Cops Called to Marijuana Garden Robbery Seize Crop; Growers Could Be Arrested

m9y49f-090512ckpotbust50.jpg
Marysville Appeal-Democrat
Thanks for calling
Forgive marijuana growers if they're not yet prepared to participate fully in society. The same society asking cannabis cultivators to pay taxes and apply for permits has been locking them up for 40 years -- and tearing down their gardens when they call police to assist.

A trio of Santa Clara County growers who called police to report a robbery won't likely be contacting authorities again.
Unknown thieves tied up two growers at gunpoint in Morgan Hill last Thursday, but fled when the third grower returned to the crop.

The growers called police, who thus far have done more damage to the "victims" than to the suspects: Cops tore down the growers' 120 marijuana plants, and if the District Attorney chooses to press charges, police will be back to serve the "victims" with arrest warrants, the Gilroy Dispatch reports.

As for the assailants? They're still at large. No suspects were identified, as of Tuesday afternoon.

The growers, who were also not identified, reported three Hispanic men breaking into their garden at 7:15 a.m. last Thursday. They ranged in ages from 22 to 45, and drove three separate vehicles.

When two of the growers confronted the intruders, the robbers pulled out handguns and proceeded to tie the growers up and help themselves to a couple of the plants, the newspaper reported. They fled when the third grower returned home. Police spent several hours that afternoon taking down the garden.

Sheriff's investigators said the growers' garden was "out of compliance" with state law, but would not say how. State law says that individual growers can have up to six mature or 12 immature marijuana plants -- but gardens can be much bigger if growers are cultivating on someone else's behalf.

For example, one grower could be feasibly legal with 120 plants if they had, on-site, paperwork -- or physicians' recommendations to use medical marijuana -- from 12 other people.

What's more, the limits on possession outlined in 2003's Senate Bill 420, which was meant to give clarification to the murky legality of 1996's Proposition 215, were struck down by the California Supreme Court in a 2010 decision.

The situation is a tricky one for police to handle. Often, growers who lose a garden to police are not charged or exonerated in court, when they produce paperwork that proves that their grow was indeed legal. If this happens in this case, and the alleged thieves are not caught, look for growers to never call police again, or worse -- take justice into their own hands.

Follow us on Twitter at @SFWeekly and @TheSnitchSF
My Voice Nation Help
3 comments
Duncan20903
Duncan20903

The 6/12 plant "limit" was struck down by the California Supreme Court as an illegal modification of the Compassionate Use Act. It's been 4 or 5 years since this decision was handed down...why in the world am I still seeing  claims that it is still the law?

Ozzy
Ozzy

Thats Santa Clara County for ya!  Be smart, move to Santa Cruz where they accept and assist if needed.

malcolmkyle16
malcolmkyle16 topcommenter

Prohibitionists are neither civil nor productive members of society, they are soulless parasites—inhuman, oppressive criminals from whom protection is required.  

 

Or maybe you think that Prohibitionists didn't really intend to kill hundreds of thousands worldwide, put 1 in every 30 American adults under supervision of the correctional system, and—exactly like their counterparts of the 1920s—destroy the economy?

 

Whatever way you look at it, Prohibitionists are overwhelmingly responsible for an immense increase in organized crime, international terrorism, rampant official corruption, a broken economy, mass unemployment and a serious undermining of international security and development.

 

If you sincerely believe that prohibition is a dangerous and counter-productive policy then you can stop helping to enforce it. You are entitled—required even—to act according to your conscience! 

 

* It only takes one juror to prevent a guilty verdict. 

* You are not lawfully required to disclose your voting intention before taking your seat on a jury.

* You are also not required to give a reason to the other jurors on your position when voting. Simply state that you find the accused not guilty!

* Jurors must understand that it is their opinion, their vote. If the Judge and the other jurors disapprove, too bad. There is no punishment for having a dissenting opinion.

 

“It is not only [the juror's] right, but his duty … to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court.” —John Adams

 

We must create what we can no longer afford to wait for: PLEASE VOTE TO ACQUIT! 

 

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

©2014 SF Weekly, LP, All rights reserved.
Loading...