Member
| I have seen alot of discussion about these drugs. My belief on this may be different than others, however here is what I have;
First we must understand the whole synthetic drug and the reaction of our law makers. If we look at the SB 331- which is what created the PG2A offense, you will see that it was not the law makers intent to tie our hands to ONLY those listed in the PG Group. Granted SB 263 was filed this year to address this and clarify it, we should look at the intent here. Granted Im just a cop, however I can read and I have seen numerous Case Law briefs referring to how the deciding Justices looked at the law makers intent on certain laws.
So with that in mind, I beleive the PG2A offense is not specific to only JWH-018 (used as an example), but to the analogues which go with it.
Think about it like the marihuana. Prosecutors have long prosecuted marihuana cases without lab reports. When the defense counsel wanted the lab report to show it was in fact marihuana, then the marihuana was sent to the lab. This was always done for the simple fact that Probable Cause is needed for the arrest, not Proof Beyond Reasonable. Officers used their "experience and training" to develop probable cause. As popular as theses drugs are becoming, the experience will come to officers rather quickly, all they really need now is the training on the issues.
There are my thoughts. |
| Posts: 10 | Location: Austin TX | Registered: December 20, 2012 | data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/401e1/401e1354d49559dbad327a78f250f48e0d46b12e" alt="Reply With Quote Reply With Quote" data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/401e1/401e1354d49559dbad327a78f250f48e0d46b12e" alt="Edit or Delete Message Edit or Delete Message"
IP
|
|