I highly suggest everyone read "Drug Crazy: How We Got Into This Mess and How We Can Get Out" by Mike Gray. I read it for a Criminal Justice class a couple of years ago, and it is a really enlightening, and actually interesting, read (which cannot often be said of assigned reading)
http://www.amazon.com/Drug-Crazy-into-Th...
So there is 'gold' in them thar hills...
Seriously: smoking pot, growing pot, and distributing pot are still illegal activities under federal law. Some states have legalized the medicinal use in special cases but the federal laws still trump the state's passing of 'privilidge to burn' laws. Alaska allows via a blind eye the use of small quantities within your own home- just don't sell it or give it to anyone else.
I'm not going to argue the legalization of pot. I think it should stay illegal for the same reason most want it legal: current societal issues with alcohol, tobacco, over the counter drugs, and abuse of prescription pain killers. People already can't control themselves and responsibly use the legal drugs. Should we really add more gas to the fire?
If the American people choose to pass the legalization of marijuana through a nation wide vote and it then becomes legal I will have no issue with it. I will still abstain from its use but I will have no issue with others using it.
Until marijuana is legal I consider it the height of stupidity to use, grow, distribute the drug just because it 'should' be legal. Breaking the law does not lend credence to your argument. Rather, it shows the willingness of pot users to break the law. Who does it hurt, right?
np79,
I'm picking research that hasn't been dsiqualified in court.
You're not picking DEA/ONDCP propaganda, often already discredited, to support your biases?
The studies that I've linked to are the tip of the iceburg for credible research from noteworthy schools. Just because NORML or MPP or DRCNet list a study, doesn't make the study invalid. They often link to the original study.
As I said before, the State Supreme Court, as well as the Canadian Parliament's group assigned to this project, both have reviewed ample evidence of credible and non-credible sorts, and both, to varying degrees, determined that there is no compelling interest for the State to intervene in a criminal manner where personal use is involved..
BTW, Robbe followed up with another U.S. DOT/NTSB grant-funded study in Holland, entitled 'Marijuana, Alcohol,. and Actual Driving Performance.'
Note that in BOTH studies, variable doses of cannabis were used; not a static dose at all. And the course graduated from an enclosed area, to the open highway, and ultimately the crowded rush-hour traffic, in Robbe's study.
The U.S. federal government is often the source of a significant amount of the funding for research. Where illicit drugs research is concerned they must sign off in approval. Are you aware of an effort that has been on-going in Mass. for years, by a professor in Cambridge who's been repeatedly turned down by the DEA, when he's asked to grow small amounts of cannabis in order to conduct research re. medical and other issues?
If the federal gov. has een expressing a bias in funding researchers, in what direction do -you- suppose that bias would tend to lean??
You get three guesses, but the first two shouldn't be necessary.
In review, I notice that you have not mentioned God. My mistake. However, you do condemn "the evils of drug abuse." I merely inferred that, being as "good" and "evil" are purely dogmatic religious terms, that you would identify with and respond to a religious approach to the discussion. In retrospect, I agree with you somewhat. I *do* believe drug abuse is wrong, and should be punished. Drug *use*, however, should be a right and choice made by the individual, not a point of conformity imposed by government (or society).
As far as white hemlock: God said that all the plants shall be food; not just for humans, but also for animals. Just because its bad for us doesn't mean it isn't good for something or someone.
Now, I'm not sure exactly what *white* hemlock is, but any of the hemlocks, being poisonous, would not be good to eat! However, digitalis, a beneficial pharmaceutical, is extracted from foxglove and is also fatal if ingested. Its possible that hemlock (or maybe marijuana) contains a compound that cures cancer, and we just haven't discovered it yet.
>>>""Breaking the law does not lend credence to your argument. Rather, it shows the willingness of pot users to break the law. Who does it hurt, right?""<<
I believe that the laws in place are an inherent violation of the unspecified rights referenced in the 9th Amendment, though the politicized SCOTUS has ruled against this.
Other than for the Puritans (who were fairly 'twisted' before landing at Plynmouth Rock), how many of the Founders would've given the courts or legislatures the -privledge- to dictate the individual's relationship with their own gardens, bodies and minds? Darned few, I'd wager.
Secondly, federal law only trumps state law in this matter in federal court. States are referred to as 'separate sovereigns,' in contrast to the federal gov., and the other states, thus having the freedom to rule as they please in their own courts, provided that guaranteed, enumerated rights are not violated in that process..
When's the last time you saw a misdemeanor possession case on the docket here in federal court, short of a -rare- federal citation issued in Denali N.P.?
Lastly, Both Martin Luther King Jr. & Albert Einstein, stated in similar, though slightly varied wording, that "We have a moral obligation to defy unjust laws."
Should I be placed on any jury wherein the 'crime' at hand involves either charges of 'consensual crimes,' whether capitalist or otherwise, or where the 'crime' involves a person's relationship with their own mind and body, I will vote to acquit IN A HEART-BEAT.
Here, here Dirk! Our founding fathers founded the country on just that premise. Our first amendment nicely sums it up. It is only because we have allowed ourself to be brainwashed by political doomsaying and a rabid news media, bent on furthering not own own beliefs, but those of the highest bidder. And because of this, we have become a country of sheep - vehemently defending the ideals of whomever has the prettiest basket of lies.
The government estimates it as a 2 million dollar a year business. Just think of how much money the government could get from taxing that 2 million dollars. If there are enough growers we could eliminate or at least drastically lower our property tax.
After all compared to alcohol it is much safer and alcohol is legal. If your not going to make pot legal make alcohol illegal. Oh wait we tried that and proved that prohibition never works. Why continue to make criminals out of otherwise law abiding citizens who as adults want the right ,in a free country,to have the choice to smoke pot instead of drinking. Than we can divert the manpower, cost and energy used going after pot and do a much better job cracking down on highly more dangerous drugs like methamphetamine, crack, and heroin.
He should have gotten a grant to hire some college students, highschoolers, or even ilegal aliens. My girlfriends family would have probably done it for much less then a thousand dollars, and she would make those plants grow like madd. There would have been some profit loss for sure too. I never suspected Tobe of being involved in that type of business, but then again its the ones you least expect who hold you down while their mistery friend bashes your head in with a snowmachine helmet and they would probably blame it on alcohol or something. I know why don't we pay people not to grow pot, so they can buy pharmacuticals or alcohol and tobacco instead? There is a good return on ones investment rather then encouraging people to break the law, maybe even tax marijuana and start an industry here. There are alot of other states who would definately buy our good herb so they can give it to their indegents. We should assess what will be the economic cost of shutting down such a lucrative industry in our nation after all the others have gone bankrupt. I know the cost of the use of marijuana might need some studying some people don't do anything any way except rob, steal and theive, and perhaps whore themselves out to get high, some people get a paycheck for it I think they are called politicians and many government workers, lol.
Sounds like a do or die situation to me.
Dirk,
It was always nice talking to you the few times that we've met as you had all of your facts and figures correct as far as I could find out from before talking to you as well as after.
As I recall you can't get money from the Feds to do a study on MJ unless you are basically going to come up with the party line. And that has to say all of it is bad for anyone. And that isn't true at all.
For a few years I had one of the medical permits, and I still had a bust here where the Troopers left red faced. Three cars loads of them along with a National Guard 2 1/2 ton truck to haul all of my stuff away. What they found was one plant that I had go to seed so I could have some.
It was the first time that I've ever even heard of a cop give up who was the snitch. An old girl friend who had figured that I'd done her wrong, and I did as I told her to leave my home because she was a thief I found out.
Dirk, I'm glad that you are still out there on the front lines, but I've stopped using. Now they just keep me loaded up on morphine for pain all the time. And I don't have to pay for it because I'm a 100% Disabled America Veteran who's in pain all day every day as well as night. People should be allowed to use what helps them.
legalise?
I'm not positive, but I think if it's deemed that the gold mine and airplane were gained by the drug sales, then the state can confiscate it and sell it. It's one of the most insidious things about the drug war. They don't do that to people who outright steal money and buy stuff with it. If someone is caught embezzling funds over a long period of time, they don't confiscate their house because they may have used embezzled money to pay for it, but with any kind of drug sales, they can and do. It is ridiculous that any of law enforcement's money be made from how many people they bust for what. No part of the funding of police departments should be contingent on busting people for drugs. When they make it legal, along with Hemp-The Wonder Plant!, we can use the taxes from them to fund law enforcement, but the forfeiture statutes have GOT to be forfeited!
Someone mentioned the school closure story, so I have to say I don't have a problem with them funding schools with sales of this magnificent plant either. Hemp-The Wonder Plant! is so versatile, they could build most of a school out of it, heat and power the school with it, and feed the kids one of the most nutritious foods there is with it. But they can't do that because it's illegal! It's not psychoactive at all, but Americans can't grow it because it looks like a psychoactive substance some guy named Anslinger didn't like in the 1930s. I'm sorry, but that's just freakin' WRONG! The government should not have the right to put people in prison for using this plant, whether they use it for psychoactive or industrial purposes. It's a crime that it's a crime!
N2AK - "Guitarzan,
What you quoted was before the fall, after which God cursed the ground, hence the things you shouldn't eat." The "fall" is when Eve ate the forbidden fruit, right? That was when God cursed women in the childbirth department too, wasn't it? Because Eve ate the fruit, labor is painful now. Damn that Eve. If she hadn't eaten that darned fruit, women wouldn't feel any pain at all when passing a whole human being through that little canal, plus we'd all still be "sin-free". What kind of God would use childbirth pain as eternal biological punishment for something someone did hundreds of generations ago? It doesn't look to pleasant for animals to give birth either, so did Eve's sin spread to animals too? How mean of God to curse innocent animal women with labor pain for something a disobedient human did at the beginning of time, 6,000 years ago!
I'm curious if laws passed by Montana pertaining to guns would relate to weed. I mean if it was cultivated, and bought and sold within state borders, could the feds f#@k with it?
...Dirk?
gold was around 960 an ounce......weed is 4000-4500 an ounce....which one would yield more taxes for the state?
This article by the FDNM and also the AP story in the ADN are closer to tabloid material than information being presented as accurate newsworthy reporting.
Check the numbers out,they don't make any sense. Also the processing claim is an eyebrow raiser. How do you harvest weekly? Logistically, in relation to the budding cycle, that is almost impossible. Then the helicopter remark and other oddities.
Reporters have an obligation I believe to not simply parrot what some agency has fed them but to do a bit of critical analysis before they publish a story such as this one. Otherwise, why have a reporter? Why not just let whatever organization that may be concerned simply send their hype to the Newsminer to print and avoid the columnist?
dog
You bet, legalize the crap so we can more of these gene pool rejects running free in the world. Get off the pipe druggies, this crap is illegal for a reason. The problem is that the judges and DAs are also smoking the stuff and won't toss the book at any of them, fearing their supplies will be cut off.
Hi Patrick,
Gold's measured in 'troy ounces,' as a rule, as opposed to standard ounces as we think of them.
Unless the mine was patented, complete with sub-surface rights on the deed, in the name of a private owner, the mine would go back to its actual land owner, which would've most likely been either the State or the feds. I don't know the status of that particular mine.
If it was a privately owned mine with subsurface rights on a patent, then which ever entity takes jurisdiction will probably seize it. In this case, based upon the amount of cannabis discovered, if it's truly privately owned, it will likely result in the feds filing a seizure action against it, and sharing a percentage with the State.
--------
Looked at federal sentences for large cultivation efforts, lately, nosunlight? I don't think so. Folks are sometimes doing longer for cannabis grow operations than they are for negligent homicide or second degree murder charges. And the feds and state rarely, if ever, seize the murderer's property.
Later on, when you want Johnny Pot-Seed to "get a hair-cut, and get a real job," the Higher Education Act says that he's ineligible for a federally-backed studnet loan (which many/most are), as well. The murderer and the rapist can go to school with your kid, but not Johnny Pot-Seed; nope, he's too dangerous.
Ignorance of the insanity of the drug war affects many persons until it's one of 'theirs,' at which time they act shocked, and reveal that they really had no clue what their government had been up to these last 39 years of imposing morality at the barrel of a big gun..
Thanks Boreal Fox,
I can't yet envision which person you are, but I'm curious now.
I wouldn't go as far as to say that the feds actually 'fix' outcomes (though to find that they had in some cases wouldn't surprise me too terribly), as I would bet much heavier that they look closely at the potential for the study to result in conclusions that embarass the preferred party line.. Who, including many pot smokers, expected Robbe's conclusions to be what they were?
The fact that cannabis tends to make the user experience a state that often erroneously tells them they're more impaired than they are, would hypothetically lead them to believe that they were -really- that impaired, despite performance that is more objectively clear to others.
I engaged in an auditory satirical skit with a friend on the phone that was intended as an example of this factor, involving a couple of folks are driving, and, in traditional Cheech & Chonmg fashion, the driver is repeatedly asking, "Dude, how's my driving? Am I too messed up?"
The person experiencing that state isn't sufficiently aware that they're often -over- correcting for the circumstances, driving slower, not passing when they might, backing off form the vehicle ahead of them, sometimes increasing that 'head-spacing distance,' etc.
------
Yes, I've known a number of folks who were long-term Rx morphine (or other opiate) users/patients; some who would've preferred to have continued with cannabis at least part of the time, as their primary pain management method. Some of them had ^physical debilitation from opiates (as well as some who experienced ^ loss of quality of life resulting from marinol, or synthetic THC). Some of the opiate subscribers experienced what I think is a serious psychological burden of, often, even greater impact.
The dogma and demonizing of addicts and drug use in general, rather than viewing through a model of either individual choice or medicalization, has sometimes resulted in RX opiates users who actively denegrate themselves as 'junkies.' even though they need the opiates for very real injuries.
Those cases were truly sad. Telling a friend that they're doing what they need to do to get by, and that they still represent the same person they are and were. In short order, it told the story of some of outcomes of the conditioning we receive re. this issue, the frailties (and some of the limited beauty of) the human condition. To hate one's self based on rhetoric and propaganda; manufactured values that shaddow needs and reality. Self hatred, self-condemnation, self-loathing, all evidence of a crime committed insideously against compassion, reason, and sanity, without their being aware that they had become perpetrators against themselves.
We do what we gotta' do, and we hope and make what ever efforts not to hurt others around us in that process. Yet we all have hurt someone at some time.
>>>""I'm curious if laws passed by Montana pertaining to guns would relate to weed. I mean if it was cultivated, and bought and sold within state borders, could the feds f#@k with it?
...Dirk?""<<<
Alaska certainly has the authority to pass such a law.
However, and in both the case of Montana's 'gun rights' laws, as well as the hypothetical analogy that you've raised, the feds can still make arrests and file federal charges. Of note is that some states and municipalities have busied themselves passing legislation in the last several years making conditions for the feds' 'interventions,' and sometimes prohibiting the feds to operate without the locality's approval.. For all the good that will do; I suspect that those laws are more for posturing than pragmatism.
The questions in either case would be;
1.) What kind of desire do the feds have to intervene in either case? (the answer of which is as much based on political whim, as anything).
2.) What kind of resources do the feds have to address either circumstance? In the case of cannabis legalization on a state level, I suspect that they'd do what they've been doing in California with the state-legalized medical dispensaries; busting any that are most high-profile, then busting as many as they can get away with after that. Despite Obama's 'promises' to put an end to the raids on medical cannabis dispensaries in California, the DEA/Federal Marshalls/et al., are, and have been, continuing to actively raid those same dsipensaries. They sometimes fail to get a whole lot of local back-up when they call for it, buy they continue on none-the-less..
At the same time, you won't find a bunch of federal misdemeanor possession prosecutions in California -or- Alaska; they lack the resources, man-power and desire, from what I can gather.
The feds have steadily expanded the applications of, and federal authority represented by, the 'general welfare' and 'commerce' clauses for many decades running, rarely if ever turning down greater authority, and often actively seeking it. Add to that the federal (mercenary) dollars that your local LEOs receive, and you quickly see who bought your 9th and 10th Amendment rights, and whoo sold those rights to the feds.
On that issue, read Justice Clarence Thomas' dissenting opinion in the Angel Raich case, from California.
By the way, Boreal Fox, I don't consider myself on 'the front lines' anymore. I gave up most of my activism and writing a couple of years ago.
America seems satisfied to remain ignorant of the implications of their government's actions, and I see little point any longer in what amounts to self-abuse, until persons stop sitting on their hands.
The number of professed growers who've stopped by our booths over the years, and said, "I hope they never legalize it. I'm making too much money, and they'll never bust -me-." was disappointing enough. Add to that the fact that the greatest organized efforts to defeat Prop 215 in Calif. years ago were from the prison guards' union (you can place your bets on why that was), and the number of drug units in the U.S. whose funding relies heavily on seizures, some of whom will tell you off the record that they don't want to lose positions by loss of mission or funding, tells me once again, there is ample evidence that we are now an 'ideological mercenary society.'
We, as a society, are apparently willing to believe what ever we're told to believe, providing that we're paid well enough, or it furthers our own hatreds and bias..
I've seen it with some of the oil field service contractors, with the carriers, with legislators, and with those engaging in the drug war; elsewhere, too.
Most persons, reegardless of intent, cannot compete with that kind of force, which routinely undermines potentially altruistic democratic processes.
Dirk, I don't know where to start, so I'll just thank you for your intelligence, diligence and research.
You are a voice of reason.
Blessings to you and your Malamute,
MrsS
Thank you, Mrs. Saenz. And the best to you and yours, as well.
you all need to understand this guy was a bad guy. He is mean, irrational, and crazy. The marijuana bust for him is a blessing to us. A bad person is off the streets. It stopped him from really hurting someone. I say this about him from experience. I hope he get 20 years min.
Mrs.S. - I agree. Thanks, Dirk. The information you share is incredibly valuable.
nosunlight - Are you for alcohol and cigarette prohibition too? Both are more harmful than marijuana, so should we fill the prisons with drinkers and smokers as well? Or should we pretend we're in a free country and allow adults to make their own decisions regarding their minds and bodies. Marijuana is also less harmful than McDonald's food, so I guess we should be throwing those Big Mac eaters in prison too. If we imprison everyone who does something that's not healthy, we'll have more people in prison than out of prison.
Most of us have done it.
It was like "and we were" -pause- "Hey man,what was I saying?"
and
"What did you say your name is?" Reply: "Uh,Uh,hey let's change the subject man"
I don't care if anybody smokes dope, but hey, everybody here that knows about it knows there are some trade offs. For most people, not all, good vs bad short term memory, laziness vs productivity.
I think if you want to do it go ahead but you know the potential problems which are a lot less than Michael Jackson's Diluadid and on and on other prescription drugs and 2-3 1.5 liters of whiskey per day.
yep,
I don't know if he was or wasn't a nasty feller. I'll take your word for it that some had bad experiences with him, and leave it at that.
There are probably folks who would say the same about any one of us, and be correct within degrees.
That said, there are MANY laws on the books that deal with nasty, bad, evil, dishonest persons. If he was a threat to others, there are laws for that. If he killed or raqped others, there are laws for those behaviors or deeds. If he put others at risk by driving impaired, then there are laws for that as well. If he took other persons' things, then there are also laws for theft, too. And on and on.
I would be supportive of charging persons with offenses that -clearly- harmed others who had not agreed to be involved, and leave the catch-all, unnecessary 'consensual crime' and neo-puritanical laws where they belong; China, Afghanistan, and Iran, to name a few.
-----------
fairbankssteve,
There is a bit of research re. the reports and experiences of lethargy associated with cannabis use. Not all persons are affected the same. Additionally, the two primary or most common species of cannabis often cause different effects.
Cannabis Sativa is known for a more 'elevated' effect, with notably less report of lethargy. Cannabis Indica is more often associated with a quasi-narcotic effect, sometimes referred to as 'couch lock,' or recognized as causing observable lethargy in -some- users.
Yet there are persons who maintain respectable levels of physical or mental activity while under the influence of either one, and persons who don't maintain the Cheech & Chong style of conversation that you've depicted.
Persons in an abstinence-based world are rarely taught respectful or proper use of a substance. It would be frowned upon by many, despite the fact that many might benefit from just such a lesson.
Imagine getting a bottle of Rx meds from the Doc, with no label directing the user re. proper use, or in what circumstances. Such has been 'our' approach within the WO(S)D's; see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.
I had a friend who was a medical user for a variety of illnesses, who told me that he was almost 40 years old before he figured out how to more constructively use cannabis in his daily life.
The style of conversation you've portrayed above is far more common amongst persons who ingest more than they might've meant to, or those who purposefully ingest too much, especially adolescents, though self-titration is common with cannabis users. Unfortunately, the full effects of what has already been ingested are very slightly delayed from the time of inhalation. Ingestion through the lungs is fairly rapid, but not immediate.
Carl Sagan was a daily, routine user of cannabis. He never sounded like Cheech and Chong's stage characters; not that I ever heard.. In real life, Cheech and Chong don't sound like their stage characters either.
Metabolism has as much to do with the effects as the ~60 cannabinoids that typically exist in any sample of either species of cannabis, and those cannabinoids score differently in each sample, re. their significance or presence.
Yes, it's way less problematic in many ways than already-approved drugs, both Rx and over-the-counter, that have been cleared via FDA scrutiny. It's certainly less dangerous than any legal recreational vice we have today. And annually, aspirin kills more persons per year than any ten-year period for cannabis
(*See Federal Judge Francis Young's conclusions in the early 80s, during one effort to re-schedule cannabis federally, so that it could be used medicinally under federal law. The feds apppealed on a technicallity, or we might not even be having this conversation now.. We had won in Judge Young's federal court room.).
Thank you, doris. I hope you're doing well and enjoying the day.
What a waste. This man had the brains to engeneer an elaborate system and avoid detection. But, his brain had a laspe and he told a disgruntled employee about it. Maybe he was smoking too much of his own product? Anyone who thinks pot is harmless has already smoked too much.
For starters, the turn off the Elliott Highway at Eureka is at mile 131.5 not 139, so I hope the rest of the story is more accurate than that small fact. If Tobe was in that business for 20 or more years, it was not at that location and I am positive on that.
Alaska Rose, for sure he was not at that location for 20 years, I think that they have been trying to catch him for 20 yrs. Although it looks like he may have been at that location for about 8 yrs. None of the old timers in Eureka would have put up with the way he conducted himself. He may not have ever gotton caught at his other law breaking escapades, but many a prisoner would say they were innocent of the crime they were incarcerated for, but that they were guilty of so many other crimes. He became so calvalier in his disregard for the law that he got busted over pot, hopefully they can pin the felony assault and interference on him. He for sure wasn't some good ol' boy growing weed in political defiance, he bad upon bad, upon bad. Not just because of my experience. No one could accuse me or lots of others of total disregard for common respect and extreme indangerment. He's a liar and a cheat to mention a few...
>>>""Anyone who thinks pot is harmless has already smoked too much.""<<<
I doubt that Federal Judge Francis Young was a cannabis smoker. He reviewed a great amount of evidence before ruling as he did (As did the Canadian parliament members working with Pierre Claud Nolin, and the Alaska State Supreme Court Justices). And he stated unequivocably that "cannabis is safer than aspirin."
Aspirin kills folks every year. Acetaminophen kills even more. Cannabis has a toxicity level that's unattainable in all practicality, short of consuming well over a kilo of reasonably potent cannabis at one time; a feat not completed by anyone I've ever heard of.
The word 'harmless' is vague. Yes cannabis, in regular users, has been associated with brobnchitis, and other illnesses involving inflamation of the throat, etc. Yes, persons with -some- pre-existing mental disorders should avoid many different drugs.
It doesn't cause brain damage, it doesn't cause lung cancer (*See Tashkin's and Abrams' more recent research re, this issue), it doesn't cause a lowering of inhibitions in the way that alcohol does. It doesn't cause adolescent males to grow female breasts (as Nixon's administration alleged). It lacks any capacity for a true physical addiction. Its relationship to highway accidents involving death is a more or less a non-issue, providing that other drugs, including alcohol, are not involved.
Perhaps you listened too gullibly, without a critical ear, during the past 72 years of often-unlimited federally-funded propaganda, Dognabber. If you have -credible- research that reveals cannabis to be the proverbial devil's weed, post it.
95% dont use? north_pole420 you must be high...
2 mil a year,for approx 20 years.dude must have had some assets.probibly all in his own name.Ill bet hes sitting,thinking why the hell did i offer that f---er a job????????
NP79...Europe classifies drugs under soft and hard drugs...pot is a soft drug and therefore the laws are more lenient.
fairbankssteve,
...............Not all persons are affected the same
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I posted "For most people, not all, good vs bad short term memory, laziness vs productivity"
Dirk above is what I said which is pretty much what you are saying. I know people that makes them more productive but a lot more people that makes them lazy, me included.
I don't use it, but voted to legalize it since I believe the negative effects are a lot less benign that some legal substances.
Mistake
Should read more benign that some legal substances
Dirk: obviously you didn't live through the 60's and watch the mental decline of regular users. It dulls the senses and therefore kills productivity. Anything that alters mental perseption is not good. I saw friends go from productive workers to abscent couch potatoes. It may not effect all in the same way but it does do harm.
I want to stand down wind if the authorities burn it! Actually, we all know that the confiscated plants will die before the trial (or dry up and be "sold" or just plain disappear! California's governor wants to legalize it to get the state budget out of the red.
Alaska could gain so much by legalizing pot, taxing it and setting up a powerball (and I don't mean "coke") or lottery of some sort. But, the problem is who is going to oversee the state committees that oversee the legalization and functions of spending the profits???
Perhaps if Alaska would come out of the dark ages and legalize a lottery etc., the residents of this wonderful state would get lower property taxes and our schools and roads would receive the monetary attention that is desperately needed.
People who gamble are going to find it somewhere, people who smoke pot are going to find it somewhere - so let's turn it around to benefit the multitude instead of wasting tax payers money chasing the "bad" guys!
Olderbutwiser said:
California's governor wants to legalize it to get the state budget out of the red
------------------------------------------------------------------
Arnold is California's governor and I spent alot of time around him in the 1970's when he was the world's top bodybuilder and totally unknown to the general public. Then he made the movie Pumping Iron in 1977 and in the movie it shows Arnold smoking reefer in South Africa. I think Arnold would like to get the state budget out of the red, but think he has other reasons. Don't believe it, get the movie.
Happy valley...This gold mine has a new name.
it might be happy valley to you, but to me, with apologies to steve earle, it will be evermore copperhead road.
Per the article:
"Larson allegedly told him that he had never had his offer rejected before and he had “killed people for less." "...
Either the words of a completely stoned idiot, or there is a larger investigation warranted. Anybody that is aware of an illegal operation is probably culpable under conspiracy laws, as I understand them. So our hero may have felt caught between a rock and a hard place. Maybe they should inspect the tailings.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.