PDA

View Full Version : Overgrow.com Busted!


silentwolf
03-01-2006, 06:47 AM
After a month of hearing all kind of speculations about what could have happened to overgrow.com, finally there is an official press release by the authorities...

THE RCMP DISMANTLES AN INTERNATIONAL DRUG DISTRIBUTION NETWORK ON THE INTERNET

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/qc/comm/2006/fev06/060228a_e.htm

MONTREAL, Feb. 28 /CNW Telbec/ - The members of the Marihuana Grow
Operations Enforcement Team of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police concluded
their first major operation when they uncovered a Montreal based criminal
organization involved in the trafficking, importation and exportation of
cannabis seeds, as well as in conspiring for the purpose of cannabis
cultivation via the Internet. This operation was launched in November 2004
under the name "Courriel" and culminated with the seizure of 200,000 cannabis
seeds and the arrest of seven persons.
Project "Courriel" revealed that Richard Hratch BAGHDADLIAN, 38, from
Marsan Street in Montreal, and six other persons operated the Heaven's
Stairway company. This company was on the web claiming to be the North
American supplier for indoor and outdoor cannabis production.
The cybercompany Heaven's Stairway used the Internet sites hempqc.com,
cannabisworld.com, overgrow.com, eurohemp.com, cannabisseeds.com, and
cannabisbay.com. These sites were used to order cannabis seeds online and
obtain information on cannabis cultivation. These Internet sites also
suggested ways to outsmart the police.
Richard Hratch BAGHDADLIAN was the instigator, head and main beneficiary
of the illicit company Heaven's Straiway. The other six accused acted as
couriers and performed other duties for the company. They are Geoffrey CHAN,
33, Maria Cristina CIVITILLO, 32, Natalie BAGHDADLIAN, 40, Manuel Bento
FERNANDES, 45, Christopher ALMOND, 38, and Teresa RODRIGUES, 39. They all live
in Montreal except Christopher ALMOND who lives in Ville Saint-Laurent.
The organization processed approximately 30 orders of cannabis seeds a
day averaging $100 each. The seeds were sent to clients by regular mail.
The seven people are facing 49 charges under the Controlled Drugs and
Substances Act and the Criminal Code of Canada. The offences were committed in
Quebec, Canada, North America, the United Kingdom and elsewhere in the world
between March 12, 1998 and January 31, 2006.
Nine searches were carried out during the week of January 30, 2006 in
order to gather evidence that criminal activities had been committed. The
searches were conducted in Montreal and Laval, as well as in the residences of
three of the accused, a business, three post office boxes, a vehicle and a
safe-deposit box.
These searches led to the seizure of 200,000 cannabis seeds, more than
$183,362 in US currencies and $14,000 in Canadian currencies, both in cash and
postal money orders, three one-kilogram gold bricks, a Harley-Davidson
motorcycle, a Mazda RX8 and many purchase orders. Since the searches were
conducted, 272 orders have been intercepted by the police.
The amount of seeds seized during the searches could have made it
possible to operate approximately 500 cannabis greenhouses of 400 plants each,
which represent 42 million s sold on the street.
The seven accused are liable to 10 years' imprisonment. Since the
possession of cannabis seeds is illegal under Schedule II of the Controlled
Drugs and Substances Act, clients of the network could also receive a visit
from the police.
It should be noted that Project "Courriel", a first in Canada, is the
fruit of the work of the new Marihuana Grow Operations Enforcement Team. This
new drug enforcement team is one of the seven teams established by the Royal
Canadian Mounted Police across Canada in 2004 to combat the scourge of
marihuana. The main objectives of these teams are to interdict drugs before
they arrive in our communities and to target and destroy the infrastructure
and the networks used by criminal organizations involved in marihuana
production. These organizations constitute a threat to public safety and well-
being.

For further information: Communications Office, (514) 939-8308

On this site there's a news video on the arrests;

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060228/rcmp_drugring_060228/20060228?hub=Canada

willoweyes
03-03-2006, 07:04 AM
This is pathetic. It's amazing what some people consider illegal.

The Baghdadalian operation was not making anyone rich. It was the work of brave committed people. Too bad the collective unconscious can't get fired up over this travesty.

SecondSun
03-11-2006, 02:01 AM
Hey, if it's against the law it's against the law, regardless of how few people the perpetrators may be harming. Besides, there are those that believe that drug use does harm people, both directly in terms of health, and indirectly in terms of lost jobs, healthcare and legal costs, etc, etc...

I think it's hard for non-drug-users to get fired up over these kind of issues and illicit drug users are a slim minority that rarely vote.

[ March 11, 2006, 03:03 AM: Message edited by: SecondSun ]

orange2368
03-11-2006, 03:17 AM
hey ya know it is against the law but if so many people believe otherwise maybe its worth a vote and so many "guilty" people wont be guilty but free!

willoweyes
03-11-2006, 03:17 AM
Hey, Secondsun, if I'm not stealing your purse or breaking your leg, it's none of your freaking business (Thomas Jefferson).

Smoking pot is not "illicit drug use." Pot is a calming and visionary herb, that has been used medicinally for hundreds of years.

When "they" tell you that you may not plant a home garden, (because growing your own food "robs" agribusiness of profits) maybe then you will get fired up.

On the other hand, I doubt it.

willoweyes
03-11-2006, 03:21 AM
BTW, welcome to the board, Orange--you appear to have a good head on your shoulders!

SecondSun
03-11-2006, 07:31 AM
illcit means:

- contrary to accepted morality (especially sexual morality) or convention; "an illicit association with his secretary"
- illegitimate: contrary to or forbidden by law; "an illegitimate seizure of power"; "illicit trade"; "an outlaw strike"; "unlawful measures"

So explain to me how smoking pot is not contrary to accepted morals (try smoking pot in a public place and see how long before someone calls the cops) or not contrary or forbidden by law (as far as I know possession without a license is a crime in every jurisdiction.)

The majority of those who would say they support the legalization of marijuana on a public opinion poll either do not vote at all or do not vote consistently. Conservatives not only donate more blood than liberals, but they get out the vote in stronger numbers as well, despite nonconservatives outnumbering conservatives.

willoweyes: "Hey, Secondsun, if I'm not stealing your purse or breaking your leg, it's none of your freaking business (Thomas Jefferson)."

That is your (and possibly Thomas Jefferson's) political opinion, but we live in a representative democracy where the states can effectively choose the political makeup of the federal government. That means that conservatives have every right to elect leaders and write laws that fit their personal political views. Unless a law is unconstitutional you can have no grievance with it. You are free to elect leaders who promise to repeal the laws that you do not like.

willoweyes: "When 'they' tell you that you may not plant a home garden, (because growing your own food 'robs' agribusiness of profits) maybe then you will get fired up."

Anyone can makeup an unappealing hypothetical scenario. The two are not the same. The federal government has the right to make laws banning the trade of certain substances. There is no provision in the constitution forbidding it. We can all pretend that the founding fathers would have supported our point of view, but it doesn't make anyones case stronger.

[ March 11, 2006, 09:17 AM: Message edited by: SecondSun ]

SecondSun
03-11-2006, 08:10 AM
whoops. double posted.

[ March 11, 2006, 09:18 AM: Message edited by: SecondSun ]

silentwolf
03-11-2006, 11:53 AM
It is unconstitutional...see the 10th Amendment.

The Federal Government says they have the right to ban it because it affects "illegal interstate commerce," but if it's illegal, how can the Feds regulate its commerce?

It all goes back to prohibition, and a bunch of soon-to-be-unemployed racists.

By the way, the DEA is now banning things without an approval from Congress...like MDMA. That substance was the first to be banned without due process...the mandate for it's banning came directly from the DEA and was never voted on by congress.

willoweyes
03-12-2006, 04:17 AM
Secondsun, I would like to understand the point you are trying to make here--the purpose of your mean-spirited post.

Do you think it is a good idea to put people in jail for selling seeds? Do you think it is a good idea to jail people (sometimes for life) for growing an innocuous herb? Do you think it is a good idea to obey unjust laws? If a majority of the populance cheered on a Hitler (oh yes, it happened) would you advise me to shut up and put on my brown shirt?

A majority of the residents of Salem wanted to burn them some witches. How does that strike you?

However, a majority of U.S. citizens support an end to the marijuana pogrom. It is acknowledged that a powerful bloc (law enforcement, liquor interests and the legal system) make a bundle from the present arrangement. This is not just--it is not what "the people" want--it is dirty and driven by greed.

Look at the medical mess in our country. Run by greed and profits--insurance and drug companies wallowing obscenely in an ocean of cash while a vast majority of the populance wants universal health care, and while poor children and old folks die needlessly--our fellow citizens whom the rich no longer wish to see as brothers.

I don't feel like discussing the war in Iraq right now. I don't feel like talking about the endangered species act, Halliburton, oil spills, SUVs, or the erosion of the middle class. I don't feel like talking about Los Alamos, bunker busters, or depleted uranium. I don't feel like talking about the gulf between the rich and the poor, or the tax system.

We "get" to vote for the lesser of two evils. Our political system is rotten with ill-gotten gains. I vote, but how many politicians are free from the money-hunger? Not many--they can't afford to be.

So please don't croak at me about lighting a joint in a public place, or voting if I don't like the way things are. You know you are being disingenuous (ie meanly artful, or giving a false appearance of simple frankness). Why?

Isaiah Mpski
03-12-2006, 04:33 AM
Have you looked into Narconon Willow.They're not to terribly far from you?
But if not,are you planning on growing anything worth having.