Should Religious or Medicinal Marijuana Users Be Prosecuted?

Late last week, a New Hampshire man who was caught growing 15 marijuana plants in his backyard, was relieved of felony cultivation charges when a jury of his peers nullified the case against him.

According to a Huffington Post story, Doug Darrell, who was arrested in 2009, had turned down several plea deals, including an option that included no jail time or fine because he said he uses marijuana as a religious sacrament.

"Mr. Darrell is a peaceful man," said juror Cathleen Converse in an interview with Free Talk Live. "He grows for his own personal religious and medicinal use. I knew that my community would be poorer rather than better off had he been convicted.”

The HuffPo article defines the scarcely known jury nullification process as occurring ...

when a jury concludes that a defendant is technically guilty, but fails to convict the defendant on the grounds that the law in question is unjust. While jury nullification is legal, judges frequently do not inform juries of this power, and may prohibit defense attorneys from doing so, according to the University of Missouri.

Now we want to hear your voice. Is it worth it to spend government money on the prosecution of peaceful citizens who use marijuana for medicinal or religious purposes? How about recreational users?

Many believe federal and state governments would be wise to legalize the drug, regulate it and tax it, as opposed to spending taxpayer money to convict and lock up offenders. Others say a marijuana is a "gateway drug" that should be kept off the streets.

Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below and be sure to vote in the attached poll.

Follow Bedford Patch on our Facebook page, Twitter feed, and daily newsletter and breaking news alerts.