Alleged indoor pot grower arrested

Monday, October 5, 2009

By KATHY FAIRCHILD/Staff writer

A Nelson man was arrested Saturday, Oct. 3, for class B felony producing a controlled substance after Saline County Sheriff's deputies discovered more than a dozen marijuana plants growing in a shed behind his residence.

Authorities were initially asked to investigate a report from the Children's Division hotline, alleging two juveniles at the residence were living in unsanitary conditions and that someone in the house was involved in manufacturing drugs.

Upon arrival at the residence, deputies asked for and were granted permission to search the residence in order to check the juveniles' living conditions and for the presence of illegal drugs. Once inside the home, deputies found a glass container containing marijuana on the floor of a closet. When questioned, the woman who allowed the search said she knew the substance in the container was marijuana and that it belonged to her husband.

Subsequent to this admission, the woman called her husband, who arrived at the home a short time later. While they waited for his arrival, deputies observed a small building behind the house, and noted the windows were covered with black plastic in addition to mini-blinds.

When the husband arrived on the scene, he consented to a search of the out-building, where officers found seven mature marijuana plants and eight seedlings, along with numerous chemicals and fertilizers used to nourish the plants, a timed lighting and pumping system, grow lights and exhaust fans.

The man said he had been growing the marijuana since Sept. 11, 2001, for his own personal use because after that date "marijuana was too expensive and not very good quality."

Formal charges are pending; the man paid a $15,000 cash or surety bond and was released later the same day.

Editor's note: Our policy is to withhold the names of people allegedly involved in crimes until formal charges have been filed.

Contact Kathy Fairchild at marshallhealth@socket.net

Comments

Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please Login or Create an account first, and then you will be able to flag a comment as objectionable. Please also note that those who post comments on marshallnews.com may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

What the f......

Yes!

-- Posted by Gumby on Wed, Oct 14, 2009, at 12:53 AM

Nancy,

Some are lightsweights with alcohol as well. Should we test for alcohol?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Oct 12, 2009, at 4:03 PM

since I grew up in the 60s I know some people are able to handle pot in moderation, but some are light wieghts and even if its legal you will still get tested if you want a job!!!

-- Posted by nancy007 on Mon, Oct 12, 2009, at 3:55 PM

What the f......,

That's not the way it appeared to me. It seems the attempt to legalize and regulate pot is not working. Criminals will always control drugs! I still have never understood why people think they always have to attempt to escape their real life, instead of coping with their daily life?? Someone has to break the cycle.

-- Posted by Gumby on Mon, Oct 12, 2009, at 12:27 PM

Gumby,

What is stated in that article gives all the more reason that there needs to be legalization and regulation.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Oct 12, 2009, at 5:58 AM

It appears that California is having trouble with their so called right to smoke and pot laws. Seems like criminals are making a mockery out of the legal system out there. For those that say making pot legal will do away with the crime and all marijuana will be sold safely.....SURE!!

http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_1353068...

-- Posted by Gumby on Mon, Oct 12, 2009, at 12:08 AM

Wonderjim said:

"what a dopehead,

regarding your self-proclamation of being a pothead, I seriously doubt you are a very productive member in society. Pipe-dreams"

For the sake of clarification, do you consider anyone who enjoys a beer or a cocktail an alchoholic?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sun, Oct 11, 2009, at 9:57 AM

Ray: People already smoke pot. Anyone that wants to smoke pot, goes out and buys it on the corner, then smokes it. Wouldn't they do two things at once by having a state run pot farm? One would generate income for a state that is has way too much government pork and entitlement spending, and two, it would reduce the cost of court and all that is involved in prosecuting people caught with pot.

The logic that says that since CA is a conduit for drugs so we should not legalize it is not really an argument. Legal or not, people will smoke pot if they want to.

prohibition did not work, only made the mob... well the mob. Crime increased, violent crime.

I am not saying what I believe on this issue, just trying to see it logically. Pot would be no different than Alcohol. One is legal and one is not and we are not spending tons of money on prosecuting people who choose to drink beer in the privacy of their own homes while we do if they smoke pot.

-- Posted by mrxray on Sat, Oct 10, 2009, at 11:06 PM

Wonderjim,

One more thing. You don't know me but you assume that you're somehow superior to me because I enjoy pot.You have no idea what I do for a living, or that I pay my taxes and I am a very productive citizen.

Drug test are also unconstitutional. Testing for pot gives no indication whatsoever as to wheter the individual is under the influence either. You, my friend are ingnorant. Maybe someday you you will actually say something to back up your claim of superiority. I have yet to see it.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sat, Oct 10, 2009, at 10:19 PM

Well I see Eric has deleted my last post. What was it Eric? My calling someone ignorant about a specific subject? Or maybe it was hoping that a generation of the ignorant and intolerant quickly move on to thier reward and let the rest of us live our lives as we see fit?

I'm sorry Eric, was that offensive? How about equating someone who smokes pot to a pedophile? Were is your offense to these little gems?

"While some libertines would legalize everything from child prostitution to heroin"-Ray

"Even if marijuana was legalized, some of you still wouldn't be satisfied. What would be next on your agenda, reduce the age of sexual consent? "- WonderJim.

I stand by every word I said wheter you like it or not!

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sat, Oct 10, 2009, at 10:13 PM

Response by Eric Crump/Editor:

We have a well-established trend here. The more people bicker and taunt, the more comments get deleted.

Marijuana has numerous extremely useful medicinal properties, the hemp plant is extremely useful in ALL its forms and the entire plant is a hugely useful and renewable resource... they're only keeping it 'illegal' to make money on prisons, etc.

I'd rather deal with someone who is stoned than someone who is drunk anyday of the week.

-- Posted by NanaDot on Sat, Oct 10, 2009, at 9:56 PM

"MY response: that is a drastic exaggageration. California wants to legalize it as a mechanism to generate revenue to pay off all their entitlement programs that they cannot afford."

While the revenue generating motivation for legalizing pot in California cannot be dismissed, neither can the obvious conclusion that a lot of people will be smoking pot to get high. Along with benefits from increased revenue will come the bad effects to society: people driving stoned and causing accidents, people suffering lung impairments and other adverse health effects, people performing less well in a variety of motor skill tasks, students doing less well in school, etc.

Given the conduit for illegal drugs that California has been, along with the laughing stock to the rest of the nation for inane behavior, does anyone seriously want to follow the behavior of this half stoned state and become a half stoned (or worse) nation? Perhaps our schools should be more actively teaching values, morals and ethics, instead of relentlessly stripping them from curricula, and perdagogy.

-- Posted by Ray on Sat, Oct 10, 2009, at 11:52 AM

"Same thing with alcohol and tobacco only much,much worse. Don't forget Big Mac's and obeseity. Is this a free country or is it not?"

You try to argue using faulty logic. Using your logic, one could argue that the effects of alcohol and tobacco are much, much worse than the effects of Russian roulette, but I would hope no one is foolish enough to believe that Russian roulette does not have harmful effects. :-/

The tar in marijuana is far heavier than tobacco. The deleterious effects to lung capacity are very serious. Marijuana contains carcinogens, just like cigarettes. The effects of marijuana are not as well known, or well documented as cigarettes, because usage has not been as widespread, or as long. That is no reason to dismiss its potential harm, or endorse it as less harmful than alcohol, or tobacco. Marijuana is a dangerous drug. It's illegal and should remain that way. America does not need more harmful agents working to destroy "the good of society." Wise up, and stop trying to deceive others.

-- Posted by Ray on Sat, Oct 10, 2009, at 11:36 AM

Wonderjim said:

Even if marijuana was legalized, some of you still wouldn't be satisfied. What would be next on your agenda, reduce the age of sexual consent? Allow for heroin and cocaine to be offered at the local jiffy stop?

You're kidding right? So, in your mind pot smokers are also sexual deviants? Heroin and cocaine are actually dangerous. There has never, ever in the history of man been a documented case of anyone dying from ingesting too much marijuana. You can't say that for alcohol, tobacco or food for that matter. So, what exactly is your problem? Is it marijuana itself, or do you just find pleasure in the judgement of those who partake? I think it's the latter. Tell me WJ, can you provied us with any substantial evidence that the legalization of marijuana will lead to pedophilia and the quest to legalize dangerous drugs? I would really like to see your evidence to back up that claim. Maybe you should try a little weed WJ, watch a nice movie have some pizza and chill out. Give you prejudice the night off, it will do "wonders" for you Jim.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Sat, Oct 10, 2009, at 8:36 AM

-- Posted by WonderJim on Fri, Oct 9, 2009, at 9:43 PM

MY response: that is a drastic exaggageration. California wants to legalize it as a mechanism to generate revenue to pay off all their entitlement programs that they cannot afford.

-- Posted by mrxray on Sat, Oct 10, 2009, at 8:02 AM

Ray,

Same thing with alcohol and tobacco only much,much worse. Don't forget Big Mac's and obeseity. Is this a free country or is it not?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Oct 9, 2009, at 12:50 PM

WonderJim is very right. Childeren are in more danger in state ran places than their own homes.... in most cases. State ran places are one of the most horrible things out there. They should all be closed down and people fired.

-- Posted by ieatsuperglue on Thu, Oct 8, 2009, at 11:14 PM

If we totally ignore the issue of marijuana as an intoxicant, there is still the fact that "weed" contains carcinogenic nitrosamines, just like cigarettes. Although research on the carcinogenic effects of "pot" haven't been as well documented as the effects of tobacco usage, (possibly because of the illegality of "pot"), smoking "pot" is far from a healthy activity, IMO. Don't be deceived by pop culture advocates who minimize the deleterious effects of "pot" smoking, and try to portray "pot smoking" as something "cool" to do. Addled thinking is also a side effect of marijuana usage and may not be wholly reversible. Some researchers have even argued that the addled thinking of "pot smokers" is cumulative.

-- Posted by Ray on Thu, Oct 8, 2009, at 11:07 PM

notworthmytime,

I thought I needed glasses or was having a kaniption fit, man don't do that to me.

-- Posted by Gumby on Thu, Oct 8, 2009, at 7:14 PM

yes that is the case as if it matters the only thing is the paper grouped us all in the same story all we had in my house was three ounces in one bag and three people livin here witch is why they charged us all wit the same thing cause we all knew it was there the rest like the person growing or the meth lab was not my situation and never was so why not in this case does evry one i the housse who knew and she knew cause she admmitted to knowing as far as i can tell from the story or is that not protocol and grumby why about that dont u get i have to type with one hand cause i have a broken shoulder and might miss a few keys but if u cant figure out what was there then u might need help

-- Posted by notworthmytime on Wed, Oct 7, 2009, at 6:04 AM

notworthmytime,

??????????????????????????????????????????????????

Would you please repeat that in english!

-- Posted by Gumby on Tue, Oct 6, 2009, at 8:30 PM

Anybody want to get HI with me and towely??

-- Posted by chuckhaynie on Tue, Oct 6, 2009, at 6:31 PM

i just caught a case and in order to protect the others i my house i said it was alll mine and it was and the arresting officer said that cause i told him it was mine no one else would be arrested but he lied and took and charged all three of us with thrre ounces of pot even though i said itr was mine so why does every one in this house with plants growin that every one in the house knew about get arrested is somone can explain that i would be happy to hear why that can happen

-- Posted by notworthmytime on Tue, Oct 6, 2009, at 7:22 AM

Really WJ?

Is that the best you got? Seems as if I'm dealing with third child again. I would be happy to discuss the subject at hand if you can handle it. Can you handle it?

What if this guy had been making beer,wine or distilling spirts, perhaps even growing tobacco as opposed to growing pot, would that make any difference in your opinion?

If so, why? I'm not talking about the so called "legality" of pot vs. booze and tobacco either.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Tue, Oct 6, 2009, at 5:46 AM

you people are amazing...such enlightening conversation

-- Posted by wheresthelove on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 11:47 PM

WJ,

I project no more than you. The difference is that I know what I'm talking about on this particular subject. Something tells me you don't. You simply choose to label and judge. Feel free to wallow in righteous indignation because that seems to fit you. I'll just take my pleasure in knowing that you have no idea what you are talking about. Drone on, "wonder" jim. Drone on.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 11:18 PM

The only thing I can say is why wasn't the wife arrested also? It seems like these cases always ignore the wife's part. She is just as guilty, if in fact they are guilty.

It sounds as if "pot" may have led to poor conditions for the children to live in? What happened to endangering the wefare of your children? I think that should be a more severe crime here? Do I think there is any reason that justifies people growing pot? About the same reason I believe that DWI's should be and are illegal.

Lets put it to a vote of the people just like they did gay marriage. If it's voted in then so be it, but if it's voted down, then no one whines and it remains illegal by a constitutional admendment??? In order to vote you must have been a resident of the state for at least one year prior to the election, no outsider influence, the Missouri People will decide.

-- Posted by Gumby on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 9:54 PM

Wonderjim,

You would be well served to educate yourself on the subject of marijuana and it's criminalization before spouting the bile of ignorance. But then again, that's what you do.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 9:02 PM

The governor of Ka-lee-forn-ya has recommended legalization of marijuana and has some personal background experience he appears not to be shy in sharing.

http://tinyurl.com/9jzcpl

As California goes, will so go Missouri?

-- Posted by Ray on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 8:16 PM

Collector,

Great point. There is a fantastic documetary called: "Union, the business of getting high."

It takes an in depth look at the real reasons behind the prohibition and all those who profit from keeping it illegal.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 8:11 PM

When are our legistlators going to legalize marijuana so that our law enforcement can spend their time going after real criminals?

-- Posted by collector on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 7:20 PM

Yank,

Ever heard of a bailbondsman?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 4:56 PM

THE MAN WITH NO NAME HAS POSTED A 15 THOUSAND DOLLAR BOND ON THAT DAY, WOW, SURE SOUNDS LIKE FOR PERSONAL USE, MAYBE PERSONAL INCOME?

-- Posted by yank on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 3:53 PM

were there any charges that came from the hotline call yet?

-- Posted by workingmom on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 12:52 PM

Response by Eric Crump/Editor:

Not so far. The only pending charge is the drug violation.

WOW, I guess people will always find ways to enjoy their "recreational activites" even in times of economic hardships. LOL

-- Posted by volleyballmom on Mon, Oct 5, 2009, at 12:23 PM

Home