Accused involved in illegal pot growing case claims prosecution was political. Really?

After his surprising acquittal in the Flandreau Tribal pot growing operation, the accused in the matter is claiming that his prosecution was political…. as opposed to it being because he was involved in an illegal pot growing operation:

A man whose company helped the Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe establish a marijuana grow room on tribal property was found not guilty by a Moody County jury Wednesday of conspiracy to possess and possession of marijuana.

Eric Hagen, the president of Monarch America, said following the verdict that he was relieved by the verdict. He accused South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley of ruining his company with a politically motivated prosecution.

“He tanked our company by spreading lies and rumors,” Hagen said. “It was 100 percent politically motivated. This was simply a media ploy for Jackley because he’s running for governor in 2018.”

Following the verdict, Jackley, who was not at the trial, issued a statement thanking the jurors. He said in an interview with Argus Leader Media that the prosecution was not political. He noted that federal officials, including the FBI and U.S. attorney’s office for South Dakota, were also involved, and that federal officials were planning to raid the grow facility.

Read it here.

So, the AG prosecutes the people involved in an illegal pot growing operation, and it’s somehow political? Really?

Sounds to me that prosecuting those involved in the illegal drug industry is what the people of South Dakota pay the Attorney General to do. And the person helping the tribe to grow drugs which are illegal both federally and in the State of South Dakota should be thanking his lucky stars that the jury didn’t think the definition of the crime fit, and let him off.

A politically motivated prosecution? Not so much.

6 thoughts on “Accused involved in illegal pot growing case claims prosecution was political. Really?”

  1. True! It is against federal law to grow and distribute pot. I do look forward to Attorney General Sessions getting more aggressive on this. President Obama made some major mistakes in drug policy during his two terms.

  2. If he was involved in illegal activity he would have been convicted you dumb shits. 12 people unanimously agreed he wasn’t.

    1. 12 people let him off from the crime he was being accused of, but that doesn’t make growing pot in SD legal federally or on the state level.

  3. It was completely political. Duly elected representatives voted to pass a law to make an activity illegal. Little thing called democracy. You don’t get to pick the parts you like and ignore the rest.

  4. I think that’s a valid point, especially if you fall on the argument of not being for medical / recreational legalization.
    But I don’t think you can deny the political upside if the case went his way either.
    (I say that as a Jackley supporter who disagrees on this one point with most other Republicans)

  5. Most young republicans support legalization. It’s the aged ones who aren’t willing to listen to science.

Comments are closed.