UK - Sentencing for commercial cultivation of cannabis

[Pondlife]

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle3365582.ece

Sentencing for commercial cultivation of cannabis

Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
Published February 14, 2008

Regina v Xu and Others

Persons convicted of being concerned in the large scale commercial cultivation or production of cannabis, could expect to receive sentences with a starting point of three years if they acted as a gardener, six to seven years if they acted as an organiser, three to seven years if they acted as a manager and higher sentences where they controlled a large number of such operations.

The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division (Lord Justice Latham, Mr Justice Jack and Mr Justice Cranston) so held on December 21, 2007, when disposing of sentence appeals by seven appellants convicted at various crown courts of being concerned in the cultivation of cannabis.

LORD JUSTICE LATHAM, giving the judgment of the court, said that in all cases, cultivation took place hydroponically and under artificial light requiring a high consumption of abstracted electricity. The cannabis crop was mostly of the highest quality, producing “skunk”, which was particularly strong, grown in private houses or industrial premises appropriately converted, and extensively equipped with propagating and growing apparatus.

The gardeners who tended the crops usually had little to do with setting up the operation. They were often illegal immigrants exploited because of the vulnerability.

Such operations were extremely profitable, as the value of crops could substantially exceed £100,000 a year, while costs were minimal, as the electricity was usually unlawfully abstracted, and the labour costs minimal. The fact that they were so remunerative required the court to consider deterrent sentences.

[Alfa]

Such operations were extremely profitable, as the value of crops could substantially exceed £100,000 a year, while costs were minimal, as the electricity was usually unlawfully abstracted, and the labour costs minimal.

They are forgetting the investment of equipment. A first run / yield often pays for investment. After that profit is made.
Labour can not be paid by the hour lol, but a cut of the profit is involved for every one involved. So labour costs are far from minimal.

[Micklemouse]

Originally Posted by Alfa

They are forgetting the investment of equipment. A first run / yield often pays for investment. After that profit is made.
Labour can not be paid by the hour lol, but a cut of the profit is involved for every one involved. So labour costs are far from minimal.

That depends on who is doing the labour. A number of the large busts involving Chinese & Vietnamese operations were apparently run by illegal immigrants. It would be very easy for the people behind these operations to pay little more than bed & board to the actual "gardeners" in return for an alleged "better life" in the UK. Not many of the gardeners would see anything approaching a fair cut, but they are the ones who get caught, ensuring a stay in prison, followed by detention centre & finally deportation.

The major costs would indeed go on equipment, but also on rental of property which according to reports were often paid well in advance, ensuring minimal contact with or attention from landlords.

[chemlove]

Originally Posted by Micklemouse

That depends on who is doing the labour. A number of the large busts involving Chinese & Vietnamese operations were apparently run by illegal immigrants. It would be very easy for the people behind these operations to pay little more than bed & board to the actual "gardeners" in return for an alleged "better life" in the UK. Not many of the gardeners would see anything approaching a fair cut, but they are the ones who get caught, ensuring a stay in prison, followed by detention centre & finally deportation.

The major costs would indeed go on equipment, but also on rental of property which according to reports were often paid well in advance, ensuring minimal contact with or attention from landlords.

I totally agree the people most likely to get in trouble are the workers the middle and poor class citizens who are just making by. In most situations growers who are caught are caught in their first cycles usually due to making mistakes/not taking proper precautions so to say most of the arrested turned or were in a position to turn a profit is largely a misconception especially in the states.

[dr ACE]

3-7 years incarceration for growing herbs(with proven medical value)!!!, The world is getting more and more backwards every single day

'the jails keep on filling up and up and..'

I herd on the news yesterday it cost 600 pounds a day! to keep just 1 prisoner locked up. So what could possibly be the answer to this sad mess? why more prisons of course, more hard-line laws, and lots and lots more 'bull crape propaganda'. And shed-loads more of that pathetic nonsense like how '1 joint and your 90% more likely to become schizophrenic '

Very rarley is there any mention of the medical values of Cannabis (in its raw form,buds leaves)_in the press. Conspiracy??

Sorry for coming over as Very sarcastic there. But the issue of prosecuting Cannabis cultivators and demonizing its use is one part in the evolution of 'political policies' that justs reaks soooo bad of High-Level- Hypocrisy

[Bikelbees]

Own a brewery and you might get significant grants or even an award for industry, make some less toxic substances and they are going to send you down for a long time. You know its become a common language of frustration amongst supporters of cannabis and other illicit substances, we all know its true, we know its nonsense and wonder what to do. These poor people who risk their liberty to grow excellent quality products and look how our courts treat them. Well, things are going to change. because these laws that the judges are pouring over are in themselves illegal, thats right, there is no authority for the UK to make these dugs illegal, they are IMO misusing their powers my mis-applying the legislation which is there solely to protect us against dangerous drugs, tobacco isn't even scheduled so that clearly demonstrates how rights are applied with discrimination, contrary to the purpose of the legislation and the Human Rights Act.

[dr ACE]

Originally Posted by Bikelbees

Own a brewery and you might get significant grants or even an award for industry, make some less toxic substances and they are going to send you down for a long time. You know its become a common language of frustration amongst supporters of cannabis and other illicit substances, we all know its true, we know its nonsense and wonder what to do. These poor people who risk their liberty to grow excellent quality products and look how our courts treat them. Well, things are going to change. because these laws that the judges are pouring over are in themselves illegal, thats right, there is no authority for the UK to make these dugs illegal, they are IMO misusing their powers my mis-applying the legislation which is there solely to protect us against dangerous drugs, tobacco isn't even scheduled so that clearly demonstrates how rights are applied with discrimination, contrary to the purpose of the legislation and the Human Rights Act.

Excellent post Biklebees, you deserve some rep power for that. As long as there are lap dogs and poodles in charge with all there hypocrite nonsense trying sooo hard to look good in front of there fellow cronies, when there are millions of individuals suffering needlessly. Sadly its really sick people who have terminal illnesses and all they need is to be allowed to grow sum Dam kind bud or get someone else to do it, and then they have an endless supply of a most excellent substance with which to help them and it is 100% natural.

I thinks its really Very Very ignorant this 'war against people and their freedoms' nonsense. Because if you think bout it there would be a massive burden lifted from the medical centres and pharmacies for mild pain relieving drugs, sleeping drugs , anti-emetic drugs, antidepressants??, the list goes on

It would be really interesting to project/figure out if the government would actually stand to make more money from legalizing *all* drugs or would they stand to loose more. Is it just straight economics like HST once said, or is it to do with 'fear of change',or/and 'fear of being wrong hence ~ pride' or i think its a mixture of these attitudes
or is it;

'the need to have control over people and their minds'

[Bikelbees]

HST - Hunter S Thompson?

[dr ACE]

yep,excellent writer very witty