Foxborough police may have violated public records law in Chandler Jones' medical emergency

[SteelCityColt]

5 minutes ago, bababooey said:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/2015/08/14/synthetic-marijuana-now-banned-boston/HgVzsp5DP4ljk26UDuOxwI/story.html

 

Both.

 

Edit: Would seem logical that you wouldn't just outlaw production and sale and not use.

 

I'm sure you'd not be surprised that law isn't always logical! 

[bababooey]

Just now, SteelCityColt said:

 

I'm sure you'd not be surprised that law isn't always logical! 

True, common sense isn't common. But to answer your question, yes both production & sale, as well as possession (use) is illegal.

[Yehoodi]

19 minutes ago, bababooey said:

I'm pretty sure marijuna is illegal, which is confirmed what he was doing.

 

Edit: Yes, they should be handled carefully. The entire issue is that this was not normal course of business. Modification by dispatcher minutes after vs. complete removal by lieutenant days later with no reason for modification.

 

In 2009 Mass decriminalized the possession of under one ounce of marijuana.  https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXV/Chapter94C/Section32L .  So if there is less than an ounce on the table then no crime for possession of marijuana.

 

As you earlier post.  I did read the article and made my points regarding the timing to Mrs. Misunderstood's post above. 

 

As for the change itself the Lt. indicated that it was a dispatch error inadvertently including medical information, something the police can not do and needs to be modified.  Also, as for the other changes, we have no clue what was changed, the article does not tell us what was changed in the other changes made by the dispatchers.  So we have changes that are made to reports, and do know the reason, and no one seems to care, so why worry about the change to Jones' report?

 

In another words, no one is batting an eye at unexplained changes to reports by police personal then try have an issue when a Lt. makes changes and gives the reason for the changes.     

 

 

[bababooey]

5 minutes ago, Yehoodi said:

 

In 2009 Mass decriminalized the possession of under one ounce of marijuana.  https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXV/Chapter94C/Section32L .  So if there is less than an ounce on the table then no crime for possession of marijuana.

 

As you earlier post.  I did read the article and made my points regarding the timing to Mrs. Misunderstood's post above. 

 

As for the change itself the Lt. indicated that it was a dispatch error inadvertently including medical information, something the police can not do and needs to be modified.  Also, as for the other changes, we have no clue what was changed, the article does not tell us what was changed in the other changes made by the dispatchers.  So we have changes that are made to reports, and do know the reason, and no one seems to care, so why worry about the change to Jones' report?

 

In another words, no one is batting an eye at unexplained changes to reports by police personal then try have an issue when a Lt. makes changes and gives the reason for the changes.     

 

 

Synthetic marijuana is illegal no matter the ounces.

 

We are talking in circles now. It was changed outside of the normal course of business even though you asserted it was normal. The article can't tell us what was changed because nobody knows what changed except the Lieutenant who removed it and the initial dispatcher who logged it. The point of the article is to point out that a possible violation occurred. If you think that we shouldn't worry about the Jones report behind all the items I mentioned in my last reply to you in addition to the fact the police chief runs security at the stadium and there is a playoff game this weekend then we have nothing left to discuss and can agree to disagree.

 

To your last point: there are no unexplained changes. When these are modified by the dispatcher minutes later they say why they are modified or at least note that it was modified. This is not the same as the removal without explanation by a Lieutenant days after.

[OffensivelyPC]

I gotta give you all credit.  Over 80 posts in and this hasn't derailed into a Peyton/Brady or Deflategate discussion yet.  Bravo!

 

PS - Yeah, I saw a few of you try!  You know who you are...

[Gramz]

1 minute ago, OffensivelyPC said:

I gotta give you all credit.  Over 80 posts in and this hasn't derailed into a Peyton/Brady or Deflategate discussion yet.  Bravo!

Hush.

[bababooey]

6 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

I gotta give you all credit.  Over 80 posts in and this hasn't derailed into a Peyton/Brady or Deflategate discussion yet.  Bravo!

 

PS - Yeah, I saw a few of you try!  You know who you are...

Most people like to focus on the issue at hand rather than try to bring up other issues to somehow negate or justify the current issue. 

[OffensivelyPC]

6 minutes ago, Mrs. Misunderstood said:

Hush.

Was it something I said? (okay, so I thought therer was an emoticon with a smiley face halo, but I couldn't find it.  So just imagine that after my first sentence, there's a smiley guy with a halo around his head lol).

[OffensivelyPC]

5 minutes ago, bababooey said:

Most people like to focus on the issue at hand rather than try to bring up other issues to somehow negate or justify the current issue. 

To be fair, pretty much everyone here is not like most people.  And I promise I mean that in a good way.  There's a lot of things that annoy me about these forums, but I'd rather deal with the personalities than the alternative.

[Gramz]

1 minute ago, OffensivelyPC said:

Was it something I said? (okay, so I thought therer was an emoticon with a smiley face halo, but I couldn't find it.  So just imagine that after my first sentence, there's a smiley guy with a halo around his head lol).

and is that halo a little crooked...

[Yehoodi]

45 minutes ago, bababooey said:

Synthetic marijuana is illegal no matter the ounces.

 

We are talking in circles now. It was changed outside of the normal course of business even though you asserted it was normal. The article can't tell us what was changed because nobody knows what changed except the Lieutenant who removed it and the initial dispatcher who logged it. The point of the article is to point out that a possible violation occurred. If you think that we shouldn't worry about the Jones report behind all the items I mentioned in my last reply to you in addition to the fact the police chief runs security at the stadium and there is a playoff game this weekend then we have nothing left to discuss and can agree to disagree.

 

To your last point: there are no unexplained changes. When these are modified by the dispatcher minutes later they say why they are modified or at least note that it was modified. This is not the same as the removal without explanation by a Lieutenant days after.

 

We are not talking in circles, you have an opinion and I have mine.  I am not worried about the situation.  Even if he had synthetic marijuana, it only recently been outlawed from what I hear.

 

As for the reports, regardless of how you want to spin it there is NO explanations in the article as to why those 4 modifications were made by the dispatchers (although the article does talk about an additional two calls the were redacted).   And you seemed to give an innuendo to changes made with "no" explanation (or the one given does not satisfy you) but yet ignore that the fact that the very article you posted talks about 4 unexplained changes and you call in the normal course of business, in another words your position is that unexplained changes are in the normal course of business.   

 

In the end of the day, we have changes made with no explanation by the Foxboro police.  The fact that the Lt. made a change after the fact and does not give an explanation you like, does not make it nefarious on its face.  We have seen at least 7 mistakes makes by dispatchers in the article and so they happen and it is not a stretch to think that mistakes can get past the dispatcher and are only caught upon a second set of eyes.    

 

Furthermore, at best we have possession of synthetic marijuana, not the biggest crime.   And most critically we are dealing with the dispatchers report NOT a police officers report, if any was made, by the officer that went to the house.   So the dispatcher will only record what he hears, and we have heard what he  heard from the audio on the internet, so we know what the dispatcher heard with respect to what was found at Jones's house.  

 

As Jones's is exempt from any crime related to what was in his system when he entered the police station, the only crime that could of been committed was for things that were found at his house and a limited search to boot.  And since we heard what the dispatcher heard with respect to things found at the house, not sure what your issue is as nothing can be hidden as we heard what the dispatcher heard with respect things at Jones' house.  In another words we know what the dispatcher knows, so what is the problem. 

[Restored]

On the next episode of CSI: Colts Fan Forum.....

[bababooey]

28 minutes ago, Restored said:

On the next episode of CSI: Colts Fan Forum.....

Magnum PSI

[bababooey]

34 minutes ago, Yehoodi said:

 

We are not talking in circles, you have an opinion and I have mine.  I am not worried about the situation.  Even if he had synthetic marijuana, it only recently been outlawed from what I hear.

 

As for the reports, regardless of how you want to spin it there is NO explanations in the article as to why those 4 modifications were made by the dispatchers (although the article does talk about an additional two calls the were redacted).   And you seemed to give an innuendo to changes made with "no" explanation (or the one given does not satisfy you) but yet ignore that the fact that the very article you posted talks about 4 unexplained changes and you call in the normal course of business, in another words your position is that unexplained changes are in the normal course of business.   

 

In the end of the day, we have changes made with no explanation by the Foxboro police.  The fact that the Lt. made a change after the fact and does not give an explanation you like, does not make it nefarious on its face.  We have seen at least 7 mistakes makes by dispatchers in the article and so they happen and it is not a stretch to think that mistakes can get past the dispatcher and are only caught upon a second set of eyes.    

 

Furthermore, at best we have possession of synthetic marijuana, not the biggest crime.   And most critically we are dealing with the dispatchers report NOT a police officers report, if any was made, by the officer that went to the house.   So the dispatcher will only record what he hears, and we have heard what he  heard from the audio on the internet, so we know what the dispatcher heard with respect to what was found at Jones's house.  

 

As Jones's is exempt from any crime related to what was in his system when he entered the police station, the only crime that could of been committed was for things that were found at his house and a limited search to boot.  And since we heard what the dispatcher heard with respect to things found at the house, not sure what your issue is as nothing can be hidden as we heard what the dispatcher heard with respect things at Jones' house.  In another words we know what the dispatcher knows, so what is the problem. 

Your own Dennis and Callahan noted that the police chief lied to the Boston Herald about this. At least someone in Boston doesn't have their head in the sand. Keep saying whatever you'd like but I dismantled your entire argument on page 2.

[natedizel]

3 hours ago, dynasty13 said:

1 hour ago, bababooey said:

Synthetic marijuana is illegal no matter the ounces.

 

We are talking in circles now. It was changed outside of the normal course of business even though you asserted it was normal. The article can't tell us what was changed because nobody knows what changed except the Lieutenant who removed it and the initial dispatcher who logged it. The point of the article is to point out that a possible violation occurred. If you think that we shouldn't worry about the Jones report behind all the items I mentioned in my last reply to you in addition to the fact the police chief runs security at the stadium and there is a playoff game this weekend then we have nothing left to discuss and can agree to disagree.

 

To your last point: there are no unexplained changes. When these are modified by the dispatcher minutes later they say why they are modified or at least note that it was modified. This is not the same as the removal without explanation by a Lieutenant days after.

Synthetic Marijuana chemicals are always changing. It's not all illegal cause the state can't keep up

[bababooey]

17 minutes ago, natedizel said:

Synthetic Marijuana chemicals are always changing. It's not all illegal cause the state can't keep up

You....you serious? It doesnt matter what the chemicals are. It's still synthetic marijuana and it's all illegal. You think the 7-11 or corner store bodega in Massachusetts or any other state for that matter are receiving shipments of new types of synthetic marijuana just because the chemicals change and sell them until "the state keeps up" and bans the new version? It's all under one umbrella as synthetic marijuana. To think that people are creating new and more dangerous types of synthetic marijuana by changing the chemicals makes them legal is just....dumb thinking.

 

[SteelCityColt]

11 minutes ago, bababooey said:

You....you serious? It doesnt matter what the chemicals are. It's still synthetic marijuana and it's all illegal. You think the 7-11 or corner store bodega in Massachusetts or any other state for that matter are receiving shipments of new types of synthetic marijuana just because the chemicals change and sell them until "the state keeps up" and bans the new version? It's all under one umbrella as synthetic marijuana. To think that people are creating new and more dangerous types of synthetic marijuana by changing the chemicals makes them legal is just....dumb thinking.

 

 

Well you say this....

 

Way back before "legal" highs were common there was a test case here where a Cambridge chem grad was selling a slightly modified form of cocaine. His argument was that scientifically it wasn't cocaine so therefore not illegal.

 

Ironically he still got prosecuted because he was telling customers it was cocaine. 

Obviously it's a different world now and there's more awareness of such things both socially and legally.

 

The whole drugs legislation is a mess in most countries IMO. But I digress.

[bababooey]

1 minute ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Well you say this....

 

Way back before "legal" highs were common there was a test case here where a Cambridge chem grad was selling a slightly modified form of cocaine. His argument was that scientifically it wasn't cocaine so therefore not illegal.

 

Ironically he still got prosecuted because he was telling customers it was cocaine. 

Obviously it's a different world now and there's more awareness of such things both socially and legally.

 

The whole drugs legislation is a mess in most countries IMO. But I digress.

This isn't back then, this is 2016. This is a side argument that's not relevant. There are tons of strains of marijuana. If you've seen the movies Ted 2 or Pineapple Express, or the Carpool Lane episode of Curb you'll see that there isn't just one kind of marijuana. It's all illegal. Again, not the point of this discussion at all. The fact what Jones did was illegal goes without saying in this case since it was confirmed he had an allergic reaction to something that is illegal to possess.

[BloodyChamp]

12 hours ago, WoolMagnet said:

Weed Didn't cause this.  If it were wed, police would have found him asleep on the couch with a half-eaten pizza on his chest.

this was a "cooked" up substance, weed just doesn't affect that way, it just doesn't.

alcohol and some cooked substance (spice) no doubt.

There's 1 answer to the question I asked...

[SteelCityColt]

8 minutes ago, bababooey said:

This isn't back then, this is 2016. This is a side argument that's not relevant. There are tons of strains of marijuana. If you've seen the movies Ted 2 or Pineapple Express, or the Carpool Lane episode of Curb you'll see that there isn't just one kind of marijuana. It's all illegal. Again, not the point of this discussion at all. The fact what Jones did was illegal goes without saying in this case since it was confirmed he had an allergic reaction to something that is illegal to possess.

 

Well I did point out in my response it's a different world now, it was small aside to the discussion about how he would have got away with it if hadn't been so stupid... and a strain of plant is very different to being fundamentally a different chemical. 

 

[WoolMagnet]

4 hours ago, dynasty13 said:

This just....doesn't....matter.

 

I don't care about any of this, and I don't understand why so much time and attention is being paid to it here. 

i gues NE fans like to ignore contoversy (****) just like their players, coaches, and front office

thanks, this made my day..

 

[bababooey]

Pat McAfee with the mic drop

 

 

This can be closed now. Thanks all.

[WoolMagnet]

4 hours ago, dynasty13 said:

 

Except that here, we aren't allowed to talk about or speculate if Peyton was involved in something 'nefarious', remember? 

 

THIS is a non-story on a football forum because the conversation has now turned to the police, the player isn't even a part of it anymore.  He didn't miss practice, this has no connection to this weekend's games, he has fulfilled all responsibilities to the team. This belongs in the Misc Discussions forum if people want to discuss how the police have handled it. 

Maybe move it to the dumpster?  Put it right bedide the spygate videos, the airpump, and needles.

[Yehoodi]

50 minutes ago, bababooey said:

Your own Dennis and Callahan noted that the police chief lied to the Boston Herald about this. At least someone in Boston doesn't have their head in the sand. Keep saying whatever you'd like but I dismantled your entire argument on page 2.

 

Yes I did listen to D&C's opinions on the matter in the last few days and am glad that there are folks that take their side and they have opinions just like yours.

 

And yes you bring up interesting points, but to think your points "dismantled" my points, I think you might be smoking the same stuff that Jones was smoking.

[WoolMagnet]

16 minutes ago, BloodyChamp said:

There's 1 answer to the question I asked...

You answered any i had with your original post.

typical.

[BloodyChamp]

This is 1 of the biggest problems with weed imo. I never said weed caused it. Supporters are so defensive and desperate over the stuff. 

[CanuckColtsFan]

37 minutes ago, bababooey said:

Pat McAfee with the mic drop

 

 

This can be closed now. Thanks all.

Oh my, that is funny

[2006Coltsbestever]

42 minutes ago, bababooey said:

Pat McAfee with the mic drop

 

 

This can be closed now. Thanks all.

Pat rules! Best Punter of all-time.

[dynasty13]

42 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

i gues NE fans like to ignore contoversy (****) just like their players, coaches, and front office

thanks, this made my day..

 

 

Controversy?

 

The guy smoked something, freaked out, and walked himself over to a police station to get medical attention. That's the end of any Patriot 'role' or involvement in this thing. Some of you guys are nuts...I'm actually surprised you didn't try to compare this to Spygate or Deflategate!!!

[dynasty13]

41 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

Maybe move it to the dumpster?  Put it right bedide the spygate videos, the airpump, and needles.

 

aaaaaaaand there it is.

[Gramz]

@OffensivelyPC   are you paying attention?

[pgt_rob]

I remember walking into a Marathon gas station and seeing synthetic marijuana or "Spice" for sale at the counter. It's been a while ago probably 5+ years, but it's banned here in Indiana.

[natedizel]

5 hours ago, dynasty13 said:

1 hour ago, bababooey said:

You....you serious? It doesnt matter what the chemicals are. It's still synthetic marijuana and it's all illegal. You think the 7-11 or corner store bodega in Massachusetts or any other state for that matter are receiving shipments of new types of synthetic marijuana just because the chemicals change and sell them until "the state keeps up" and bans the new version? It's all under one umbrella as synthetic marijuana. To think that people are creating new and more dangerous types of synthetic marijuana by changing the chemicals makes them legal is just....dumb thinking.

 

Do some research bud before calling people dumb. http://listverse.com/2016/01/02/10-things-we-do-and-dont-know-about-synthetic-marijuana/

[natedizel]

1 hour ago, bababooey said:

You....you serious? It doesnt matter what the chemicals are. It's still synthetic marijuana and it's all illegal. You think the 7-11 or corner store bodega in Massachusetts or any other state for that matter are receiving shipments of new types of synthetic marijuana just because the chemicals change and sell them until "the state keeps up" and bans the new version? It's all under one umbrella as synthetic marijuana. To think that people are creating new and more dangerous types of synthetic marijuana by changing the chemicals makes them legal is just....dumb thinking.

 

I can lace oregano into something that will you dizzy and call it Marijuana 

[OffensivelyPC]

1 hour ago, Mrs. Misunderstood said:

@OffensivelyPC   are you paying attention?

I leave to go back to work for a couple of hours...looks like I've missed a lot.  Probably a job for a forum moderator to pick up.  I'm honestly not surprised though, except that it lasted as long as it did before becoming a disaster.

[OffensivelyPC]

58 minutes ago, natedizel said:

I can lace oregano into something that will you dizzy and call it Marijuana 

No you can't.

 

 

[Yehoodi]

5 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

Relax.  Just responding to your comment about wanting to IGNORE this like it didn't happen.

the "sweeping under the rug" mentality is what i get a kick out of.

i would like to believe there was no "controversy".

but to think the cops aren't influenced in some way is crazy. (Not just in NE)

history is what it is..... Sorry.

 

We hear yah WoolMagnet, but on the level of severity, the alleged crime is low on the totem pole.  In fact, even if Jones was caught with drugs, and assuming its his first offense, it is my understanding that the first offense in the NFL is just to go in a treatment program.   

 

It does not get any lesser that this, and given the facts are somewhat attenuated from any alleged crime, it makes it all the less issue, and given that he was by himself, seek treatment voluntarily, did not harm anyone, and it depending on what "type" of synthetic marijuana he had, it might be legal.   Makes this thing not really an issue in the grand scheme of things.

 

Had this same sort of stuff surrounded Spikes' car which allegedly did not have its lights on when it rammed into caravan last year, I would agree.  But there was no issue, Spikes was cut and left to deal with the situation on his own.   

[SteelCityColt]

MOD NOTE

 

This has been mostly a civil discussion about the issue. I've removed a few posts that were nothing more than personal spats. Attacking what people post (in a reasonable manner) is fine, just flat out calling people stupid isn't. 

 

This is the friendly warning and plea to try and not end up with having to lock this. Please try and behave. 

[Cynjin]

3 hours ago, dynasty13 said:

 

The guy smoked something, freaked out, and walked himself over to a police station to get medical attention. That's the end of any Patriot 'role' or involvement in this thing.

 

I doubt this is the end of Patriot involvement, I have to believe that he will be put into the leagues substance abuse program.

[DougDew]

Interesting how the local laws are written so that no wrongdoing is accorded either Jones or the Police.

 

Things that Jones and the Police did would be considered wrong and illegal in most places.  Wrongdoing on a personal conduct level takes a very very high bar before it becomes illegal, apparently, in the local area.

 

I comment on this because it helps readers to understand that the defenders of Brady, Spygate, Feign-Injury gate simply require a very high level of proof before disciplinary action can be implemented. Its just the way they see it.

 

Edit:  I see that Pat McAfee sees it the same way.