• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: Tronica

NEWS: Reveller caught with 750 ecstasy pills at Winter Sound System

Do police have to test the pills to see what's in them?
Or do you have to request that?

Coz no doubt they are some shitty RC or bunk and he could get off because it wouldn't be illegal. Although I think he deserves to go to jail, might teach him not to be such a dumbass.
 
^ That's right, if the intention was to sell it as an illegal drug then even if it was fucking acetaminophen he would be charged still.

If he could get them tested and claim that they were meant to be sold as a legal replacement he might get away with it, interesting to consider but you would probably have to know prior what was in them not just after the testing; you'd have to prove that you knew it was a legal substance and not illegal and that you were going to sell it as such.
 
^You have to request them to test the pills. They assume the pills are 100% MDMA if it is not tested. Even inactive binders and other non-actives are considered prohibited drugs.
Click to expand...
That is not true for a serious offence like this. The police will initially lay a charge on the basis of what they think the drug is, through reagent testing and obviously how it appears. Then the drugs get sent off to a lab to be tested. A certificate will come back telling them exactly what drugs were in the substance, the exact quantity and the purity. They then can amend the charge if it turns out to be something else.

Where this might not be done is for small amounts and the person pleads guilty to what the police allege they possessed. If you plead not guilty, then regardless of the amount you had they must test what was seized.

Drug laws in all states are very weight dependant (in terms of the different types of charges that can be laid and also perhaps other consequences that might follow, such as automatic confiscation of assets) and the purity of the drug, especially for powder drugs, is very relevant for sentencing. The police must have this information and the information must be exact if they are going to prosecute someone for drug offences beyond mere possesion. The only way is to have the Government Laboratory test the samples obviously.
 
^ I do appreciate the point you were both making. If someone sells a substance, that is inactive, believing it to be MDMA, then it is possible to charge them with attempted supply of MDMA.

This happens all the time when people attempt to take possession of drugs the police have already intercepted and substituted with something else. That person gets done for attempted possession of the drug, it being impossible to possess the actual drug because the substance has been substituted.
 
I wont go into it but I was on a jury years ago involving kilos of pills being smuggled in suitcases.

the lab tested pills saying there was 40% mdma per tablet and other 60% was binders/inert substance.

it went from 3 kilos to 1 kilo of mdma ... you dont get charged for inert substances.

if the 750 pills lab tested saying there was no mdma or illegal substances then this kid be charged with intent to sell and get a slap on wrist.

pacman caffiene pills bloke with thousands of em got slap on wrist.
 
I'm glad he got caught, what a fucking idiot.

Probably some muzza anyway trying to be a tough cunt.

I highly doubt they even contained MDx, Karma....
 
Biscuit said:
That is not true for a serious offence like this. The police will initially lay a charge on the basis of what they think the drug is, through reagent testing and obviously how it appears. Then the drugs get sent off to a lab to be tested. A certificate will come back telling them exactly what drugs were in the substance, the exact quantity and the purity. They then can amend the charge if it turns out to be something else.

Where this might not be done is for small amounts and the person pleads guilty to what the police allege they possessed. If you plead not guilty, then regardless of the amount you had they must test what was seized.

Drug laws in all states are very weight dependant (in terms of the different types of charges that can be laid and also perhaps other consequences that might follow, such as automatic confiscation of assets) and the purity of the drug, especially for powder drugs, is very relevant for sentencing. The police must have this information and the information must be exact if they are going to prosecute someone for drug offences beyond mere possesion. The only way is to have the Government Laboratory test the samples obviously.
Click to expand...


Thanks for clearing it up Biscuit. I'm speaking only from personal experience. I know someone who was found with a small amount of ecstasy pills and charged for the full weight. He knew the pills contained no MDMA so he pleaded not guilty. Long story short a charge that was something along the lines of intent to sell illegal drugs, as the pills contained caffeine and sugar.
 
Sameria said:
^You have to request them to test the pills. They assume the pills are 100% MDMA if it is not tested. Even inactive binders and other non-actives are considered prohibited drugs.
Click to expand...

All pills are sent off for a lab analysis to confirm what it is. U cant be charged with something that they dont have any idea of what it is. I do find it strange that they can charge u selling a panadol as extasy tho.
 
Unless the law has changed in the past couple of years, in Qld, an offender can be treated as an adult (charged etc) at age 17. It's all at the discretion of the police officer.
Click to expand...
The discretion of the police officer? Not a judge, not a jury, but the arresting officer? That is fucking crazy.
 
But I think in order for an 18 year old to have saved up the cash to invest in 750 pills seems unlikely without illegal activity to acquire that amounts.
Click to expand...

The black market is the same as the above board economy. The world runs on credit.
 
True that, I've gotten plenty of small amounts on Tick.

But 750 on tick to an 18 y/o ?

Sounds a bit sus to me.
 
thestudent14 said:
True that, I've gotten plenty of small amounts on Tick.

But 750 on tick to an 18 y/o ?

Sounds a bit sus to me.
Click to expand...
1-2 years ago (round the time of the good hearts) my dealer would get similar amounts on tick and he was 18 at the time. He stopped dealing when everything turned to shit, couldn't force himself to sell the shit we now see flooding our streets.

Also a few people may remember the red/pink V-Dubs from a few years back in WA. My brother would get similar amounts on tick, was around the same age. It's not entirely unbelievable.

A year or two ago news such as this would have saddened me, these days not so much. They were most likely adulterated/bunk/crap. Miss you Mandy :(.
 
Its business man... if it means 2 days from now you would have sold 500 more pills then if you had of waited for cash from ya buyer.. then why woulnt you? .. simple economics.

If i tick an ounce off my mate, it means that tomorrow he will have sold one extra ounce then perhaps he would have had i not ticked..

Age really has no bearing these days.. look at child soldiers in suda, drug lords by like 9 you know?

I USED to tick hundreds of pills all the time back in the day a few years back when it was good... Not good if your out boozing with a bag of pills though.. or getting loved up haha.. you tend to get a bit generous. I mean if a great pill was only costing you less then a drink ;-) its like.. hey man fuck it.. here ! haha

Good times... fucking good times..

I miss the days of everyone rolling in the club. Man... the laundromat in sydney has changed a fucking lot. I remember just sitting in that backroom every weekend with like 30 munted cunts and everyone loving it... nowdays its like "dude your sitting to close man..get the fuck back.. im drunk bitch"

bloody grog..
 
phase_dancer said:
Unless the law has changed in the past couple of years, in Qld, an offender can be treated as an adult (charged etc) at age 17. It's all at the discretion of the police officer.
Click to expand...


So if an adult has sex with a 17 year old they could be charged with having sex with a minor, yet when a 17 year old minor breaks the law they can be charged as an adult ? sounds like a load of double standards and contradictions, so basically we have law that thinks its above the law.
 
umm if ur over 19 and fuck a 17yo u can be charged with stat rape, after 18 thought its all good
on the same token that 17yo fucks a 14yo and they're up for stat too.
 
Last edited:
^lol, that law kinda sounds sexist cause anal is the choice for homosexuality.

My actual point was though the law argues that 16 - 17 year old are minors (in some states) when it comes to sex but then the same law argues that they are adults when it comes to drugs or other criminal charges, that doesn't make any sense to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top