|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE LONG-AWAITED APPEAL OF THE CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS
OF EDWARD R. FORCHION(A/K/A NJWEEDMAN.COM) FINALLY TO BE HEARD WHAT: ARGUMENT IN THE APPEAL OF
STATE V. EDWARD R. FORCHION WHEN: WHERE: While many of Mr. Forchion’s claims of a “criminal
conspiracy” by New Jersey state officials to prevent a fair trial, because
he’s advocate for changing the current marijuana laws might at first blush
appear to be something out of the mind of Oliver Stone, it is established
fact that in January of 2003, the Honorable Joseph E. Irena’s, U.S.D.J.,
ordered the State of New Jersey to return Mr. Forchion to the Intensive Supervision
Program since the State had violated Mr. Forchion’s First Amendment rights
by incarcerating him due to his advocating a change in the marijuana laws. This is a reported federal decision (of significant precedential
value) the cite of which is: Forchion
v. Intensive Supervised Parole, 240 F.Supp. 302 (D.N.J. 2003);
see also the front page article of the January 27, 2003, New Jersey Law
Journal: “U.S. Judge
Finds No Abstention Bar to Review of State’s ‘Weedman’ Jailing;” along
with Mr. Forchion’s excellent website: NJWeedman.Com. Mr. Forchion claims thought his ordeal in the
Concerning the appeal of the (Dec. 2000) criminal
convictions to be argued on the 28th of April, after the filing
of the appellate brief, the Honorable Stephen W. Thompson, J.S.C., (who
presided over Mr. Forchion’s trial and sentenced him to ten years of prison),
was charged by both state and federal authorities with child pornography. That a compulsive criminal pedophile (who, apparently,
routinely flaunted the laws of this state and the federal government), was
permitted by the State of New Jersey to deprive Mr. Forchion of ten years
of his life is further proof of the farce and mockery of justice that have
plagued Mr. Forchion. Some of the substantial First, Fourth, and Fourteenth
Amendment constitutional issues on Forchion’s appeal include: 1) the “unconstitutionality” of the 2) the issue of “medical necessity” of marijuana;
3) religious and medical defenses; 4) the issue of jury nullification; 5) the selective prosecution of Mr. Forchion; 6) the entrapment of Mr. Forchion by law enforcement;
7) prosecutorial misconduct due to, among other
things the blatent violations of BRADY/GIGLIO
decisions i.e. the concealing the
Arizona reports; and 8) the warrantless and unconstitutional seizure
of the marijuana. The actual appeal briefs and supporting information
about this case can be reviewed on Mr. Forchion’s website at: http://www.njweedman.com/appealbrief.htm Mr. Forchion has petitioned the Appellate
Court to allow him to present his own oral arguements insupport of his supplemental
appellate brief. John Saykanic will argue the appeal. Hopefully, Mr. Forchion
who is again running for a seat in the |
| HOME |