by frog
Last month Southland shearer Lionel Paul Joseph Taumata was sentenced to six months in prison for possession of 709g of cannabis leaf, 22.4g of cannabis oil, more than $10,000 cash and a 20-litre container of isopropyl alcohol, used for the manufacture of cannabis oil.
In sentencing, Judge Phil Moran said the money seized did not prove Taumata was a drug dealer. But even though there was no proof the cannabis was for intended for sale, Taumata got six months.
Taumata’s case makes an interesting comparison to that of semi-retired expatriate Arthur Douglas Myers.
Douglas Myers was arguably New Zealand’s biggest drug dealer. Between 1965 and 1998 Myers amassed a personal fortune, now estimated at around $350 million, selling the drug alcohol. Unlike Taumata, whose drug use was likely causing harm to only himself, Myers’ mass marketing of the drug alcohol was a causative factor in countless road deaths, injury accidents, domestic violence incidents, street assaults, and instances of work absenteeism.
So what does Myers get? He is made a Knight Companion of the Order of New Zealand in the New Year Honour list for his efforts.
I’m no wowser and enjoy a tipple myself, but surely the different approaches to Taumata’s and Myers’ cases must be food for thought.
Isn’t it time our drugs policy focused on harm minimisation, rather than imprisoning someone for possessing one drug for his own use while rewarding someone else for making a fortune selling vast quantities of another drug, which is arguably more harmful, with one of New Zealand’s highest honours?
Published in Health & Wellbeing | Justice & Democracy by frog on Sun, January 10th, 2010
Tags: alcohol, cannabis, Douglas Myers, harm minimisation, Lionel Taumata
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
But al-hic-hol is what nice people use.
Pot is what those nasty smelly hippies use.
Like or Dislike:
6 
4 (+2)
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
12 
0 (+12)
Check out the poll results on the left hand side…
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
I must say I like the inherent suggestion of cost:benefit analysis pertaining to significant awards.. anyone care to have-a-go at the new knight’s lifetime ratio..?
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
If anyone wants a leg-up to understand the debate.
J-day is 5 May (or thereabouts) every year, so keep a lookout for info on where & when this year’s actions will take place.
Institutional bias/support – well, you only have to compare the Police record for supplying booze in the Police Canteens to off-duty officers, many of whom have subsequently been observed by members of the public driving erratically, to know that there is a bias in the policing of drug and alcohol offences, squarely on the side of alcohol users, and those whose business it is to distribute alcohol.
Count on the fingers of one hand how many publicans actually get convicted for providing alcohol to already intoxicated customers (against the law), or to minors (against the law) – they run free while the occasional drunk goes through Court, and the rest of society picks up the tab for healthcare (traffic accidents, liver failure, domestic violence, assault/robbery) costs associated with alcohol abuse.
Like or Dislike:
7 
0 (+7)
I think Hone Harawira has a point here. Rich white mofos like Myers get rewarded for exploiting the poor, especially poor Maori. When Maori choose to do it for themselves, as this guy Taumata did, and substitute a drug other than that approved by rich white mofos for their own financial benefit – well, they get a stretch inside.
Racism, colonialism, and elitism are still very much alive in the public policy of this country.
[big bro - I presume you must be on holiday! Surprised you haven't commented by now!]
Like or Dislike:
10 
6 (+4)
knight companion for his services to business, sport and education.
He has spent years doing plenty of good with his money. Though I do wonder if ‘sport’ is just getting DB to sponsor sports…
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
http://thedaktory.org.nz/news/press-release/
His last appearance was last month but the judge wasn’t there so he is due to appear on Tues 26th of this month.
Supporters of law reform could… SHOULD use this opportunity!!
There will be a rally at Albert Park (likely by the hemp shop) See NORML or Daktory websites for further details.
Mr Green is apparently confident of getting a permanent ‘stay’ of proceedings; which could set an important precident…
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
And then the cops raided the Daktory in Auckland, nicking Mr Green’s computer, etc, just as he is due to appear in Court this month.
As I said previously, the bias in the Police is very obvious.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
I have just posted on Kieths blog on Heads of State issue I hope you all take a squiz at. Apparently Owen has tried to vindicate Doug Myers by pointing out that he was a philanthropist. I am glad that Frog has picked up the thread here.
Apparently Mr. Myers has established an education trust for Maori and Pacific islanders, so what do you all think of that? And do you all think that his motives are genuine?
My post on Kieths blog I quoted how Machiavelli advised his pet tyrants on how to use charity and parsimony for their own ends.
The knights system is a gallery of rogues and I only hope that someone like Peter Jackson refuses the Knighthood. In fact why don’t we petition him!!!
If Peter Jackson Knocks back the Knighthood for two reasons (1)Because he deserves it and (2)he does not wish to be associated with the rogues on that gallery, then that would really be one hel!! of a statement.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
Will the Green party have any official presence at Raggamuffin?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
And what is with this “manufacturing” line.. nothing is manufactured, it is ‘distilled’. ie: cleaned up, and made more wholesome. (SAFER again).
The ONLY reason ‘oil of cannabis’ (yes it was a medicine ‘tincture’, diluted with ethyl alcohol) was made MORE illegal was because according to POLICE authorities it was easier to HIDE! It had diddley to do with public safety, of either the consumer of anyone else. It was based on PURE prejudice. That if a person was willing to HIDE stuff they were MORE criminal.
Taumata had to go to Jail to maintain the lie.
As long as we fail to understand the ‘war on **drugs’ is about classism and racism everything else will just confuse you” – Clifford Wallace Thornton Jr. (Co-convenor, Green Party, USA)
[** including Methamphetamine, but made exemplar by Cannabis]
Like or Dislike:
5 
0 (+5)
The NJ law isn’t that great but at least its a start. Nothing more stupid than the polices war on drugs, a war they will never win yet they continue to fight it.
Like or Dislike:
5 
0 (+5)
I would like to see it decriminalised but I am not so sure about NORML’s claims of how safe it is I mean sucking it into one’s lungs can’t be all that healthy can it?
But the human rights aspect of it is definately valid I see it as definately one of a number of pretexts to create a police state.
The police could be spending tax payers money protecting the public from thieves, murderers and rapists etc.
Like or Dislike:
4 
1 (+3)
I agree Drakula. Though NORML promote vapourizers and ingestion as ways to avoid inhaling burnt vegetation. They also give advice re toking. Apparently the THC is absorbed quickly and so holding your breath doesn’t increase the cannabinoid intake much but does increase the smoke damage (and can cause light headedness through lak of O2).
Despite the carcinogenic effects of inhaling burnt plants, there is no consensus on whether ‘puffing grass’ causes (lung) cancer.
There have been case reports of upper-respiratory-tract cancers in young adults who smoke cannabis, but evidence from a few epidemiological cohort studies and case-control studies is inconsistent. Second, there is mixed evidence on the effects of THC and other cannabinoids on cancers: in some in vitro and in vivo studies THC and some synthetic cannabinoids have had antineoplastic effects
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15629274?log$=activity
I think the smoke (especially hot smoke) is bad but the cannabinoids counteract the carcinogenic effects to some extent.
http://www.nature.com/nrc/journal/v3/n10/execsumm/nrc1188.html
Drak said “I would like to see it decriminalised “… See you on the 26th then?
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Lionel Taumata received a sentence of 2 years 6 months imprisonment, not 6 months!
He is appealing his sentence and conviction and this will be heard in Wellington on Wednesday 17th March 2010.
It seems to me that there is an element of discrimination in Lionel’s sentence, when Southland ‘locals’ receive PD and community work for similar and worse offences.
Also, isn’t it odd that whilst the Judge found that Mr Taumata possessed cannabis leaf and isopropyl alcohol to make cannabis oil for his own personal use, he was found guilty of possession for supply on the acutal cannabis oil. If the leaf and iso was to make oil for his own use, then the end product ie. the oil, must also be for his own personal use. There was no evidence of supply, but he was still found guilty.
In the ‘Draft Summary of Facts for Sentencing’ the Judge states that “in the absence of any evidence as to any actual sales, for the purposes of sentencing, I would give Mr Taumata the benefit of the doubt and hold that the cash was not shown to have been derived from sales of cannabis oil, so as to justify forfeiture”. But where is the money now? It certainly hasn’t been returned to Mr Taumata or his family.
The Judge has accepted that the cannabis was for personal use and there was no evidence of supply, but Lionel Taumata still received 2 and a 1/2 years in jail. Where is the justice in that?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
If that’s the case, grumpygoat, it was far worse than I thought. I relied on the report in the Southland Times I linked to above as being accurate.
Another good reason to make a submission to the Law Commission on drug law reform. Submissions close 30 April.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
Hey, grumpygoat, can you give a few more details. I would have thought that if the conviction was in the District Court, the appeal would be to the High Court, so would still be held in Invercargill.
But in Wellington sounds like it is the Court of Appeal, unless there has been an successful application to move it out of area.
Can you tell us which Court it is? As an Aucklander I can’t be there, but maybe frog could hop along and report on it, or at least get a tadpole to. Seems like a case there should be more public scrutiny of.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
Trevor29 wrote:
“Lionel Paul Joseph Taumata was probably jailed because he didn’t give the government a share of his profits.”
nah. they’d lock up half the landlords in the country if that was the case.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Hey, it’s worse than that, kahikatea – they subsidise many of the landlords through the accommodation supplement, but lock up people who grow and process a bit of dope for their own use. And Doug Myers gets a knighthood for selling lots of alcohol. Go figure!
Not that I’ve got an easy solution to the accommodation supplement problem.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
Hey Frog & Toad,
My info is correct – Lionel has sent me his documentation from the court case including the “draft summary of facts for sentencing” and “notice of filing of appeal”, so this is definitely accurate.
Yes, his appeal will be heard by the Court of Appeal in Wellington on 17th March 2010. As Lionel is in prison in Invercargill he will not be appearing at the hearing. It would be great if one of you could go along, this is such a harsh sentence, and seems totally out of line with other sentences handed out for cannabis offences. (from Lionels Support Team).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Also to clarify, the sentencing judge was different to the trial judge – maybe it would have made a difference if the same judge who heard the case also handed down the sentence?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)