It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NEWS: Mother Sentenced To Five Years For Giving Toddler a Marijuana "Bong"

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 06:20 PM

Originally posted by djohnsto77
The story says that they have a photograph of the child with a bong, so I don't think this is a complete fabrication. The negative test results are interesting though.

That's the point dj, thanks, if a parent was stupid enough to let a kid handle a bong, they would have no problem smoking in front of the kid, thus second-hand pot smoke. Wouldn't this be in the kids system? According to the tests, um, no.

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 06:23 PM
The picture is proof enough how stupid this lady is regardless if she was high or not, she probably thought the kid look funny or cute
god knows holding the bong and took a picture, whether the kid smoked or not, she's guilty for being an idiot and letting her child be anywhere near her drug paraphenelia.

There basis for this case, but I also thinked it's being played up. good find btw Mayet.

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 06:34 PM

Originally posted by djohnsto77
The story says that they have a photograph of the child with a bong, so I don't think this is a complete fabrication. The negative test results are interesting though.

I've looked for this picture, can't find it, does anyone have a link?

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 06:47 PM
Produce the pictures already, k?

This is my line of thinking, anyhow.
Let me get this straight though, seemingly, the only evidence that the state could allegedly produce was a couple of pictures taken by a witness? On top of that, the state could only further muster an admitted drug-users testimony [ie: the witness] of what she seemingly saw? No proof that marijuana was in the bong, tests on the child for marijuana were negative. Seems mighty, mighty bogus and quite dern fishy to me.

Sooooooooo yeah, of course, duh, if you take a picture of someone who appears to be smoking pot, an illegal act, that person, you allegedly witnessed performing that illegal act, can be charged with possession of an illegal narcotic based on a picture and your testimony as empirical damning evidence that that individual was smoking weed, despite testing proving to the contrary? Huh?! Wow. And to think that people are up in arms over the Patriot Act?!!


[edit on 5-8-2005 by Seekerof]

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 06:56 PM
This is obvious propaganda. Please, people.

Even if you forced a child to smoke a whole bowl of cannabis, you wouldn't be causing them 1/1000th the damage of a lifetime with one cigarette-smoking parent. Not to mention those children who are regularly beaten and molested by their parents.

Ask yourselves, "Do I really care about parents who truly abuse their kids?" because if you aren't a foster parent, then the answer is probably, "No." Thousands of kids are hungry and homeless in America and nobody gives a crap.

Step off your hypocracy boxes for a moment.


...Uhm, 'bowl' means a tiny piece.

[edit on 5-8-2005 by smallpeeps]

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 07:28 PM
I am all for the legalisation of Mary-Jane...

Did you know why Marijuana is illegal - its because its ten times harder for the government to capitalise off... I mean, anyone can grow a plant in their back yard - and think of all the money people would loose then...

Anyone seen a movie called Grass?

I remember my biology teacher told me; that the nerve pathways in the brain really dont stop developing until you are around 30 years old - and after that, its almost completely beneficial... But before that, it can distort and/or damage development of those nerve pathways...

But that being said, whos to say the distorted nerve pathways are a bad thing... I know I didn't wait till I was 30, but when I first smoked some MJ it put things in a much better perspective in my opinion, and made me much more productive as a result...

However, I'm no pot-head, and I have seen MJ completely destroy some peoples lives - but in moderation, I think it is highly beneficial...

But no way on earth should you smoke it in front of children, and you should definatley not allow them to smoke it, not until their older

As for this case, I think its a little weird...

[edit on 5-8-2005 by ghostsoldier]

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 07:48 PM
From the article:

Durham did not testify at trial and the defense called no witnesses. She said nothing at her sentencing.

Maybe she was stoned?

Ha, seriously tho', I sounded a little angry there, but really, this sounds like an idiotic woman who actually thought that her daughter's appetite was being helped.

If she would say to the cops, "Oh yeah, my toddler's a little stoner!" she's obviously stupid beyond measure. Therefore, I think we can presume that she's being honest --that's IF the statement she made to the police is factual. I think it's absurd. This sounds too lame to believe and is definately effective anti-pot propaganda.

Anyway, If she is stupid enough to confess it to a police officer, 60 months in prison isn't going to improve her intellect. She needs education. Meanwhile, it's one more kid tossed into 'child services' and the foster care system. That's all I'm saying.

Now back to your usual thread.

[edit on 5-8-2005 by smallpeeps]


posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 07:54 PM

Originally posted by djohnsto77
The story says that they have a photograph of the child with a bong, so I don't think this is a complete fabrication. The negative test results are interesting though.

Could be a missing member of the ‘Clinton clan’... which has already innately shown and demonstrated the existance of a dominant gene that instinctively instructs humans ‘not to inhale’.


posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 07:55 PM
A terrible story i think the fault rests in the system not the drug and although heinous if true this women does live in a society that pays lip service to children. Always an opposition to reality and frequently abuse.

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 08:07 PM
The reason second hand pot smoke does not cause a positive test rusult is the lack of THC (active ingredient) in the smoke...

Almost all the THC is absorbed by your lungs...

Sounds like they are heating up the anti-marijuana war on the public...

There's story today about another crazed pot grower shooting at law officials...Just like the one in Canada...

It's pretty obviouse to me it's the feds trying to creat more anti-pot sentiment in the population.

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 08:27 PM
More news on this case from when she was first found guilty

Fuller News Article Here

Defense attorneys Robin Hammond and Zachary Cain argued that there was no proof that marijuana was in the bong. And they suggested that the photographs could be of Durham taking away the bong rather than offering it to her toddler.

Further, the attorneys said Nichols, an admitted marijuana user with a felony drug conviction, was not a credible witness. And they questioned whether the case was distribution within the meaning of the statute.

Cebull ruled that distribution does not need to be for pay or profit. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has held that sharing of drugs constituted distribution, his order said.

Yes it seems that if enough stink is made, laws will be changed to make these statutes clearer.

Nichols returned with a digital camera. Durham, she said, suggested it would be "cool'' if they had pictures of the baby smoking a bong and that she wanted to send a picture to High Times, a marijuana magazine.

I'd say the pics are out there somewhere but so far I have no luck with any of the search strings I have tried

A test of the toddler's urine seven days after she allegedly smoked marijuana was negative for the drug, witnesses said.

seven days and only a urine test would give the tiny body the chance to clear the thc out.

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 08:32 PM
There is no evidence that the mother has harmed her child. This is her decision and government should stay out of her and her daughters lives. COmpletly unwarranted by the authorities.

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 08:35 PM
And yes, My offbeat humour just has to post this

[edit on 5-8-2005 by Mayet]

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 09:58 PM
[edit on 8/6/2005 by chiS2000]

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 10:49 PM
chIS-sounds like you burn over your share dude. This is obviously a political
snare "Them" that gave us the chair. The rights of the child are in question. Don't hang the mother or obscure the obscurity of facts in this poisonous media romp.

[edit on 5-8-2005 by Frantic]

[edit on 5-8-2005 by Frantic]

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 10:52 PM
Mayet, thats precious! LOL... You just made my night...

My husband fell asleep and i put lipstick on him, threw a skirt over him, put a wig on him and took pictures
He didnt think it too funny at all-= I suppose i could circulate that picture on the internet and raise some eyebrows. Sometimes things are not as they appear

That sentence is a little harsh specially since no traces of any drug were found on the toddler. The only thing i see wrong here is that the child is obviously exposed to parafinalia- tsk tsk... Hide the bong in the basement like everyone else does

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 11:24 PM
i've passed pee tests days after toking....dilution, vitamin c and pectin and creatine.

the dilution for obvious reasons, and its not a stretch to say the kid drank lots of liquids

vitamin c brings the color back to your urine, the first thing they check for is dilution technique. not a stretch to say the kid drank OJ

pectin to raise your pH. A chronic user will actually lower their natural pH. Pectin is basic and will raise it. It is used in making jellies and jams. Tastes awful ! A common form is apple pectin. Not a stretch to say the kid ate apples

creatine is in every mammal's urine. They test for this to make sure you didn't swap out your sample with water. How did the kid get elevated levels of creatine ? that one i'm stumped on

anyway, now you know how to beat the pee test !

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 11:44 PM
I'm willing to wager that when an 18 month child takes in a breath of air, smoke or whathaveyou that it's a far lesser amount than what and adult, for which the tests are geared for, would take in...Thus the amount of THC inhaled is far less then what the tests generally seek out...

I have a few soccer buddies who are big chiefers...They toke up 24/7....Some of them are fathers - When I went over one day for a "session" one of the team members had brought his 3 year old kid along with him...Everyone else in the room partook, but I just watched in a horrified sort of manner....stunned....I actually remember the guy saying to his son as he was passed the pipe "I sure hope you don't have a good memory little fella"

Personally, I think this story is bogus - Sounds like the lady had never smoked before, took her first puff, got sick, couldn't control her high and became delusional and then made up some BS story....The fact that the lady admitted guilt is probably something the lawyer advised her to do, due to the seemingly incriminating evidence - But let's not forget folks that evidence, photos or not, do not always led to guilt....They can easily be staged....We can't see them, who knows....It's makes more sense to be a skeptic than to play follow the leader...

I agree that it's lousy crap like this that keeps responsible users rights to smoke a crime......But as some have mentioned, its this growing stupidity, trailer-trash ubber-redneck mentality that keeps the ball rolling....

On an awkwardly related subject....Anybody see the Ebaums update today (I check them every Friday religiously

They've got a rather disturbing photo of a 5 year old addict.....real? fake? I dunno....And sadly, I'm getting to the verge of saying “who really cares anymore”...

[edit on 8/5/2005 by EnronOutrunHomerun]

posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 01:30 AM

Originally posted by EnronOutrunHomerun
They've got a rather disturbing photo of a 5 year old addict.....real? fake? I dunno....And sadly, I'm getting to the verge of saying “who really cares anymore”...

Seeing as how there is very little proof that pot is "addictive" (it can be, but no more so than caffeine or something) I find it hard to believe a 5 year old would be "addicted to it"...

It takes many years of daily smoking to become anything close to addicted.

The pot smokers throw mud at the feds, the feds invest it, make a profit, then throw second rate over priced government mud back...
The ironic thing is, the feds mud is paid for by the pot smokers and other tax paying citizens, who expressed their freedom of speech and the freedom to vote, and voted YES on prop 215.

(who was it that said voting changes things? "If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal." Emma Goldman)

The pot smokers speak the truth, take action, fight back, protest, complain, write to their congress men, vote, waste their time, keep smoking, sleep a lot.
The feds use dirty tactics, manipulate the facts, invade peoples property, terrorise people, outright lie to the general gullible public.
To serve and protect? To serve and protect in this instance, the pharmaceutical industry....


posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 03:48 AM
The photo of the five year old is genuine. Her mother was charged if I remember correct.

She was Australian too

Police last night launched an investigation into allegations a five-year-old girl is using drugs.

The girl may be blood tested for drugs by health authorities.

Police were called in after the Northern Territory News voluntarily handed over photographs of the girl holding a bong.

Her 13-year-old sister was shown smoking a bong while her 13-year-old friend poured herself a glass of sherry.

Community Services assistant secretary Carol Peltola said: ``We have spoken with the family.

``We have forwarded the photos to the police and asked them to investigate.

``We are speaking to a pediatrician about children and drugs and what you should be looking for. Whether we blood test the children will be up to the medical advice.''

The mother of the children yesterday spoke out for the first time.

The Northern Territory News has concealed the family's identity to protect the children.

The mother denied she had allowed her children to use drugs.

But she admitted she had allowed them to go unaccompanied to the home of a neighbour who she knew was a drug user.

``I trusted this lady with my children,'' she said.

``I'm disgusted. I knew she was a user but I didn't think that she and her daughter were going to introduce it to my kids.''

She also admitted she had in the past gone to her neighbour's home to take drugs.

``I very occasionally do take drugs. My children are a little bit aware I take drugs but they're not sitting there when I do,'' she said.

``It's not like a daily thing _ I'm getting too old for things like that.

``Maybe once or twice I would have gone over there and done drugs with her in her house. I don't keep drugs in my house.''

The mother said she and her children were ``set up'' by their neighbour after a fight over a children's CD.

``Everything you see in that picture _ the bong and everything _ belongs to her,'' she said.

She denied she took the photographs. ``Her daughter took them,'' she said.

The 13-year-old sister admitted the photos of her smoking cannabis from a bong were not staged. Neighbours said yesterday the children rarely went to school.

BTW Nimbin Rocks..pot capital of Australia...they even have an annual pot festival

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in