home

Jailed Pot Suspect Hangs Himself

A pot sting by the DEA has had some dire consequences. The suspect, a 24 year old Canadian, hanged himself in his Spokane, WA. jail cell.

The DEA pretended to be a buyer and had Samuel Jackson Lindsay-Brown, previously unknown to law enforcement, fly 350 pounds of BC bud in by helicopter. As he was unloading it, they busted him. The helicopter turned out to have been reported stolen.

< NY Assembly to Vote on Reform of Rockefeller Drug Laws Today | Isikoff on the Released DOJ Memo >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    There should be some way to help people (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by MyLeftMind on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 06:19:51 PM EST
    who have made horrendous choices in life, instead of just punishing them forever.  There should be a punishment that really lets someone pay back their debt to society, not live in the shadow of those mistakes for the rest of their lives.  When people can't reenter society after jail, what other options do they have?  A drug conviction leaves you forever working in minimum pay jobs, regardless of your skills, experience or commitment to remain clean.  

    Without knowing why this guy killed himself, I can imagine that going for the quick money maker turned into a nightmare for him.  Bad enough getting caught smuggling pot, but the theft of a helicopter is much worse.  What hope did he have?  

    In a world where there is such great disparity, I understand why some people choose to break the law to get ahead.  Until we stop people like Madoff and companies like Citi Corp et. al., we're not going to be able to convince people stuck on the bottom (or even in the middle class) that it's worth their effort to obey the law and participate in society in a reasonable manner.  What's the point in not cheating when you look around and see so many other people getting ahead in unethical ways, most of them unstoppable?

    People breaking the law should be a rare event.  Instead it's a way of life for many who don't believe that doing what's right really works.  We need to reestablish the concept of being rewarded by society for making ethical choices.

    Missing info: how did (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 04:12:46 PM EST
    the DEA come into contact with the helicopter pilot to begin with?  

    Just great. (none / 0) (#2)
    by lentinel on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 04:47:56 PM EST
    Entrapment for pot dealing.

    Your law enforcement tax dollars at work.

    Makes you feel proud, don't it?

    No kidding (none / 0) (#4)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 04:53:03 PM EST
    These DEA agents need to be as responsible for the crime taking place as the person they entrapped. Something along the lines of the getaway car driver being just as responsible for murder if someone is killed in a robbery.

    There is no way to prove these crimes would have happened had it not been for the DEA enticements.

    Parent

    It is hard to imagine (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Steve M on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 05:07:15 PM EST
    that someone who is not otherwise predisposed to commit a crime ends up flying a stolen helicopter into the forest with a giant shipment of pot.  My credulity will not strain that far.  But I should note that I'm talking about the legal definition of entrapment here.

    Parent
    It's called... (none / 0) (#31)
    by Samuel on Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 11:07:55 AM EST
    Reefer Madness!  I saw a movie on it once.  

    Parent
    Entrapped? (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 05:12:39 PM EST
    Yeah. He answered a random phone at the nursing home where he spent his days volunteering and it turned out to be a DEA robocall that tricked him into learning how to fly a helicopter, searching out and befriending a major underworld pot dealer who would front him 350lbs, stealing a $1,000,000 helicopter, and risking his life flying that helicopter and the pot across the border at night in a storm.

    Parent
    Murder, Violence on both sides of the border (none / 0) (#15)
    by kidneystones on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 05:39:51 PM EST
    Well said.

    I've argued before for the end of incarceration for drug possession/trafficking and for much broader drug testing, the latter much less seriously than the former.

    Marijuana production and export in Canada is a lucrative, competitive industry controlled by motor-cycle gangs and other criminal elements capable of murder, extortion, rape, theft, and every form of intimidation up to and including the execution of lawyers and government officials.

    Canadians, Mexicans, and Americans working on behalf of our governments to enforce laws enacted and approved of by democratically elected majorities are routinely targeted by these same cartels.

    You like smoking dope? Fine. Grow your own. I'll even defend your right to make what I think to be a fairly poor decision. The people who transport and distribute these drugs are criminals who will commit any crime. Please don't make the folks who enforce our laws out to be the bad guys

    Parent

    Analogy (none / 0) (#17)
    by lentinel on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 06:09:48 PM EST
    You like drinking beer?
    Fine. Brew your own.

    Welcome to prohibition.

    Parent

    You sound as silly... (none / 0) (#20)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 06:50:33 PM EST
    as I do when I say all the people who enforce our unjust laws are little Eichmans.

    There are good and decent drug distributors just as sure as there are rotten ones...same with law enforcement officials.

    The drug prohibition debate is about rights.

    "Everybody talkin' bout crime, tell me who are the criminals?"

    Peter Tosh



    Parent
    Let's see..... (none / 0) (#16)
    by Fabian on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 05:43:52 PM EST
    Do I...

    Know how to fly a helicopter?  No.
    Know where to get large quantity of drugs with no money down?  No.
    Know where to steal a helicopter?  Not without getting caught.
    Fly at night in a storm?  Uh, no, no thanks.

    I also don't know anyone who knows how to do even one of those things.  Whoever that was, he was no Joe Average.

    Parent

    hmmmmmmmmm.................... (none / 0) (#27)
    by cpinva on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 11:31:53 PM EST
    if they (DEA) had never contacted him, he'd never have been in the helicoptor, delivering pot to them. they (DEA) initiated contact, not him.

    in fact, they are guilty of conspiracy. oh, wait, criminal acts are ok, as long as law enforcement types commit them.

    sorry, silly me, whatever was i thinking?

    the problem with the DEA (and others) is that, after a while, they become indistinguisble from the people they are after.

    of course, if pot was legal, whatever would the DEA spend all its spare time on?

    Parent

    Strongly disagree. We are (none / 0) (#5)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 04:55:56 PM EST
    not yet privy to any information as to how DEA and the suicide victim came into contact.  

    Parent
    Where do you see (none / 0) (#7)
    by eric on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 05:03:54 PM EST
    even a hint of entrapment here?

    Parent
    My liberal layman's interpretation of entrapment (none / 0) (#12)
    by kdog on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 05:20:31 PM EST
    the DEA initiated the deal...I assume the deceased, may he rest in peace, wasn't calling DEA agents offering to ship them in some good smoke.

    Regardless, I'm sure you'll agree, suffering maximized instead of minimized, your War on Drugs at work.

    Parent

    "But we can't remove their linens" (none / 0) (#3)
    by scribe on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 04:50:31 PM EST
    is false.  Jail authorities do that every day.  

    This suicide was wholly preventable, and should have been prevented.  

    There is a whole industry which has arisen to provide the jail complexes with "suicide-resistant" equipment.  

    Bedding and uniforms that cannot be knotted or turned into ropes (they tear apart first, being made of paper) or misused (note the "Derby mattress", advertised as being suited for use without a sheet or cover), Light fixtures , custom doors and ventilation grates which defeat attempts to tie off (note the linked ad says the product is "the only truly suicide-resistant air grille that has ever been available to the corrections industry.  It is 100% impossible to loop anything through an S-Vent air grille so no direct fastening to it can be made."  A bold statement, that.) for suicides (note this "Satisfied customer" letter to a supplier detailing how their vent grates cut down on suicides).

    (OK, I included this one merely to show you can buy those striped jumpsuits, too.)

    Writing this comment and doing a couple google searches took less than ten minutes.  That's how available this stuff is.

    But, even more seriously, the only civil rights conditions-of-confinement case most attorneys with knowledge of the law will take, is a pre-arraignment suicide.  And that - not even in all circuits.  Because in some circuits, the jail has an affirmative duty to prevent suicide, and a suicide succeeding pretty much establishes liability.  But that is not the rule in all circuits.

    The article says the person (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 04:58:46 PM EST
    arrested was not displaying suicidal tendencies.  If that is correct, I doubt even the Ninth Circuit puts the burden on the government to prevent suicide.  Different matter if the signs and symptoms are present and a reasonable person would have put the person on suicide watch.

    Parent
    The jailer is pretty much obligated (none / 0) (#10)
    by scribe on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 05:16:23 PM EST
    to assume all pre-arraignment arrestees are suicidal.

    Anyone with experience in the criminal justice system will likely agree that, after a day or two of being confined and taunted by cops and guards about being there for many years (350 lbs. of pot might yield a big sentence), particularly for a person previously unknown to law enforcement (i.e., a first-timer like we appear to have here), the arrestee is likely to be going out of his mind and in danger of suicide.

    Besides, are you going to trust a jail guard (no medical degree) to determine whether someone has suicidal tendencies?  Or take his word post hoc that the decedent didn't have them, when admitting that "yes, he was suicidal" would cost (a) a lot of county money and (b) the jailer his job?  I mean, really.

    Parent

    Not buying it. At least in CA, (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 05:19:47 PM EST
    there is a medical/mental health professional check up, with documentation for each arrestee upon booking into the jail.  Not fool proof, of course.  I am not willing to assume each and every arrestee is suicidal and the law doesn't obligate the government to so assume either. Yes, it is tragic this human being chose to commit suicide.  So far, we have no evidence it is the fault of the government.

    Parent
    is this the left wing view on crime? (none / 0) (#22)
    by diogenes on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 07:24:42 PM EST
    Hey, if it's not a constitutional violation to dress all inmates in paper gowns all the time and if the liberal end agrees with it, then I'm sure the conservatives would go along.  Sounds like that sheriff in Arizona who feeds his inmates pink bologna.
      If you don't dress them in paper all the time then you always have a situation where they are given clothes after being evaluated, and even psychiatrists have a difficult time predicting suicide if a patient has resolved to lie about it.

    Parent
    green bologna (none / 0) (#23)
    by txpublicdefender on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 07:43:24 PM EST
    I don't think people would have a problem with pink bologna.  It's the green bologna that they object to.  Sheriff Arpaio is a sadistic jerk.

    Parent
    Pink underwear (none / 0) (#28)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 11:55:16 PM EST
    Not sure why that's supposed to be humiliating, but Sheriff Joe seems to think it is.

    Parent
    @but we cant take away their linens (none / 0) (#13)
    by danielmolano on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 05:27:57 PM EST
    okay so you really want our tax dollars to go towards spending billions and billions or our hard earned money to making our prisons "safe" and "suicide resistant" are you flipping kidding me? If a criminal wants to kill himself then let him do it! saves us taxpayers a ton of money..I only wish more criminals decided to do it! Hey they made the decision and there has to be a reason for it..people dont just decide to commit suicide for no good reason! internet marketing

    hey (none / 0) (#14)
    by CST on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 05:31:26 PM EST
    there's an idea, better yet, why don't we just shoot them all on sight!

    Parent
    Yikes! (none / 0) (#19)
    by befuddledvoter on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 06:47:49 PM EST
    This was a kid; someone's son; someone's brother; someone's friend.  This did not deserve a death sentence and as it turns out that is what he got.  Someone certainly missed the boat while assessing this kid.  I hope his family gets a good lawyer.  A kid in another country, separated from all friends and family, facing a very lengthy sentence, what more do you need to be on high alert for suicidal tendencies.  

    Parent
    My bet is that he knew what the guys who (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 09:22:49 PM EST
    fronted him the pot would do to him and/or his family, so he saved them the trouble...

    Parent
    Good guess. (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 10:05:05 PM EST
    Highly likely, plus he couldn't be (none / 0) (#29)
    by Inspector Gadget on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 11:59:38 PM EST
    interrogated to the breaking point of naming the bigger names in the ring.

    I used to do contract work for the Exec Director of the huge county jail in downtown Seattle. An in-jail suicide was a huge deal. They happened, but they were very, very rare. All the code calls unnerved me, though.


    Parent

    He flew alone? (none / 0) (#21)
    by polizeros on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 07:00:17 PM EST
    That makes no sense, except that he did. Only way I'd fly 350 lbs. of weed to someone alone and unarmed is if I'd dealt with them in the past and knew them.

    Maybe he was just the flyer, not the seller. But still, alone with no gun?

    arbitrary law enforcement (none / 0) (#24)
    by txpublicdefender on Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 07:46:27 PM EST
    Meanwhile, I just saw someone plead guilty in my border county to being the mule who got caught bringing across 100 1bs. of BC bud.  The feds, for whatever reason, didn't want to bother with him.  Which was very lucky, because in our state court, the sentencing range for someone convicted of possession of marijuana with intent to deliver is 0-6 months if you have no felony history.  This guy got 30 days of community service!

    I'm hopeful (none / 0) (#30)
    by Mikeb302000 on Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 05:36:41 AM EST
    I'm hopeful that the new Attorney General will do something about this.  The waste of resources and the loss of life over marijuana has got to stop.