My Life of Joy - my pics, my family and friends and some of my writing

My Life of Joy

New lockdown rules explained

a couple of questions and answers about the new rules, guidelines, whatever they are.

a lady asked why she will be allowed to meet her son in the park but not in her back garden. She was told it is because he may touch garden furnature or garden gate but you can sit on the grass in the park.

another asked why young children will be allowed back to school first. The answer was because if they get ill with the virus they will probably not get as ill as the older ones, but, the young children are also good at spreading the virus (no mention of the teachers and other staff). If you have ayoung child that you want to send back to school so you can drive, walk or cycle to work that you cannot do at home, and need a child minder that will be able to walk, drive or cysle to your home, you'll be able to do that, so long as the child minder is not a friend or relative or pensioner, and please make sure they don't tounch anything in your house, or in the garden if its your son.

the government wants people back to work but not on public transprt; they want young children back to school but not on public transport.

also we can now meet one other person outside the home so long as we stay 2 metres apart, just like last week when we could meet outside a shop, but now it doesn't have to be outside a shop. They did no mention people lining up in parks at 6 metre intervals, like outside supermarkets, in which case everone except at either end could meet two other people - unless it's a big circle. You can also play a sport with your friend in the park, like tennis. But avoid touching a ball that the other person has touched. I think you'll be allowed to play blow football too, so long as you both wear masks. Plus you'll be able to throw darts at your friends so long as they are at least 2 metres away.

there's also a problem for border towns England /Wales and England / Scotland, where they live in one country but work in the other.

got it! if not, it's your fault if restrictive measures are toughened again if the virus infection rate increases to where it was before the lockdown - or is it already there?

workers beware, be alert, your taxes will soon be going up.

pensioners, ignore all that, it may not apply to you.

but the good news is that UK citizens probably won't be able to leave the UK for a holiday this year, although people from abroad may be able to come to the UK for a couple of weeks holiday in isolation.

what a mess

POEM: Bumbling Boris

Bumbling Boris make no sense,
The red virus outside your fence,
But you can walk now, mile on mile,
Wear a face mask, don't show your smile.

You can be outside all the day,
Go to work and earn your pay,
Sit inside your local park,
They'll be unlocked til it gets dark.

Play your sports with family,
Run yout life but alert please be,
You'll be fined if you break the rules,
Soon the infants back to schools.

Keep your distance, stay apart
Fill your wheelie shopping cart,
Use your plastic bankers cards,
Spare the beds on hospital wards.

Control the virus when it's red,
Keep the colours in your head,
Ease the lockdown, ease it slow,
Bumbling Boris doesn't know.

HOW MANY TIMES

HOW MANY TIMES
by
Alun Buffry

(to tune of Blowing in the Wind – thanks Bob Dylan)

------------------------------------------------------

How many times must a man be afraid

of the sound of a knock on his door

Yes 'n' how many times must he live in fear

of those who uphold the law

Yes 'n' how many times must the public pay

to take themselves to the courts

Yes 'n' how many times must a mother watch

her innocent children caught?

The answer my friends, is blowing in the wind,

the answer is blowing in the wind.

How many families will be split apart

when a father is sent to jail

Yes 'n' how many times lives must be lost to bad drugs

because of a law that fails

Yes 'n' how much pain must be felt by a man

that could be eased by a plant

Yes 'n' how suffering will not be cured

because of the drugs that can't

The answer my friends, is blowing in the wind,

the answer is blowing in the wind.

How many years must be passed while we wait

to be free to smoke the good herb

Yes 'n' how many times must we see the judge

before we get the rights we deserve

Yes 'n' how many drugs must a doctor sell

before we can grow our own ease

Yes 'n' how many drugs must a patient take

when cannabis can cure the disease

The answer my friends, is blowing in the wind,

the answer is blowing in the wind.

How many fines must the people pay

before they're allowed to get high

Yes 'n' how many times will a Government hide

before they will legalise

Yes 'n' how many lives will be spoilt by a law

when the law is meant to protect

Yes 'n' how many cells will the prisoners fill

for the good of a law that's suspect

The answer my friends, is blowing in the wind,

the answer is blowing in the wind.

Letter to Chole Smith MP Norwich North: the Misuse of Drugs Act is often in conflict with Human Rights laws.

Dear Chloe,

I am writing to express my continuing deep concern that the application of the Misuse of Drugs Act is often in conflict with Human Rights laws.

Human Rights guarantee every person the Right to choose their own religion or belief and to practice that belief alone or in the company of others. Human Rights law also guarantee the Right to a Private Life.

The criteria that allows authorities to interfere with those Rights is clearly stipulated in the law; that an activity is against the law is not enough along; the law also demands that such interference must be in the interests of public health or to protect public order or the Rights of others.

My question is: in what way does a person that chooses to grow and consume a plant, in this case cannabis, if they believe such consumption, alone or with others, for any reason, is beneficial or even essential to their well-being, when that person grows or consumes in PRIVATE, pose a risk to anyone?

It can hardly be called a "crime" when there is no harm or risk and no victims, yet a person can be sentenced to up to 14 years in prison for growing cannabis, even if for its their person medicinal or spiritual benefits?

In consideration of the comparison to the harms caused to individuals and communities by alcohol, it seems that the application of the laws against the possession and cultivation of cannabis need some justification as it ruins the lives and alienates so many people annually at great public expense (billions of pounds annually).

I look forward to your reply.

Yours sincerely,

Alun Buffry Interviews and speeches 2000 to 2019

INTERVIEWS ANS SPEECHES

• FUTURE RADIO, FEBRUARY 6 2019
• DARK CITY RADIO CANNABIS COMPASSION CLUB, August 20, 2015
• Legalise Cannabis Alliance Conference, Stoke-On-Trent, 2007
• Legalise Cannabis Alliance Conference, Norwich, 2006
• Legalise Cannabis Alliance Conference, Norwich, 2005
• Trafalgar Square, 2005
• Legalise Cannabis Alliance Conference, Norwich, 2003
• Legalise Cannabis Alliance Conference, Norwich, 2001
• Legalise Cannabis Alliance Conference, Norwich, 2001

Misinformation: Portsmouth cannabis grower told police he was exercising his Magna Carta rights

In Common Law the question is whether or not the accussed person has done any wrong or harm to others or their property:  if they are found guilty they are deemed to have committed a "crime".

Other laws that have been and are being made by Parliament are statutes - subject to the political whim of the time and changeable: doing something against those laws, which mostly do not have what one could call a victim except the statue itself, are OFFENCES, not crimes.

The cultivation of cannabis within one's own home for one's own use, not involving others and not having a victim, banned under statute, is certainly an offence brought about by political whim, and, incidentally, undergoing change throughout the world.

 Here we have the case of a man basically sent to prison for disobeying statute, a man through his so-called offence has done no harm and who was in fact using it only for his personal benefit, being sent to prison.

In addition, we have Human Rights and one of those is the right to a private life.  The Bill is quite specific on this: authority must be able to justify interfering with a Private Life - there must be a threat to public health, public order, the Rights of others or national security.

In this case there was no threat and the authorities acted without good reason thereby themselves being guilty of breaking a law - and there is a victim.

"But Judge Crabtree added Dixon committed the second offence while on bail.
"He said: ‘It’s shows a disregard for the law.’"

No, your Honour, that was disregard for STATUTE - a law made my politicians - it shows disregard for political opinion - and neither is holding such statue in disregard o crime.

In the not-too-distant future people will look back at these cases and see nothing but injustice brought about by state employees to enforce statutes created by politicians.

If there is no victim, there cannot be a crime.

Portsmouth cannabis grower told police he was exercising his Magna Carta rights

Feb 3 2015, The News, Portsmouth UK

A MAN caught twice growing cannabis at his home told police and a judge he was a freeman of the land not bound by common law.
Portsmouth Crown Court heard the Southsea home of Niall Dixon was raided by police who found 65 plants growing in 2013.
The court heard that during a second raid in January last year officers found two plants in a growing tent, one in his conservatory and some dried cannabis.
Prosecutor Nicholas Hall said Dixon had told police that through Magna Carta he was exercising ‘his right granted by god to consume any plants that he chose to do and therefore the inapplication to him of this legislation’.
The court heard Dixon, 43, used the cannabis in juice form for medical conditions he suffered, including anxiety.
Judge Peter Dixon Crabtree sentenced Dixon to eight months in prison for the first offence and one month concurrent for the second.
He gave no extra punishment for the possession charge.
Judge Crabtree said: ‘You profess to be a freeman of the land not bound by common law.
‘I’ve no doubt that you hold the beliefs you espouse and do so genuinely.
‘In court that’s not led to any difficulties. You have conducted yourself well.’
But Judge Crabtree added Dixon committed the second offence while on bail.
He said: ‘It’s shows a disregard for the law.’
The court also heard Dixon, of Devonshire Avenue, shared the drug with friends – but only when they asked him to do so.
Judge Crabtree added: ‘He provided his friends with cannabis if they visited and wanted to use that drug but not on a commercial basis.
‘It’s accepted by the crown that the cannabis found was for personal use.
Unemployed Dixon admitted one count of cultivation of a Class B drug in relation to the first raid, another count of the same charge and one of possession.
The court heard he spent around £1,000 setting up his growing operation and officers had found the plants on the ground floor and basement in the first raid.
He had grown tomatoes and other plants alongside the cannabis in a growing tent, Judge Crabtree added.
Hannah Evans, defending, said Dixon told her his drug use had significantly reduced.
She added: ‘Niall has very firm views as to what his rights are and his position on what the role of the law is.’

 

Cannabis-using mother convicted of breast feeding cannabis to her baby - yet the cannabinoids are already in us naturally!

In the last feed days the world press have been reporting that a New Zealand mother has pleaded guilty to supplying cannabis to her baby through her breast milk.. yet most have failed to report another recent press article that claims that cannabinoids are natural constituents in breast milk.  In fact the claims go further than suggesting that cannaboinds are present naturally and claim  "If it were not for these cannabinoids in breast milk, newborn children would not know how to eat, nor would they necessarily have the desire to eat, which could result in severe malnourishment and even death. Believe it or not, the process is similar to how adult individuals who smoke pot get the "munchies," as newborn children who are breastfed naturally receive doses of cannabinoids that trigger hunger and promote growth and development." ( see below)


First, the nonsense: The New Zealand Herald wrote:

"A woman has been convicted of giving cannabis to her 3-month old baby through her breast milk, in what is believed to be the first case of its kind in New Zealand.

"The 29-year-old Wanganui woman was charged with administering a class C controlled drug, namely cannabis, to a person under the age of 18.

"She pleaded guilty and was sentenced in Wanganui District Court last week to six months' supervision."

adding a comment from Allison Jamieson, a Plunket clinical adviser, who said ..

"organisation advised mothers against using cannabis, tobacco and other drugs.

"Most drugs, including cannabis and P, pass through the breast milk and are known to affect babies.

"It is safest for breast-feeding mothers to avoid smoking and taking drugs because the long-term effects of this on the baby are unknown." she said.

This of course, has been jumped on and repeated my many other news agency around the world.

Now the facts:

However, just a few weeks earlier, seemingly unknown to the mother, her legal representatives that afiled to do their jobs, the courts or the press, it was claimed that cannabinoids are in fact present naturally in all of our bodies including breast milk:

Cannabinoids, like those found in marijuana, occur naturally in human breast milk
Jonathan Benson
Natural News
Friday 20 Jul 2012

Woven into the fabric of the human body is an intricate system of proteins known as cannabinoid receptors that are specifically designed to process cannabinoids such as tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), one of the primary active components of marijuana. And it turns out, based on the findings of several major scientific studies, that human breast milk naturally contains many of the same cannabinoids found in marijuana, which are actually extremely vital for proper human development.

Cell membranes in the body are naturally equipped with these cannabinoid receptors which, when activated by cannabinoids and various other nutritive substances, protect cells against viruses, harmful bacteria, cancer, and other malignancies. And human breast milk is an abundant source of endocannabinoids, a specific type of neuromodulatory lipid that basically teaches a newborn child how to eat by stimulating the suckling process.

If it were not for these cannabinoids in breast milk, newborn children would not know how to eat, nor would they necessarily have the desire to eat, which could result in severe malnourishment and even death. Believe it or not, the process is similar to how adult individuals who smoke pot get the "munchies," as newborn children who are breastfed naturally receive doses of cannabinoids that trigger hunger and promote growth and development.

"[E]ndocannabinoids have been detected in maternal milk and activation of CB1 (cannabinoid receptor type 1) receptors appears to be critical for milk sucking ... apparently activating oral-motor musculature," says the abstract of a 2004 study on the endocannabinoid receptor system that was published in the European Journal of Pharmacology.

"The medical implications of these novel developments are far reaching and suggest a promising future for cannabinoids in pediatric medicine for conditions including 'non-organic failure-to-thrive' and cystic fibrosis."

Studies on cannabinoids in breast milk help further demystify the truth about marijuana
There are two types of cannabinoid receptors in the body -- the CB1 variety which exists in the brain, and the CB2 variety which exists in the immune system and throughout the rest of the body. Each one of these receptors responds to cannabinoids, whether it be from human breast milk in children, or from juiced marijuana, for instance, in adults.

This essentially means that the human body was built for cannabinoids, as these nutritive substances play a critical role in protecting cells against disease, boosting immune function, protecting the brain and nervous system, and relieving pain and disease-causing inflammation, among other things. And because science is finally catching up in discovering how this amazing cannabinoid system works, the stigma associated with marijuana use is, thankfully, in the process of being eliminated.

In another study on the endocannabinoids published in the journal Pharmacological Reviews back in 2006, researchers from the Laboratory of Physiologic Studies at the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism uncovered even more about the benefits of cannabinoids. These include their ability to promote proper energy metabolism and appetite regulation, treat metabolic disorders, treat multiple sclerosis, and prevent neurodegeneration, among many other conditions.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014299904007423
http://pharmrev.aspetjournals.org/content/58/3/389.full
http://pharmrev.aspetjournals.org/content/58/3/389.full#title49
http://www.whattoexpect.com
http://bioteaching.wordpress.com/2011/03/15/cannabinoids-and-cannabis/

Magistrate tells drug farmer: Cannabis killed my brother so jack it in

I feel I must comment on your article "Magistrate tells drug farmer: Cannabis killed my brother so jack it in" (August 24).

Whilst of course I agree with Magistrate Yvonne Davies when she says "“If I can stop one family going through what I went through it will be worth it.”, I feel she is wrong to blame the cannabis plant or use of it for the terrible ordeal her family went through leading to the death of her brother. It is prohibition that was the real cause.

It is indeed sad that her brother's mental health deteriorated after he used cannabis, but is there any evidence that it caused the problems? - He would of course have been well-advised not to consumed cannabis, especially the dreadful stuff sold on the streets under prohibition. The prohibition law leaves cannabis in the hands of often unscrupulous dealers and profiteers who care little or nothing about quality or contamination, and may often sell it alongside other drugs. Those dealers are hardly likely to offer such advice.

So what help was the law to Ms Davies' brother and we must remember that it was under prohibition that these events leading to his death occurred.

Prohibition helps nobody except the dealers - it results in the punishment of people that the law is really meant to protect, boosting profits for suppliers and leaving consumers exposed to the world of crime. Anyone suffering from bad effects of cannabis will of course be reluctant to seek help due to fear of arrest and prosecution.

Had he been drinking and developed problems, it is probable that he would have been helped - but with cannabis consumers seem to be thrown to the mercy of the courts not the help of doctors.

I would ask reader as well as Ms Davies, this: "If you discover a family member consuming drugs, what would you do, call a doctor or a policemen?"

Magistrate tells drug farmer: Cannabis killed my brother so jack it in

Manchester Evening News

Friday 24 Aug 2012

A magistrate revealed to a man she was sentencing for growing cannabis that addiction to the drug had led to the death of her own brother.

Chairman of the bench Yvonne Davies told defendant Christopher Duncan that the tragedy had been a 'horrendous' time for her family.

And – as she ordered him to do 200 hours of unpaid work – she warned: "Cannabis is serious, jack it in."

Duncan, 55, has been hauled before Manchester magistrates' court after pleading guilty to the production of cannabis.

Police found six mature plants and 18 seeding in the conservatory of his home in Harding Street, Ancoats.

Mrs Davies, a magistrate of 12 years’ standing, told him how her own brother, Glen Harding, had died aged 34 after becoming addicted to cannabis.

Mr Harding went on to develop schizophrenia and threw himself in a canal.

Mrs Davies told Duncan: "That was a horrendous time for the family. Cannabis is serious. It puddles the brain apart from anything else.

"You have got to stop using it so jack it in."

Mrs Davies, a part-time volunteer magistrate who also works as a mental health counsellor and psychotherapist, said after the case she had no regrets about speaking out.

And she revealed it wasn’t the first time she had used her family's experiences to warn a defendant of the dangers of cannabis use.

Mr Harding, who died in 1984, had been a successful technical engineer before falling prey to addiction.

He used cannabis for several years before developing schizophrenia, depression and epilepsy – losing his job in the process.

Following a row he stormed out one night with the family dog which came back soaking wet on its own several hours later. Glen's body was found in a canal 10 days later.

Mrs Davies, a grandmother-of-seven and great-gran of one who lives in Partington, said: "People say cannabis is not a big deal but to me it is enormous.

"When Glen's body was found 10 days after he disappeared, it had been a living hell for the family.

"When I tell people about happened, some look at me like I've got two heads but one woman defendant burst into tears.

"It's important to talk about it because I am a member of the community sentencing other members of the community.

"Cannabis ruins the lives of those who use it and their families.

"If I can stop one family going through what I went through it will be worth it."

http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1587100_magistrate-tells-drug-farmer-cannabis-killed-my-brother-so-jack-it-in

Man used cannabis to combat anger - will he be punished for not using NHS drugs?

Why is it that we keep reading articles about people that grew and used cannabis in their own homes to their own medicinal benefit being taken to court and punished for it?

"Mr Tomlinson said: "He felt it would be better to take cannabis than Prozac."

For sure I am convinced that is true.

As for the estimate of value - had it been sold - well that just goes to show that nobody knows the yield until it was ready - and IF he had sold it (which seems down to what the police "believe"), would his customers have been victims or other people that felt the plant was better than expensive pharmaceutical drugs.

It's almost as if the courts are telling us "buy our drugs - if you grow cannabis we will make you pay!"

And the taxpayers will be made to pay either way, either for the NHS drugs or the court cases. 

 

Man grew cannabis to help him calm his anger problem
Derby Telegraph, May 19 2012

A SELF-EMPLOYED engineer grew cannabis plants to self-medicate his anger problem, a court was told.
Police found 20 plants at Lee Priest's home in Derby Road, Heanor.
They were growing under three timer-controlled lamps in a basement, magistrates in Chesterfield were told.
Becky Mahon, prosecuting, said the plants had a potential street value of between £3,600 and £11,250, depending on their yield.
Priest told police he was going to let them grow for another fortnight and then check on the internet what to do next.
Ms Mahon said: "He said he had anger management issues and smoked up to half an ounce of cannabis a week, and he used it to relax himself.
"Police believe he would keep some for his own use and sell the rest to subsidise the outlay for future crops."
Kevin Tomlinson, in mitigation, said Priest had been prescribed Prozac for depression but it had an adverse effect on him.
Mr Tomlinson said: "He felt it would be better to take cannabis than Prozac."
Priest, 33, admitted producing 20 cannabis plants between January 1 and March 12.
He will be sentenced on July 13. He was granted bail.

 

Does busting cannabis growers make people feel safer?

Well I guess people will feel safer in their lives knowing that the plants will be destroyed and all that cannabis won't reach the streets.  Of course most of those that want to but cannabis will get it anyway, others will step in to fill the ever-growing gaps in the illicit market, sold to them by dealers even more unscrupulous than this grower was in by-passing the electricity bill, maybe selling dangerous contaminated cannabis even to young teenagers, possibly offering hard drugs, avoiding paying any sort of tax on their profits ...  until they too have their operation closed down, and so on for who-knows how long?

And taxpayers are the ones to pay the cost.

Would it not be better to allow people ton grow their own in their own houses for their own use - would it not be better to allow licensed commercial cultivation and supply with consumer protection, separation from crime and hard drugs, for adults, with credible advice, good quality and known strength, profits taxed, some sort of control?

It would certainly save police time so they could better focus on serious crime that does put us at risk - then we may sleep better at night

Blackburn Citizen, 18 May 2012, by Vanessa Cornall,
Tip-off leads to Accrington drug farm raid

A TIP-OFF helped police close down a cannabis farm in Accrington.

Officers discovered around 50 mature cannabis plants and a ‘huge’ bag of dried ‘bush’ at an empty house in Stevenson Street East yesterday morning.

Mature plants and cultivated leaves were found in three rooms of the property.

The house had been staged to look like someone was living there, but it was obvious the house had not been lived in.

Springhill Community Beat Manager, PC Shazia Bibi, led the investigation.

She said: “We found two rooms full of plants and one room was being used to cultivate the drug.
“It’s hard to put a figure on the total of this find but it is very substantial and easily more than £20,000.”

The grower, had bypassed the electricity supply to run his lamps and transformers from the mains.

As well as the plants, police confiscated transformers, lights and fans.

PC Bibi said: “The house had clearly been staged to look like someone was living there. There were children’s toys on the table in the lounge for example. But a deeper search proved no one had been living there.

“We think someone has been visiting daily to water the plants and to open the windows.

“Our investigation will now focus on who had access to the house.”

Invasion of privacy - the law demands justification

“There is such a thing to the RIGHT TO A PRIVATE LIFE and the criteria by with authorities can justify interfering with that Right are clearly specified in the Act: it must be in the interests of law AND to protect public health, public order, national security or the Rights of others - law itself is NOT enough.

How does the SUSPICION that a person MAY be growing cannabis (breaking the law) pose such risks and how can the invasion of people homes be justified in terms of Human Rights.

If there is no known or potential victim, then how can there be a crime?

And at what cost?”

Cannabis factory find prompts Hull City Council to plan more inspections
Hull Daily Mail, March 27 2012
ROUTINE inspections of council-owned commercial premises could be stepped up after the discovery of Hull's biggest illegal cannabis factory to date.

Councillors want to tighten procedures despite warnings from one officer that checking for criminal activity could be viewed as "intrusive and offensive" by some tenants.

Three Vietnamese men – Toan Nham Vo, Dat Truong and Vuong Van Vu – were each jailed for a two and a half years in January after being caught growing more than 2,700 cannabis plants at the council-owned unit in Fountain Road just before Christmas.

The plants could have produced more than £2 million of cannabis.

Police officers took almost ten hours to clear the factory of plants, along with more than 320 lightning units, 283 transformers, 14 filters, 17 extractor fans and eight propagators. The operation was spread across ten rooms.

The unit had been empty, having previously been used as a skills training centre.
In a report, the council's assistant head of property, Nick Howbridge, said: "Historically, incidents of criminal activity in the 1,700 commercial properties leased by the council are rare and there have been less than a handful of cases over the past decade.

"Previous instances have involved a cannabis factory, sale of illegal cars and drug smuggling through hiding it in pallets."

In the report, Mr Howbridge said vacant units are inspected every three months while all units are reviewed annually as part of a statutory valuation process.
But he said introducing more inspections to check on possible illegal activity could cause problems.

"Our tenants are likely to find checks for criminal activity in their businesses both intrusive and, in some cases, offensive
.
"A much more formal approach or inspection to check criminal activity is likely to carry resistance and a poor response from our tenants."

Councillor Simone Butterworth, chairman of the council's value for money scrutiny commission, said reviewing the inspection regime was necessary.

She said: "We still want to see what can be done in terms of having more informal inspections of properties."

No Justice for Medicinal Cannabis Grower in pain

A very sad day for British Justice locking up a man that has clearly done now harm to anyone, just for growing a plant to ease his terrible suffering - like so many cannabis users now a victim of the law.

Given that he was growing cannabis for his own use and nobody outside his house would have been involved, I must ask what Right the police had to raid him in the first place?

We all have a Right to a Private Life, irrespective of what we choose to do in it, so long as we do not harm or risk public health, public order, national security of the Rights of others. How was Winston Matthews doing that? He wasn't.
The fact that what he was doing was against the law is not enough to give the police the right to interfere with hsi private life - Human rights law is quite clear on that.
It must be in the interests of law AND of protecting public health, public order, national security or the Rights of others. How was arresting and punishing Matthews justifiable then?
And how much did all these raids and court cases and days in prison and medication going to cost the public?
All in the name of what? Hardly Justice!

Pro-cannabis campaigner fails to overturn sentence

By Ben Endley
March 26, 2012

A PRO-CANNABIS campaigner who was jailed last month after repeatedly refusing to stop growing the drug has failed to convince a top judge he was too harshly punished.

Winston Matthews, 55, was handed a 10-month sentence at Guildford Crown Court on February 6 after he admitted producing, cultivating and possessing the drug - which he insists is his only relief from chronic back pain and hepatitis C.

Scores of cannabis plants had been found growing at his home in Upfield Close, Horley, by police and Matthews was also given another six months for breaching the terms of an earlier suspended sentence - making a total 16-month term.

Matthews, a former member of the Legalise Cannabis Alliance (LCA), stood for election as MP for East Surrey in 2005 however few voters shared his pro-cannabis stance and he finished in last place with 410 votes.

At London's Appeal Court on Thursday (March 22), his barrister, Ben Cooper, argued the sentence did not take enough account of his troubled background and the fact he was using cannabis to "self-medicate" in the privacy of his own home.

The barrister said Matthews had "stood for Parliament on a cannabis footing" and had been using the drug to deal with his pain for many years. Mentally and physically dependent on the drug, prison was "extremely hard" on him, the court heard.

Mr Cooper added that Matthews, who fractured his spine in a workplace accident when he was just 16, never supplies cannabis to anyone else, grows his own to avoid drug dealers and every leaf he cultivates is for his own personal use.
He found cannabis "far more effective" in relieving his pain than conventional medicines and, having turned his back on other substance abuse, "only uses cannabis because he wants to live a pain free life.

"He was using cannabis on a fairly large scale on a daily basis but he simply cultivates enough plants to keep him going", he told Mr Justice Haddon-Cave.

He does not qualify for prescription of cannabis-based drugs often given to multiple sclerosis sufferers and needs specialist help to "break his cycle of offending", Mr Cooper added.

However, refusing to release Matthews on bail or grant him permission to appeal, the judge said he had indicated at the Crown Court that he "would continue to cultivate cannabis come hell or high water".

Observing that Matthews is "something of a campaigner in this regard", the judge added: "He is a recidivist and he's not above the law just because he has personal reasons for using it".

Concerns over online drugs poll - comment

"legalising cannabis" is about law and Justice - we must ask first whether the possession or small scale cultivation of cannabis poses any threat or does any harm to others - in itself - not speculate. For instance, when it comes to unsafely driving whilst under the influence then that would come under driving laws just as over-the-limit drinking does: alcohol is not banned despite accidents, fights, destruction of property etc - and anyone proved guilty of that can be dealt with by the authorities irrespective of whether they are sober, drunk or high on pot. It would not be seen as just by many people to punish everyone that drinks alcohol because of what a minority of others do.

Likewise with illness: cannabis is actually far less risk to health than aspirin, tobacco, alcohol and it is surely not Just to punish users because they or others get ill?

Cannabis, like alcohol, is widely used in the UK - by millions - and those unable or unwilling to grow their own are exposed to drug dealers and crime - lack of information, availability of other drugs, contaminated cannabis that poses health risks of its own.

Imagine if the only source of alcohol was illegal dealers or manufacturers, that criminals control the supply! Oh yes, they tried that in the US and had to legalise alcohol again.

And the cost to the taxpayer of chasing over 3 million regular users, thousands of growers and dealers, only to find that however many or fined or locked up, there is more and more cannabis on the streets.

Then there is the ridiculous situation where people like Winston Matthews in Surrey are imprisoned for growing cannabis to ease the terrible pains of illness or injury - nobody else involved.

Consider the cost to the NHS of providing pharmaceutical drugs, often with their own risks and side-effects, to people that claim cannabis is more effective. Now Pharmacists are producing whole-cannabis extract containing about ten pounds worth which they sell at over £120 a can of spray to people in desperate need whilst they risk prison if they grow their own.

Of course there is the cost of potentially criminalising millions of our youth - for a crime without victims.

Not forgetting of course, that if it is legal to grow cannabis then it is legal to grow hemp - a valuable source of fibre, foodstuff, oils and environmentally-friendly fuels - local hemp could avoid the problem of transporting fossil fuels around the world and ease up on pollution.

And what of the negative impact: less profit for giant petrochemical and pharmaceutical companies, less work for the police and courts .. less money for drug dealers.

I voted in favour of legalising cannabis also realising that it is not cannabis that needs legalising because it is not itself illegal - it is the possession, cultivation and supply that is illegal and need legalising - the law is aimed at people, not drugs - the "war on drugs" is a war on drug-users, not substances.

I have studied the pro's and cons: I hear the cries that cannabis causes problems in a minority of users, and poses risks to others if people drive whilst high - but all those risks are made worse by the failed prohibition.

I would advise anyone seriously concerned about those risks to use the WWW and search for evidence, because there are several reports out there claiming cannabis has little detrimental effect on driving skills and poses only a small risk to a small percentage of people predisposed to certain mental health condition eg http://tinyurl.com/79zcjmj”

Leicester Mercury, March 23 21012
Concerns over online drugs poll

Regarding the online poll about the legalisation of cannabis, I was rather perturbed to see that so many seem to be in favour of a change in the law.
Admittedly the respondents are a self-selected group and not necessarily representative of the general population but their influence may be important.
In addition to the concerns about mental health, progression to other drugs, etc, I do wonder how many of those wanting to decriminalize cannabis have considered its detrimental impact on daily functioning.
Very recently, a research paper in the British Medical Journal found that cannabis use doubles the odds of having a motor vehicle crash.
So I would suggest if the rules concerning so-called "recreational" drugs are to change then it will also be necessary to consider implementing drug-driving legislation in order to keep the remainder of the community safe from the increased threat of road accidents.
Personal use of drugs has wide-reaching effects beyond those on the individual and this must not be forgotten.
Eleanor Mather, Earl Shilton.

Drugs charge man shown clemency- comment

So what harm did this man Loveridge actually do? How much did the police raid and court case cost - thousands of pounds - and how does this make society a safer or better place to live in?

Sure he broke the law, but a law without Justice - for it attacks Human Rights and personal choice without reason - a law that needs to be scrapped - after many billions of pounds have been spent it clearly does not work - there are more cannabis users and growers in the UK than ever.

Personal possession and cultivation for own use ought not be be criminal offences, and legal and controllable outlets for adults to buy cannabis should be set up to take it out of the hands of crooks, provide consumer protection (just like with alcohol and other consumables), separate the supply from hard drugs and tax the profits.

Drugs charge man shown clemency
Ely Weekly News, March 23 2012 

A man found with cannabis has escaped having a suspended sentence activated.
Wayne Loveridge, 30, of Ely, appeared at Cambridge Crown Court yesterday charged with possession of cannabis.
He was in breach of a nine-month suspended sentence imposed by Cambridge magistrates last June after he was found with a small amount of Ecstasy.
Robin Miric, prosecuting, said police executed a search warrant in January at Morley Drive, where Loveridge lives, and found a bag containing a small amount of herbal cannabis concealed in the finger of a glove.
Loveridge admitted possession of cannabis and breaching his suspended sentence.
In mitigation, Charles Myatt said Loveridge did not know how long the cannabis had been at the house and could have been there prior to the suspended sentence being imposed.
He said Loveridge had completed a curfew order, was doing well with his work with the probation service and showing an “improved attitude”.
For possession of cannabis Loveridge was sentenced to one day in prison.
Judge Anthony Bate did not activate the suspended sentence but added additional sessions to be completed with an alcohol key worker.
He told Loveridge: “If you commit another drug offence it may be very different next time.”

Inverness drug suspected choked trying to swallow cannabis - comment

I'm sure the public will sleep sounder at night knowing that the police and courts are spending precious tax-payers money locking up a man like this - what harm did he do to anyone but himself?

If he'd swallowed the contents of a whiskey bottle he would may have been shouting or fighting in the street. Then he would have deserved arrest and punishment - but had he simply been quietly drunk the police would presumably left him alone and the perverting the cause of Justice would never have happened.

What you do not report is WHY police hassled him in the first place - what was he doing to attract their attention?

Inverness drug suspected choked trying to swallow cannabis
Highland News, March 22 2012

A MAN choked when he tried to swallow a piece of cannabis resin after being challenged by two plain clothes police officers in Inverness.
George Macaulay fell to the ground and had a fit during the incident in Farraline Park in the city.
He ended up being jailed at Inverness Sheriff Court today for attempting to pervert the course of justice.
The court heard Macaulay (26) of Perceval Road, Stornoway, was approached by police officers who suspected he was in possession of controlled drugs.
Ms Robertson said: "They noted he had his hand in his jacket pocket. He removed his hand from the pocket and began to swallow something he had placed in his mouth. He fell to the ground then proceeded to have a fit."
She said Macaulay had tried to swallow a small quantity of cannabis which had a "nominal street value".
Macaulay (26) admitted on October 18 placing the drugs in his mouth and attempting to swallow them to pervert the course of justice and possession of the Class C drug.
Solicitor advocate Michael Chapman said Macaulay had very little recollection of the incident because of the fit he suffered as he attempted to swallow the resin.
He said he was serving a prison sentence with a release date on March 31.
Sheriff Gordon Fleetwood commented Macaulay could have been killed over a small quality of cannabis and jailed him for 14 days.

Cannabis growers MUST be jailed says top judge as he ignores 'soft' guidelines and imprisons six men

When Professor Nutt, the Chair of the Government's own Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, the panel that recommended that the Government did NOT upgrade cannabis to class B again, spoke against Government policy in a lecture - he was sacked!

Now we have a Crown Court Judge openly speaking against Government sentencing policy on cannabis, using the courtroom as his soapbox - will he be sacked?

I doubt it!

Cannabis growers MUST be jailed says top judge as he ignores 'soft' guidelines and imprisons six men
Mail On-Line, Monday March 5 2012
By Chris Brooke

A senior judge has ignored ‘soft’ new drugs sentencing  guidelines by jailing six men for growing cannabis.
Judge Alan Goldsack criticised regulations that came into force last week and defied the authority of the Sentencing Council for England and Wales.
Under the new guidelines, at least four of the six offenders who were jailed at Sheffield Crown Court should probably have been given a community penalty.
Home-grown ‘skunk’ cannabis production is said to have reached ‘epidemic’ proportions in South Yorkshire, the area around the court, and judges there have been routinely jailing even low-level offenders in an effort to clamp down on the industry.
The judges have been following ‘clear and succinct’ guidance given by the Court of Appeal early last year, urging tougher sentences.
However under the new guidelines, the sentence range, if no more than nine plants are involved, goes from a conditional discharge to a medium- level community order.
Even where 28 plants are involved, the sentencing range is from a low-level community order up to 26 weeks in jail.
On Friday Judge Goldsack, the Recorder of Sheffield and the most senior judge sitting at the city’s crown court, sentenced 13 cannabis growers in one hearing.
He told the court it would ‘not be in the interests of justice’ to follow the new guidelines.


‘Suddenly reducing sentences, which have been seen as appropriate and hopefully effective in reducing a very common form of offending, would seriously undermine public confidence in the criminal justice system,’ he said.
In a lengthy address to a packed courtroom, Judge Goldsack said it was clear that cannabis was being widely grown in attics, cellars and bedrooms, and that a few plants could produce a substantial amount of the drug.
He said: ‘There is the clearest possible evidence of the damaging impact on local communities of this particular type of offending.
‘The hope was that before too long the level of offending would drop off dramatically once potential offenders realised the sentence they face if caught.’

Judge Goldsack said that in his judgment, where an offender has grown cannabis with an actual or potential yield close to or more than 1 kilo (2.2lb), an immediate custodial sentence is justified. He jailed six offenders and gave another seven community penalties.
Gary Woodward, 31, of Maltby, near Rotherham, was jailed for 15 months and Alexander McGregor, 23, of Shiregreen, Sheffield, was imprisoned for ten months.
Mark Bolton, 47, Matthew Taylor, 28, Gary Brearley, 45, and Robert Healey, 24, all from Barnsley, each received nine months.
All admitted producing cannabis, which prosecutors accepted was for their personal use. Woodward had four previous convictions for possessing cannabis and admitted supplying to friends.
Later counsel for several of those jailed indicated that they would be appealing.
The Sentencing Council is a  public body set up to promote a ‘clear, fair and consistent approach to sentencing’.
Members include senior judges, a magistrate, solicitor, barrister,  academic and police and probation service officials.
The courts ‘must follow’ the guidelines it publishes ‘unless it is in the interests of justice not to do so’.