Sunday, August 1, 2010

Anne Marie Leikas Was In And Out Of Jail Recently...

Stock photo of a memorial and blog post by John Hoff

Anne Marie Leikas, who is the sister of murder victim Annshalike Hamilton, was in and out of jail recently for pot charges. Anne Marie is the girlfriend of Remaro C. Smith, which the mother of June Leikas suspects of murdering her daughter, as revealed and discussed exclusively with Johnny Northside Dot Com. Here are the details from the jail roster...

Booking Number: 2010020547
Date of Birth: 12/24/1986
Sheriff's Custody: RELEASED FROM CUSTODY ON . 7/28/2010 . 16:46
Housing Location:
Received Date/Time: 7/27/2010.. 11:16
Arrested By: HCSO
Case/Count Description of Charge Charged By Reason for Arrest Severity of Charge State of Charge Bail Information Court Appearance Date/Time Court Appearance Location

A source tells me there is more to the story but I do not yet have those details where I can release them. This much I have been told, but it is unconfirmed: Anne Marie is reportedly in the workhouse. She walked out of court to have a cigarette and the judge gave her 6 months. This is reportedly secondhand info from June Leikas, the mother of Anne Marie.


Anonymous said...

Date of Birth: 12/24/1986
Book Date: 07/28/2010
Booking Number: 10-07257
Admission Type: SENTENCED
FELONY - Controlled Substance Crime Fifth Degree Possession
FELONY - Controlled Substance Crime Fifth-Degree-Possession
Projected Release:

Johnny Northside! said...

Thank you for digging up that extremely helpful info.

Anonymous said...

Thank god she's off the street. One less Marijuana user experiencing freedom.

Folwell Fox said...

I'm with Anony. 3:11 PM and here's why. Part I.

During the latter half of the 20th century, governments throughout the world adopted stringent drug prohibition systems within their respective countries. The main reason for this was due to the influence the United States had on the UN, which it used as the international agency to create, spread, and supervise world-wide prohibition. Some believe that since so many leaders from so many countries shared a negative view of drugs and drug usage, and a positive view of government police power it was easy to agree on drug prohibition as a good non-partisan issue. However, there are many who believe that the United States' “War on Drugs” has been a horrible failure, and many studies conclude that the prohibition of presently-prohibited drugs creates most of the same problems that the prohibition of alcohol did nearly one-hundred years ago. Proponents suggest that there are several benefits for the decriminalization of drugs in the U.S., such as the improved welfare of the user, savings in federal, state and local criminal justice spending, and a reduction in violent crime. The main point opponents argue is that decriminalization would increase drug usage and addiction; therefore, increase spending
for treatment. Despite this point, the United States' criminalization of drugs, and the approximate twenty billion federal dollars and another thirty billion dollars spent in 2009 from state and local
governments pursuing the U.S'. “War on Drugs”; according to a 2009 study from the CATO Institute, the U.S. still has the highest levels of cocaine and cannabis usage and prevalence rates in the world.

The U.S. and governments from around the world find drug prohibition useful as a way to finance and maintain, often large, special military and police units. In the U.S., anti-drug police often receive substantial federal subsidies; sometimes they are allowed to keep money, cars, houses and other property that they seize. Top politicians and government officials in many countries may have believed deeply in the war on drugs. But other health-oriented causes could not have produced for them so much police, coast guard and military power. In addition, drug prohibition provides governments, media-outlets,and religious institutions a reason to depict drugs, and drug usage as negatives on moral grounds,
especially within countries in Asia and the Muslim world, which often implement draconian prison sentences, or even the death penalty for mere possession of an illicit drug.

Anonymous said...

You can look up workhouse residents here:

Assuming it works outside of a criminal justice computer system.

Folwell Fox said...

Part II

While most health-oriented initiatives go untested or ignored in most countries that are in favor of criminalization enforcement, there is growing opposition to punitive drug laws occurring in the United States and elsewhere. The harm reduction approach assumes that neither drug use nor drug prohibition is going to go away anytime soon. Harm reduction programs seek to increase public health by helping users reduce the harms of drug use such as: syringe distribution and exchange, methadone maintenance,
injection rooms, prescription heroin, medical use of cannabis, drug education for users, and pill testing at raves. This has led many countries, particularly in Europe, but also the United States, Canada,
Australia and many Latin American countries to change laws, policies and funding which have in turn
reduced the harshness and intolerance of drug prohibition in those countries.

While harm reduction strategies continue to produce successful outcomes in the U.S., Canada, and
Australia, some EU states and Latin American countries have found success with the decriminalization
of drugs. The most notable example is Portugal, where on July 1, 2001 a nationwide law took effect that decriminalized all drugs. This was brought about based on a 1998 Portuguese commission report
that recommended decriminalization as the optimal strategy for combating addiction problems in
Portugal. However, Portugal's new law did not make drugs legal, drug possession and usage are still
legally prohibited, but violations are exclusively administrative, and are removed completely from any
criminal prosecution. “The statue, in Article 29, uses the Portuguese word descriminalizacao—
decriminalization—to describe the new legal framework it implements. “Decriminalization” applies to the purchase, possession, and consumption of all drugs for personal use (defined as the average individual quantity sufficient for 10 days' usage for one person)”. Drug trafficking, and furnishing drugs to a minor (or people with mental illness)continue to be forbidden by the new law and is punishable by imprisonment between 4 to 12 years. While other EU states (e.g. Netherlands) have forms and process of drug decriminalization mostly for softer drugs, such as cannabis. Portugal is the only EU state with a law that explicitly declares all drugs to be decriminalized.

Folwell Fox said...

And lastly....Thanks for publishing this John. I really think this view point can help, especially in Nomi.

Part III
Almost a decade has passed since Portugal's law has been enacted, and in that time all of the fears
that the opposition held have never come to pass. In fact the opposite is true. Since 2001 there has not
been an increase of “drug tourism”, drug usage in many categories has actually decreased, whereas usage in other categories has increased only slightly or mildly, general usage and lifetime prevalence rates have decreased (the majority of EU states have rates double or triple that of post-decriminalization Portugal), the number of newly reported cases of HIV and AIDS among drug addicts
has declined substantially every year since 2001, drug mortality rates have decreased, and drug-related deaths have decreased as well. According to the CATO Institute's study, in virtually every category of any significance, post-decriminalization Portugal has outperformed the vast majority of other states that continue to adhere to the criminalization of drugs. By and large, usage rates of drugs continue to be lower in the EU than non-EU states with a far more criminalized approach to drug usage. There is also no serious political push in Portugal to return to a criminalization framework.

It would seem that these types of positive results which had occurred in Portugal since 2001 would spark a debate within the United States and within other countries that prefer a more criminalization drug policy about their respective approach. However, after the findings where published, drafts of the CATO Institute's report where forwarded to various U.S. drug policy officials including the DEA's office in Madrid, The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration's headquarters, and the Office of National Drug Control Policy, along with a list of questions that required a response. Those questions focused on
the rationale for the U.S. approach to drug criminalization in light of the far higher drug usage rates among Americans, trends that, in general, appear to be worsening, contrasted with the far better rates in decriminalized Portugal. Despite repeated requests, none responded to those questions. The CATO Institute continues to state.

Although, the United States and other countries that continue to criminalize drugs and drug usage
seem to have very little interest in changing their policies to reflect that of decriminalization, it may be of little wonder, given the large sums of money being exchanged within governments to fight the “War on Drugs”. Regardless of the money to be had, I very much doubt that the United States will adopt policies similar to that of Portugal in many of our lifetimes. This is very evident from our country's leader's lack of response and acknowledgment of Portugal's success. However, I am confident that the United States will adopt more liberal views of drugs as time passes. This is evident with many harm reduction practices that have included many success stories not only in the United States, but from around the world as well.