Marion County will no longer prosecute simple marijuana possession

[jsharmon7]

What if the smart attorney questions the arrest since no prosecution of the visible joint (only) is to result based on the prosecutor’s statement ?

Doesn't matter, it’s still illegal. If it’s illegal, then the probable cause existed to investigate the crime.

People are making way too much of this. Public intoxication as a stand-alone charge gets dropped pretty regularly in Marion County. Officers can still arrest for it, but the charges aren’t filed. It’s the same thing with this announcement. You could still be arrested for a joint, but the charges won’t get filed and you’ll be released.

There was a recent case where a guy was arrested for something that normally wouldn’t lead to an arrest, but he made the officer mad. He tried to argue that the conviction should be overturned because the officer only arrested him because he got mad at the guy and that any other person would have been sent on their way. The court ruled that there was still PC for the arrest and the officer’s potential ulterior motives didn’t matter. I would imagine the same logic would apply for any arrests made after this decision.

 

[NHT3]

No, no one is telling us NOT to arrest. PC is PC. Just don't expect prosecution. They have no legal authority to tell us who we can and cannot arrest.

You make my point. Why would you bother to write a ticket or even stop me for going 11 mph over the speed limit if you had been told I would not be prosecuted? If I were a police officer I believe I would feel sold out. I can't assign motives as to why someone would tell you not to expect prosecution but if it's for cheap political motives or for votes that smells of corruption to me. But maybe I'm being too judgemental and don't understand the situaiton.

 

[Jzim]

Maybe with their free time the prosecutors can work on reducing spam calls. If I have to hear about my cars extended warranty one more time...

 

[Ziggidy]

So now we’ve gone from magazine restrictions to sanctuary cities, which is another irrelevancy. Immigration law is the purview of the federal government, it is not up to local officials to enforce. In fact, locals do not even have the authority to enforce immigration law.

If you agree that there should be some discretion, then what is your point? The measure of what discretion is acceptable is obviously the question of whether it infringes on rights or not.

I do believe it's relevant. If I advertise that we do not enforce specific laws, am I not aiding and abetting; encouraging one to break the law? In many instances that alone can be legally devastating. Once again, my point is by whose rule of measure does one use discretion when deciding to enforce or support law? And also, when is it appropriate and not appropriate - again by whose rule of measure?

Does political affiliation decide? Does financial associations help the decision? Does one's use or support of MJ influence ones decision? If I wake up crabby, will that have any influence how I give a break to one? What they look like? How about the color of their skin?

Why did Mears make this announcement? Why didn't he discuss this with others? Do you really think it is because it's flooding the courts and taking too much time? What happens when other crimes become too much for the courts, will the prosecutors stop enforcing other crimes? Personally I believe there are other alternative (better) means of punishment but to announce in a press conference your intentions to allow people to break the laws? I see problems.

 

[Raskolnikov]

Is it against the law not to enforce the law; if not, are we endorsing anarchy? Or does anarchy already exist and the law is giving in?

No, it’s not against the law...just as it isn’t against the law for law enforcement to give you a warning. Happens with weed all the time. Person gives it up, it gets stamped out or flushed. Do you think that every annoying drunk encountered gets arrested? Nope. “Shut up. Go home.”

We’re far from anarchy. Haven’t you ascertained that by now on INGO? Half the posts on here deal with stopping government intervention.

The Reefer Madness craze was 80 years ago. It’s archaic. Weed is far less harmful than alcohol. Move on...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Vigilant]

So if I’m sitting on the circle downtown Indy smoking a joint and the police walk by am I to assume they will continue walk ? Or will they stop, assert their police authority, and use the code infraction to perform searches or other investigations into other possible crimes ? If nothing found they’ll simply let me go - but if they discover I am a wanted felon, or holding more than one ounce of marijuana or other illegal substance, etc will they then arrest asserting probable cause. What if the smart attorney questions the arrest since no prosecution of the visible joint (only) is to result based on the prosecutor’s statement ?

They already stated that smoking it will still get you a trip to jail, as it is still illegal, and any other bonus charges they can accrue due to that joint will keep you there.(for a couple days at least)

 

[KMaC]

So if I’m sitting on the circle downtown Indy smoking a joint and the police walk by am I to assume they will continue walk ?

The temp prosector said this policy is not to be mistaken for making pot legal. It is still illegal to smoke it in public and will draw legal attention.
The IMPD Chief and Mayor Joe are both trying to walk this policy back without stepping on Mears' toes. They fear the same misconstruing as INGO is demonstrating.

 

[bwframe]

What will be the next thing that our new prosecutor will not prosecute?

What is the next "victim-less crime" to overlook?

How many of our citizens involved in the opiod epidemic NEVER used weed to begin their lust for euphoria?

Is Indy headed towards being the next progressive big city? What seems to be the norms in these progressive big cities?

 

[Trigger Time]

No, no one is telling us NOT to arrest. PC is PC. Just don't expect prosecution. They have no legal authority to tell us who we can and cannot arrest.

But they can fire you right?

 

[Trigger Time]

What about how impd was told that seeing a citizen carrying a firearm isnt PC to stop and ask for ID?
They had the authority to make that happen and policy right? Or was that different because it came from a court ruling?

So if impd starts telling street cops not to make arrests over less than an .oz of weed and some cops keep doing it and violating the policy, will they get fired? Honest question. Im not anti cop. Its not the street cops fault that our politicians create stupid laws and then make them have to go out and enforce these impossible laws or laws that make people hate the cops when they should hate the politicians who made them.

Im not lawyer. Im no cop. I just try to understand all of this confusing ****

 

[Dean C.]

What is the next "victim-less crime" to overlook?

How many of our citizens involved in the opiod epidemic NEVER used weed to begin their lust for euphoria?

Lol , studies are showing MJ can be used as an alternative pain managment resource for doctors as MJ is actualy pretty good at treating chronic inflamation caused pain (while opoids are better for acute pain). Then department of Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) has launched a study that medical marijuana has reduced perscriptions for Benzodiazepines by 30% and opoid perscriptions by 16%.


The Benefits and Effects of Using Marijuana as a Pain Agent to Treat Opioid Addiction | Insight Medical Publishing

 

[Ziggidy]

I don't think anyone is arguing if MJ should be legal or illegal, with any amount. No is arguing if it is a stupid law or not a stupid law. The concerns, and IMO rightfully so, is the ability for anyone in power to determine which laws are to be followed and which are not; especially without council from other departments.

We have laws, like them or not, that exist for a purpose. Once that purpose is determined obsolete or inappropriate, we have a legal protocol to fix it, change it, amend it or eliminate it.
What we do not have is a governing system that allows for one individual to make such decisions. Even the POUS has checks and balances and EO's have been reversed via the courts. NO ONE has exclusive power.

When one man, Mears in this one case, makes this decision without council and people allow it to occur without challenge, we have a broken system. What will be next?

 

[cobber]

Just don't carry a Chinese throwing star with your weed while you're trespassing at Walmart and you're good to go.

Maybe it's time to reinstate the criminal code of 1965 and not allow any more new laws/amendments?

 

[Denny347]

But they can fire you right?

Only the Civilian Merit Board can do that.

 

[Denny347]

What about how impd was told that seeing a citizen carrying a firearm isnt PC to stop and ask for ID?
They had the authority to make that happen and policy right? Or was that different because it came from a court ruling?

So if impd starts telling street cops not to make arrests over less than an .oz of weed and some cops keep doing it and violating the policy, will they get fired? Honest question. Im not anti cop. Its not the street cops fault that our politicians create stupid laws and then make them have to go out and enforce these impossible laws or laws that make people hate the cops when they should hate the politicians who made them.

Im not lawyer. Im no cop. I just try to understand all of this confusing ****

The carrying policy came from recent court rulings. As far as the Marijuana, there is no one telling us we cannot arrest for this. We have no department policy restricting our ability to make these arrests. It is still illegal by State code and if we have PC to make such an arrest, we are still legally allowed to do so. What the Prosecutor does with our arrest is up to them. That is outside our control.

 

[Denny347]

I don't think anyone is arguing if MJ should be legal or illegal, with any amount. No is arguing if it is a stupid law or not a stupid law. The concerns, and IMO rightfully so, is the ability for anyone in power to determine which laws are to be followed and which are not; especially without council from other departments.

We have laws, like them or not, that exist for a purpose. Once that purpose is determined obsolete or inappropriate, we have a legal protocol to fix it, change it, amend it or eliminate it.
What we do not have is a governing system that allows for one individual to make such decisions. Even the POUS has checks and balances and EO's have been reversed via the courts. NO ONE has exclusive power.

When one man, Mears in this one case, makes this decision without council and people allow it to occur without challenge, we have a broken system. What will be next?

Elected Prosecutors have always had the legal discretion to decide what cases to prosecute and which ones they won't. They "No File" for dozens of criminal arrests every day and have done so for decades. The public was just not aware of it. Lots of Public Intox arrests get "no filed". Driving a stolen car, get caught and arrested? Great...but they won't file charges for it. Juvenile battery on parents or teachers? You will never see those in court..."no filed". Juvenile arrests rarely get filed. The Prosecutors Office has X number of resources and it is NEVER enough for the number of arrests processed and they have always had the ability to choose how to apply those resources.

 

[KLB]

I was just explaining to my wife on Sunday as we drove from Burlington, KY to Valparaiso in 4 hours flat that speed limits are limits in the sense that you may freely exceed them if you are willing to pay a fee for the privilege after the fact, and only if "asked".

I have to remember that one.

 

[Jludo]

How many of our citizens involved in the opiod epidemic NEVER used weed to begin their lust for euphoria?

98%


The only correlation weed and harder drugs share, which alcohol lacks, is that weed is illegal. When someone tries weed they realize it's not bad or dangerous, yet it's scheduled as the worst possible drug. If government is lying about this illegal substance being bad, how bad can the other ones be?

 

[Trigger Time]

Elected Prosecutors have always had the legal discretion to decide what cases to prosecute and which ones they won't. They "No File" for dozens of criminal arrests every day and have done so for decades. The public was just not aware of it. Lots of Public Intox arrests get "no filed". Driving a stolen car, get caught and arrested? Great...but they won't file charges for it. Juvenile battery on parents or teachers? You will never see those in court..."no filed". Juvenile arrests rarely get filed. The Prosecutors Office has X number of resources and it is NEVER enough for the number of arrests processed and they have always had the ability to choose how to apply those resources.

This is sad.
No reason why the county is having a crime boom. We (justice system) are teaching problem youth or youth that made a bad choice, that there really isn't any consequences for making those choices. Most of them already have absent parents so they arent getting in trouble at home either. So they commit crimes and get off completely free. Makes sense they become repeat offenders.

 

[HoughMade]

Wait...why do we care about the "opioid crisis" again?