Chris Bartkowicz Rally

[Sshfan]

No offense but he sounds like I did when I was 20 something. Thought I knew everything and had very little sympathy for others. Thought I could never fuck up... Have a little sympathy for this guy what he was doing is harmless. Marijuana has never killed anyone. He does not deserve 60 years in prison for being stupid or breaking the "rules" of a corrupt and outdated system.

You may be correct about this guy bringing it on himself but he should be able to argue medicinal use in federal court. There is no other reason other than bs "legal rules" that the jury should not hear the full side of the story IMO.

 

[sedate]

He can have a Darwin Award to spruce up his federal cell

No offense but he sounds like I did when I was 20 something. Thought I knew everything and had very little sympathy for others. Thought I could never fuck up... Have a little sympathy for this guy what he was doing is harmless. Marijuana has never killed anyone. He does not deserve 60 years in prison for being stupid or breaking the "rules" of a corrupt and outdated system.

Oh please. I've as much empathy as anyone.

But this Bartkowicz doesn't deserve any.

If it were actually a medical grow for actual med patients then I'd be all over that crap - but really - but if it were an actual medical grow under state law, the DEA would've found it too politically sensitive to bother with.

I mean even as it stands Jared Polis was writting nasty letters to the DEA and the DOJ demanding an explanation.

The fact of the matter is that just because Bartkowicz claimed his marijuana was medicinal doesn't make it that way. It just means he (wrongly) claimed it was.

And somewhere in his previous five felony arrests he should've figured out that if you are going to live in a legal grey area, you might want to 1) actually read the laws you're taking advantage of, and 2) keep your shit off broadcast television.

 

[Bud Spleefman]

If 10,000 Chris Barkowitz all called 9 News to brag TODAY, it would break the DEA's back.. They can't do 10,000 of these cases..... everyone who goes before you go helps break the machine a little more. Sooner or later we will break it for good!

Further more, everyone has a right to do what he was doing. Starbucks, WalGreens, Coors, the liquor store..... everyone sells something to make you feel good, or buzzed, whatever. Who has a right to say you can't grow weed in your basement? No one! We all know it's ridiculous, and obviously it would be better if we didn't call 9 News to brag when we are breaking the law, but don't we want full legalization?

Maybe the guy will win, I know the Fed Courts don't allow Med Cannabis as a defense... but we need to keep trying. Every little bit helps!

 

[mr. bojangles]

I'm curious if anyone who has attempted to bring up a medical defense in federal court, has brought up the fact that the federal government has it's own MMJ patients. Doesn't seem like the prosecutor could propose a valid argument against, if the same entity that pays him also in fact is guilty of the same accusations. Of course I can't remember the last time I witnessed the feds do something that was truly just and righteous.

 

[Dorje]

He could be the biggest idiot in the world, doesn't mean he should go to jail for any length of time. I don't remember any of his victims complaining (oh right, he didn't have any), no animals, wildlife or public property was harmed, so I'm not sure why anyone is considering putting him in jail....

 

[TyKaycha]

I'm curious if anyone who has attempted to bring up a medical defense in federal court, has brought up the fact that the federal government has it's own MMJ patients. Doesn't seem like the prosecutor could propose a valid argument against, if the same entity that pays him also in fact is guilty of the same accusations. Of course I can't remember the last time I witnessed the feds do something that was truly just and righteous.

Ya know that's an interesting point and might be why the prosecutor wants to keep the medical defense out of the trial. hmmmm bastards! :fighting0087:

 

[Sshfan]

I'm curious if anyone who has attempted to bring up a medical defense in federal court, has brought up the fact that the federal government has it's own MMJ patients. Doesn't seem like the prosecutor could propose a valid argument against, if the same entity that pays him also in fact is guilty of the same accusations. Of course I can't remember the last time I witnessed the feds do something that was truly just and righteous.

This is where the law is flakey and it is hard to have respect for law that is not fair and lets the defendant tell his side of the story. I always heard you should hear both sides of the story before making a "fair" decision. The fed have a history of cases like this in California of not allowing the defendant to bring up state medical laws. In other words, they don't allow the full side of the story to even be mentioned.

The judge will tell the jury the law is not up for interpretation so will the prosecutor. Its the "rules". This is where citizens need to make a stand and vote not guilty if the law is not fair and take this system back to what it was intended to be.

 

[Sshfan]

If it were actually a medical grow for actual med patients then I'd be all over that crap - but really - but if it were an actual medical grow under state law, the DEA would've found it too politically sensitive to bother with.

Sorry, I can't work within those limited constraints. People have been supplying me good herb for 20 years outside the medical system and they don't deserve jail either. The interpretation of Amendment 20 for many disagree with the plant counts and it is really up in the air whether this was violation of state law at the time. I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

I don't believe that someone having 200 plants versus 36 constitutes a life prison sentence even if he has priors related to mj. He was over the state limits and maybe a punishment or a reprimand to get into compliance there is justified but anything over probation for harming no one is just a waste of tax payer money.

 

[sky high]

Bad news for Barkowitz

Judge: State pot law no defense in federal case

(AP) – 57 minutes ago

DENVER — A pot grower won't be allowed to use Colorado's medical marijuana law to fend off federal drug charges.

The decision Wednesday by U.S. District Judge Philip A. Brimmer means that Christopher Bartkowicz (BART-ko-wits) faces a possible life sentence on federal marijuana cultivation charges.

Brimmer said that suggestions by the White House that the U.S. government wouldn't pursue pot cases in states that allow medical marijuana cannot be used as a defense on federal drug charges.

Bartkowicz's suburban Denver home was raided by federal agents in February after he showed off his basement pot business to a television news reporter.

The judge also rejected Bartkowicz's arguments that he was singled out unfairly because he talked to a reporter.

 

[mrdizzle]

mortgages everything you own to the hill, its an old school trick, Feds cant take what the bank owns

guys a real dumb fuck, a true ego maniac, but I have a feeling he will get a plea and serve 3-10yrs. my heart wont allow me to believe a prosecutor would want to jail someone for 60yrs for growing herb

 

[mrdizzle]

wow, I just watched the video of this fucktard on the news. Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck him, he can do the whole bid for all I care, what a mutt. hes lucky hes only getting 60yr, if this was the mafia his brains would be all over some sidewalk right now

 

[mrdizzle]

"I want to be invisible"- chris bartkwicz , one of the last things he said on that news report

 

[sedate]

Sorry, I can't work within those limited constraints. People have been supplying me good herb for 20 years outside the medical system and they don't deserve jail either.

I mean - I totally agree as a matter of public policy federal pot laws are retarded.

But I'm not talking about macro-scope public drug policy - I'm talking about the Colorado MMJ scene and how much fuel this tard gave the General Assembly during the run up to HB1284. Why do we have 5 patient limits and school distance requirements and shit?

. . . exhibit A . . .

guys a real dumb fuck, a true ego maniac, but I have a feeling he will get a plea and serve 3-10yrs. my heart wont allow me to believe a prosecutor would want to jail someone for 60yrs for growing herb

Yea really.

One of the charges carries a mandatory minimum of 40 years. My gut tells me the US DA will drop that one and make him eat the other 20 in exchange for a guilty plea.

He better drop the circus act quick though if he wants any days of freedom left in his life.

wow, I just watched the video of this fucktard on the news. Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck him, he can do the whole bid for all I care, what a mutt.

Haha. ROFL.

Yea really. Fuck that mutt.

 

[Seamaiden]

This is where the law is flakey and it is hard to have respect for law that is not fair and lets the defendant tell his side of the story. I always heard you should hear both sides of the story before making a "fair" decision. The fed have a history of cases like this in California of not allowing the defendant to bring up state medical laws. In other words, they don't allow the full side of the story to even be mentioned.

The judge will tell the jury the law is not up for interpretation so will the prosecutor. Its the "rules". This is where citizens need to make a stand and vote not guilty if the law is not fair and take this system back to what it was intended to be.

There's something else most jurors aren't told about, and that's jury nullification.

*I* know about it. I wonder why I can't get on any juries, though...?

We the People have the right to find against a bad law. We can actually use a case which we feel is a demonstration of poor law in order to find against it by not finding against the defendant. That's also the letter of the law, but the judge no longer tells you that.

I believe I read somewhere that West Virginian jurors are the most likely to throw judge's instructions out the window and exercise their right of nullification. Gotta give 'em props for that.

 

[BoCo Buds]

He could be the biggest idiot in the world, doesn't mean he should go to jail for any length of time. I don't remember any of his victims complaining (oh right, he didn't have any), no animals, wildlife or public property was harmed, so I'm not sure why anyone is considering putting him in jail....

strange how this simple truth keeps gettin passed by. right on Dorje

 

[TurboAllWD]

strange how this simple truth keeps gettin passed by. right on Dorje

Props to Dorje, Funk mentioned this too. Isn't this why the guy in BoCo was not charged for having a couple pounds and an edible rec?

This guy definitely abused the system and needs to be punished for that but 20-60 years? I wouldn't wish that shit on any grower, no matter how greedy they are, even if their facebook page has a dumbass picture of them with branches of buds hanging out of their ears. haha

 

[pollenchucker]

Stan Garnett urges John Suthers to help MMJ grower Chris Bartkowicz: That's likely!

http://blogs.westword.com/latestwor..._mmj_grower_chris_bartkowicz_thats_likely.php

​Tonight, several medical marijuana attorneys host a fundraiser for Boulder DA Stan Garnett, who's challenging Attorney General/MMJ-law hater John Suthers. Garnett's now publicly criticizing a ruling forbidding marijuana grower Chris Bartkowicz from using a medical defense in his high-profile case. In a release, Garnett also urges Suthers to intercede with the feds on Bartkowicz's behalf. Yeah, sure. See the statement below:

Bartkowicz Deserves Fair Application of Colorado Law
SEPTEMBER 23 -- Attorney General candidate Stan Garnett said today that the ongoing federal prosecution in Denver of medical marijuana grower Christopher Bartkowicz highlights his belief that currently, this complex issue is best dealt with primarily through land-use regulation, rather than the criminal courts. This prosecution, which threatens Mr. Bartkowicz with decades in prison for an activity he believed to be sanctioned under Colorado law as it was currently written, is unjust and unnecessary.

"John Suthers, a professed supporter of states' rights, and obligated as the current Attorney General to defend Colorado law, should call on the U.S. Attorney to promptly and fairly reach a proportionate and just resolution of this case," Garnett said. "Colorado needs thoughtful leadership on these complex legal matters. Mr. Suthers' commitment to states' rights and federalism is selective, and he raises the issue only if it comports with his socially conservative views."

In case after case, the incumbent Attorney General has argued for the supremacy of states' rights, although a closer look at his record reflects that when he moves to defend them, he does so in a fashion clearly meant only to satisfy the conservative wing of his political party - his opposition to gun laws, taking a swipe at gay rights, or the challenge to health care reform being just a few of the examples. If his defense of states' rights is solid and sincere, the incumbent should stand equally strong in his defense of Colorado's Amendment 20, said Garnett.