Justice Bryan, in sentencing, said: “The tragedy that played out on 25 April 2022 is a salutary lesson to all those who peddle the myth that cannabis is not a dangerous drug.
“No one is suggesting that [the murders] were religiously motivated. You never intended to make any sacrifices of your victims. This was simply a symptom of your psychosis.
“You were well aware of the risks to your health of smoking skunk cannabis. You had doubled your consumption of cannabis in the weeks leading up to the killings.
“You may have consumed seven grams of cannabis a day immediately before the killing.”
Dr Nigel Blackwood, a forensic psychiatrist for the prosecution, said the symptoms of manic behaviour displayed were caused by the large amount of cannabis Jacques had consumed.
Jacques had been hospitalised in a psychiatric ward in 2018 and diagnosed with bipolar disorder.
We know – know – that those going nuts will, often enough, self-medicate.
Personally, but not to any level I’d want to have to try and prove, entirely willing to agree that too much (like, say 7 g a day) could turn you nuts. But at any level of proof we’ve not shown that here. Nutter self medicates, or drug consumption makes you nuts?
Obviously, the jury isn;t still out on this but as a more general point, yes, in fact it is.
It seems to be a mainly black issue too. Not the smoking of weed, plenty of white customers for that.
But the ‘going mad and slaughtering with extreme brutality while smoking weed’.
the myth that cannabis is not a dangerous drug
Danger is always a relative thing. There are folks who peddle the myth that salt and sugar are more dangerous. I suspect alcohol is vastly more dangerous that cannabis.
Not a chancw of getting a resolution on this question. Every opinion is going to be partisan, no experiment is likely to eliminate all the confounding factors. Race, drug strength and impuities, pre-disposition, social effects.
Alcohol may be more dangerous, indeed it surely is. But alcohol started civilisation, so there’s that.
Jacques butchered all four within the space of a single evening following a bout of “self-intoxication” with drugs and alcohol.
But it was definitely the weed, because no drunk has ever killed anyone.
Armed police who arrived at the scene were met with the sight of Jacques naked and prostrate on the ground in a praying position, shouting, “Allah, take me”
And there is definitely no history of maniacs burbling about Allah after a multiple murder.
Dr Nigel Blackwood, a forensic psychiatrist for the prosecution, said the symptoms of manic behaviour displayed were caused by the large amount of cannabis Jacques had consumed.
Jacques had been hospitalised in a psychiatric ward in 2018 and diagnosed with bipolar disorder.
So the murderous lunacy of a diagnosed loon with a long criminal history was definitely down to the weed he smoked immediately prior to the murder?
All drugs are ‘dangerous’ if you take a boatload. I don’t know what the equivalent alcohol consumption is for 7g of dope a day, but I imagine it’s a fair load. The sort of drinking that might lead violent loons to misbehaving, for example.
“ The court heard how Jacques had smoked cannabis since the age 12 ”
I think that may be quite important. We are not talking about an adult (with a somewhat fully formed brain) choosing to do a bit of weed. So regardless what adults wish to do, the habitual smoking of weed by children should never be tolerated.
I don’t know what the equivalent alcohol consumption is for 7g of dope a day
7g a day costs about £350/week, in alcoholism terms that’s roughly similar to getting wankered on a bottle of vodka every morning for breakfast.
I.e. by that point, it’s full time crippling addiction rather than a habit.
Taking drugs and alcohol when you have an underlying mental health condition like BPD (or even moderate depression) is extremely dangerous. He would also have been prescribed antidepressants and mood stabilisers, and depending how he took or didn’t take those they might also have been a factor as they don’t play well with intoxicants.
Sneeze x3 – Yarp, children should not be taking psychoactive drugs. It’s quite common for black teenagers to be heavy dope smokers…
My personal experience dealing with the stuff is that yes, it probably does cause the mental issues. What’s worse is that the paranoia makes them impossible to “reach” as well 🙁
If he killed people while drunk driving, he would have been done for both the deaths and the drunkenness.
Why would he get off because he used a different drug?
M – homicide caused by drunk driving would have been a less serious offense. This guy was found guilty on four counts of murder.
With anything the danger is in the dose. Chocolate will kill you if you eat enough of it, cough lozenges will make you psychotic if you take enough of them, but your stomach is unlikely to be large enough to hold the required quantity.
Having known heavy cannabis smokers, definitely the drug. And sorry, the idea that cannabis is less harmful than alcohol is hippy bollocks. People don’t generally drink alcohol to get rat-arsed. It takes effort & dedication. Except in very small doses, smoking weed will make you the equivalent of drunk. 7g of skunk will have you rodentified beyond belief. It’s only because people don’t generally chuck up all over the dog after a couple of spliffs fools people into thinking it’s benign.
Yeah, there’s a physical limit to how much you can hold in your stomach. There is no limit to how much you can continously circulate through your lungs.
@jgh
There’s also the factor they usually pass out. Fortunate for those in their presence. They’re just an obstacle to be stepped over (hopefully not in) With weedheads you don’t get that luck. They just babble on & on & on & on & ,,,
On a point of order, there is a “forensic psychologist for the prosecution”?
This might be a supreme and noble common law jurisdiction versus perfidious civil law (where apparently everything that ain’t permitted is banned) thing, but innt an expert witness supposed to give impartial evidence in response to statements and questions from both sides (and in some cases the court) rather than working for one side?
You’re confusing UK law with Continental law, BiFR. UK law’s adversarial not investigatory. The defence gets to call its own expert witness to say his denial to be selected as an international football star was responsible for his decline into depression & drugs but now he’s taken up macrame he’s fully reconciled & a changed man. He shouldn’t have to pay for the guilt of society. (The two experts pocket their dosh & leave for a round of golf) Continental system, you get an independent expert appointed by the State who gives the opinion he’s paid for. The Covid Inquiry is revealing to us the value of independent experts.
There are people who are prone to addiction and those who aren’t.
It doesn’t matter if it’s smoking, gambling, (legal or illegal) drug use, over-eating, drinking alcohol, extreme sports, gay cum bucketing, etc – some people won’t have the will power to know their limits whereas others will.
In a liberal society, we’d help those who get addicted (the minority) but wouldn’t ban the use for others who don’t.