Publisher’s Note: On Tuesday, July 9, 2019, Montgomery County District Attorney Brett Ligon made a presentation to the Montgomery County Commissioners Court. Ligon explained to Montgomery County Judge Mark Keough and the Commissioners that the District Attorney’s Office will need to spend funds on testing the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content, a psychoactive component of the hemp plant, in marijuana possession cases through an independent laboratory, as a result of legislation which Governor Greg Abbott just signed into law permitting the possession and sale of hemp products as long as they had a THC content of less than 0.3%. The Commissioners Court approved Ligon’s request to spend up to $20,000 for the tests out of forfeiture and contingency funds.
Please see “BREAKING NEWS! Tough-On-Crime Montgomery County DA Ligon Makes Clear That Problems With House Bill 1325 Legalizing Hemp Production Won’t Stop Marijuana Prosecutions In Montgomery County,” The Golden Hammer, July 1, 2019.
During Ligon’s presentation, a group of individuals, mostly wearing yellow shirts, loudly whispered “such a jerk”, “what a jerk”, and similar comments about Ligon and Precinct 3 Montgomery County Commissioner James Noack. Apparently, after the Commissioners Court meeting, Ligon spoke with some of the individuals in the group. The following Guest Editorial is Ligon’s report of that meeting.
Brett Ligon, Montgomery County District Attorney, Guest Writer, The Golden Hammer
I met a Democrat in Commissioners Court today. Here is my expose.
After explaining some of the nuances involved with the newly enacted hemp bill and the steps the District Attorney’s office takes to prosecute marijuana cases, I was approached by a small group of ladies wearing yellow shirts.
Normally yellow signals caution. I should have heeded the signs.
One lady began to lecture me that marijuana possession laws were very personal to her. I attempted to listen to her describe how it was my fault and the state’s fault that her son was now a paranoid schizophrenic.
I’m used to being called names by family members of defendants, so I listened patiently as she advised her son used to smoke normal marijuana and he was “just fine,” but because it was illegal he was forced to purchase synthetic marijuana (which is also illegal), which caused his new permanent diagnosis of being paranoid schizophrenic.
I missed the logic in her thoughts, so she had to explain to me that if marijuana was lawful he wouldn’t have smoked the synthetic marijuana. Confused yet? I tried to tell her that her logic was flawed and referenced the fact that an addict will get his high wherever he can.
I gave the example that, even though alcohol was lawful, people still drank xerox fluid and windex until they go blind just to ingest the alcohol. I thought I made a brilliant point. But evidently not, as she doubled down on her assertion that her son’s new diagnosis and drug addiction was my fault. (Publisher’s Note: People really drink xerox fluid and windex?!)
I don’t know if this represents the majority of folks, but I saw it as a refusal to accept responsibility for actions and the consequences that flow from them.