This May Be The Wrong Forum

Hrry1025

Member
Today a buddy of mine came up with an interesting thought. Hypothetically can you be charged and convicted of production manufacturing or distribution with no physical cannabis for evidence? We found personal home sized incinerators online...they're relatively affordable and could easily fit say 25 plants and a couple saved pounds around pretty easily...has an instant start on button with auto off when all matters incinerated. So if you had a good security system and knew the police were coming say 3 minutes before they did. Gives you enough time to incinerate everything. No grass no conviction? Even if the exhaust smoke coming out the roof bangs. What'd ya think guys? Anyone use this method (for extreme emergency and unlikely situations only) as a get out of jail card?
 

suTraGrow

Well-Known Member
Under our law, a person is guilty of Tampering with Physical
Evidence when, believing that certain physical evidence is about
to be produced or used in an official proceeding or a prospective
official proceeding, and intending to prevent such production or
use, he or she suppresses it by any act of concealment, alteration
or destruction, or by employing force, intimidation or deception
against any person.
Some of the terms used in this definition have their own
special meaning in our law. I will now give you the meaning of the
following terms: “official proceeding,” “physical evidence,” and
“intent.”
OFFICIAL PROCEEDING means any action or proceeding
conducted by or before a legally constituted judicial, legislative,
administrative or other governmental agency or official, in which
evidence may properly be received.1
PHYSICAL EVIDENCE means any article, object, document,
record or other thing of physical substance which is or is about to
be produced or used as evidence in an official proceeding.2
Intent means conscious objective or purpose. Thus, a
person is INTENDING to prevent the production or use of physical
evidence in an official proceeding or a prospective official
proceeding when his or her conscious objective or purpose is to do
3See Penal Law §15.05(1).
so.3
In order for you to find the defendant guilty of this crime, the
People are required to prove from all of the evidence in the case,
beyond a reasonable doubt, each of the following three elements:
1. That on or about (date), in the county of (specify), the
defendant, (defendant’s name), suppressed physical
evidence by any act of concealment, alteration or
destruction, or by employing force, intimidation or
deception against any person;
2. That the defendant did so believing that such physical
evidence was about to be produced or used in an
official proceeding [or a prospective official
proceeding]; and
3. That the defendant did so intending to prevent such
production or use.
Therefore, if you find that the People have proven beyond a
reasonable doubt each of those elements, you must find the
defendant guilty of the crime of Tampering with Physical Evidence
as charged in the ______ count.
On the other hand, if you find that the People have not
proven beyond a reasonable doubt any one or more of those
elements, you must find the defendant not guilty of the crime of
Tampering with Physical Evidence as charged in the court

This of course was not wirtten by me but was taking from a federal law website i used for a criminal behavior class in college. Hope it helps.
 

Hrry1025

Member
Now here's another question to that....wouldn't you rather be charged for tampering with evidence than manufacturing of marijuana? Because weather you destroyed the evidence or not (being that crime all in it's own) if there's no physical cannabis to be confiscated then can you be convicted for production
 
Top