One of the areas I've really learned about is the connection between drug use or abuse and false allegations.

Read the details in LEGAL.

www.kingofhits.co.uk/content/view/711/46/

This is truly revealing and very useful JK - I agree totally - I've witnessed several trials and every single "witness" had a history of substance abuse.

If you go to any AA meeting (I cannot be specific) you will hear stories of sex abuse suddenly changed as the drug wears off.

Many false allegations are made by children with no history of drug use. These can involve a variety of reasons from attention seeking to anger or hurt transferal. It's a much deeper problem than the surface suggests.

It really is very widely known that cannabis use can cause serious mental and memory problems - from an online professor...


Drug taking is often denied, or the amount that is admitted by the patient is so little that one cannot say that this accounts for the current symptoms. Worse still, patients may not even consider Cannabis as an illicit or dangerous drug and so do not mention using it. Hallucinations are vague and delusions may be transitory with little in the way of thought disorder.

There is often a lack of volition and a history of gradually deteriorating social ability and contact with others, including significant others. This history will often be verified by relatives and close friends who may be either completely ignorant of the drug taking, or confirm that there has been some in the past but believe that there has been little drug taking recently. There is often a depressive component with suicide attempts in the past but nothing recent or, if there is, then they are only ineffectual pleas for help.

The person has usually lost his or her job some months or weeks before due to their poor performance at work. There is often very poor memory and concentration, which may be marked at the time of presentation. Paranoid delusions may be present and quite severe which can be the most alarming psychotic feature and result in hospital admission. If confronted with aggressive and authoritarian staff, who indicate verbally or non-verbally, that they do not believe the patient, the patient may become violent or simply leave against medical advice.

There is a slow and gradual effect of cannabis and the symptoms continue to worsen for some time after the person stops using it. Thus by the time of presentation the person may be so disorganised and confused that they can

What you should have pointed out JK, is that these are the symptoms of 'acute cannabis psychosis', as clearly stated on the website of The Priory.

It is also widely known than the symptoms of acute alcohol abuse, are probably far worse and will have an even more negative impact on the lives of those affected.

And what about smoking? This drug kills far more people than heroin, ecstasy, coke, puff etc put together. But, because the Treasury makes MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of tax pounds from sales of these drugs, they are deemed to be acceptable.

What utter hypocracy.

What really makes me puke, are these 'Daily Mail sponsored' attitudes towards drugs, and the people who use them.

I use cannabis regularly, and I've done so for at least 15 years. I live a full life. I have a serious, well paid job, and I have regular contact with my family and friends.

And, I love getting stoned but I hate getting drunk. In fact, I don't really drink at all these days...

We've all got our poisons JK. What's yours...?

An online professor? what sort of source is that?

Cannabis is only harmful to those unfortunate few who are predisposed to such effects.

Would the same patient mention that they had had a pint of lager because alcohol is just, if not more, dangerous to their health and indeed far more likely to cause them harm.

I've read your post in Legal. I am sorry JK, but your argument just does not stand up. You cannot seriously blame your troubles on the fact that your accusers were basically "mash-up on de drugs..."

You are clearly not a regular cannabis user (I am), but I wonder how much wine and sherry you push down your neck on a daily basis... Would someone who drinks 3 glasses of wine a day be subect to the same pathetically ignorant generalisations....?

So, I think your post is nothing more than the usual ill-informed, Daily Mail style bollox, that we all know and detest.

Although I did find the following quite amusing..

"Insist that your lawyers call expert witnesses to the effects of drug abuse - one of which is frequently exaggeration, invention and even genuine delusion - consistent use of cannabis can convince people that certain things happened which, simply, didn't. "

If that's the case then I reckon JK must be caning at least one nine-bar per week.

What do you think Walter....?

Ah Pete and Godiver - I'm not saying cannabis always has these effects, just as alcohol doesn't (I hardly drink) or nicotine (I don't smoke)... just that it CAN provoke bad symptoms as can all other addictive substances.

I'm sure neither of you would ever make false allegations and I don't think most drinkers or even heroin addicts would either BUT - it's an area often if not always ignored whereas the truth is - all substances CAN have bad effects if someone is predisposed and not admitting that would be as absurd as if I claimed there was NO abuse or sex crimes.

It's the middle way I believe - it CAN provoke or encourage problems. Not does or even usually can - it's just sometimes one of many reasons and one that is often ignored.

With the CANNABIS issue returning to the headlines can I make it clear...

I'm not saying cannabis (or any other drug from alcohol to nicotine to heroin) always or even often provokes lies.

But I am saying it CAN do so and the legal argument ("the abuse caused the addiction") is spurious. It doesn't matter why somebody behaves in a certain way (for legal purposes as opposed to psychiatric ones)... it is whether they are reliable witnesses and often addicts have very strong reasons to lie or exaggerate.

JK2006 wrote:
With the CANNABIS issue returning to the headlines can I make it clear...

I'm not saying cannabis (or any other drug from alcohol to nicotine to heroin) always or even often provokes lies.

But I am saying it CAN do so and the legal argument ("the abuse caused the addiction") is spurious. It doesn't matter why somebody behaves in a certain way (for legal purposes as opposed to psychiatric ones)... it is whether they are reliable witnesses and often addicts have very strong reasons to lie or exaggerate.
I'm not saying being buggered by a devious and manipulative monster always drives somebody to drug misuse (It's not abuse BTW).

But I am saying, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, it CAN do so.

Oh dear....

Just got back from Paris via the Eurostar. I smoked a HUGE boombatty just before I got on the train, but strangely, I was not compelled to lie to the stewardess when she asked me what I would like to drink...

I told her straight up... "Hit me with a diet coke, and a packet of jumbo cashew nuts please!"

One hell of a counter argument for the lawyers there Zoo!

Pete Clarke wrote:
One hell of a counter argument for the lawyers there Zoo!
...sorry to hijack the thread a bit, but that's one of the problems with our legal system.

For a parent it is much more reassuring that someone becomes dependent on drugs due to some awful incident and not more or less at random.

So a parent on a jury, through no fault of their own, will be receptive to certain ideas. The barrister can (Will?) use deliberately emotive terms to "win" the case.

A defendant accused of an offence that provokes emotive reactions is at a disadvantage.

(I wonder if I'm libelling barristers... that wouldn't be a good idea)