In 2016, Illinois decriminalized small amounts of cannabis. Under the 2016 law, those caught with up to 10 grams of marijuana faced fines of $100 to $200. The law also changed the state’s zero-tolerance policy for driving under the influence.
In doing so, Illinois created a “per-se” limit. A “per-se” limit is the concept that allows the state to assume you’re guilty of driving under the influence even if the state is unable to prove impairment. These arbitrary thresholds have created complications for cannabis users in Illinois, particularly during traffic stops. Many individuals find themselves charged with intoxication despite not being impaired. From what I’ve been able to gather, beyond the low threshold levels, the real concern is the methodology that is practiced by one of the only labs in the state of Illinois that performs this type of testing in response to the change in the DUI statute in 2016. Listen to this episode for more information!
- Watch the episode on Patreon here
- Watch the episode on Youtube here
- Stream the episode on Soundcloud here
- Stream the episode on Spotify here
- Stream the episode on Apple Podcast here
- Stream the episode on X here
Links mentioned during show
- Case of Dwan Thompson
- Episode 81 which mentions Jennifer Bash
- Dr. Marilyn Huestis from Smart Approaches to Marijuana
- Episode 74 featuring Jordan Davidson from Smart Approaches to Marijuana
The auto-generated transcript is available below.
is it actually legal so there are still possession if you read the statute there were possession limits put in the statute the program also includes regulation on possession limits so people can still be arrested for a possession if they you know go beyond the legal amount so things are legalized but it’s not legalized completely I don’t know that we need to continue to put limitations on possession as we move forward but as of now and based on statute that it would be illegal to have a certain level of or possession amount it’s important to understand that small amounts of cannabis had been decriminalized by then Governor Bruce rer in 2016 almost 4 years prior to the new law taking effect under that system possession of 10 G or less of cannabis was punishable by a small civil fine between $100 and $200 according to Legal professionals under this old system possession of a few grams more than the legal limit of 0 g incurred a small civil fine under the new law however possession of a few grams over the legal limit say 32 G is not punishable by a small civil fine but by a Class A misdemeanor and up to a year in jail there’s something wrong make it a fine only offense I guess I mean if you want to make it a I don’t think you should make an offense at all but if you do want to make it an offense like do we really have no tools other than criminal law you know give them a ticket all of these criminal laws still exist M they’re all still enforced they all still are if you fall off that tight rope if you’re from Indiana and you’ve got your 16 G which you’re not allowed to have because you’re not a resident to fall back into the criminal law the pre-existing criminal law that uses jail time and probation and fines yeah um High fines as as a mechanism of enforcement we’re not being Progressive yeah like we’re saying we’re Progressive as a state on cannabis but we’re obviously not living up to that if our only tool for enforcement is criminal law this law will not legalize drugs for our communities this legislation will still see Devastation on the behalf of those who are stopped by the police as a result that was a Peak at my upcoming mini documentary if you’d like to be notified when I release it you can go to the memo.com Subscribe or you can go to the demo.com patreon as it will release on patreon first thank you enjoy the [Music] episode in so many different ways the legalization of cannabis in Illinois seems to have fell short of its original promises and that’s you know something that we can continue to work to perfect if you’re not sure what exactly I’m referring to there are like I say several shortcomings to legalization in in Illinois in fact I don’t think it’s fair to say that we have legalized cannabis in Illinois I think it’s more fair to say that we’ve created a system for the regulation and taxation of cannabis which allows adults to purchase tiny quantities of cannabis from a small amount of State ordained operators um for so many ways I think this falls short of what we originally had in mind because for example if you exceed the tiny quantity that you are allowed to have under this new framework you are still subject to the old penalties as they were originally prescribed and you don’t have to take my word for it we’ve talked to several defense attorneys about this exact subject in fact the Cannabis Control Act of 1978 which originally established the criminal penalties is still the primary enforcement mechanism for all cannabis related infractions in the state of Illinois that’s right every every penalty related to cannabis is still on the books most of the penalties the only penalties that were really changed were the possession of tiny quantities of cannabis if you’d like to learn about how these shortcomings affect real people you can go to theol memo.com isit Legal because I’m always asking is it legal if you can go to jail for Simply Having quote too much cannabis I don’t even know what that means uh I’m always wondering is it legal if you can get arrested for simply possessing cannabis in your vehicle in an unopened container that’s an actual story that you can listen to at the memo.com slis it legal today’s episode is just another example of a shortcoming related to the legalization of cannabis this one actually started before cannabis was quote quote legalized this actually began when cannabis was decriminalized in the state of Illinois in 2016 the co memo.com isit legal is it legal enjoy the episode [Music] this is the Cole memo I’m your host Cole Preston every episode is released in audio video and transcript format to find the transcript audio or video version of any episode please refer to the description of the episode that you’re listening to now within that description you can find a link that will take you to our website which will display the transcript for this episode and the platforms where you can find this episode in audio or video formats if you’re unable to locate the episode description on whichever platform you’re listening from Simply note the episode number and visit the memo.com from there you can find the corresponding episode using our search functionality and then you’ll be able to access the audio video and transcript version of that episode you might also find an links that we reference during the episode so that you might be able to do your own research if you’re not listening to this episode of the Cole memo on patreon then you’re listening to this episode later than our patrons in fact I released this presentation I think three weeks ago to become a patron go to theol memo.com patreon it only costs $3 a month and you get exclusive access to our episodes as they release it’s a great way to support our show another way to support our show is at the memo.com support one of the best ways to support our show is free subscribe to or follow our show if you’re watching right now please give us a thumbs up leave us a positive review from wherever you’re listening to us or watching us from favorite this episode give it a thumbs up leave a comment or share it with your best friend retweet It Whatever whatever you’re watching this on uh the video version of this episode is also released on Twitter or X nowadays in addition to YouTube patreon and any other video platform uh that you know Spotify for example I just want to say before I send you into this presentation your engagement and support is appreciated today is May 22nd 2024 but again this presentation was released first for our patrons enjoy this episode of the Cole memo hello and welcome have you consumed cannabis in the past month if the answer is yes it’s crucial to understand that operating a motor vehicle within the state of Illinois could result in legal implications for you even if you’re not currently intoxicated or haven’t been for several days weeks or even months so bear with me here folks I’m going to jump in from time to time here with a little bit of a fact check on myself I ran this episode by a subject matter expert and they offered uh what you might call some fact checks so the firston one on what I just said they say a few times in the presentation you say that you can be over the limit of THC in urine based on this procedure for months we’re going to get into what I I’ll break down what exactly I’m about to say but just to be clear THC glucuronide which is what we talk about in this episode is present in the urine of chronic cannabis users for up to 24 days not months what I was referring to was carboxy THC which is a different different metabolite of THC and it can be found in the urine of chronic cannabis users for months but at least right now no one is asserting that carboxy THC can be the basis for a DUI cannabis charge in this episode I’ll be explaining why the per limit for cannabis in Illinois is impossible to comply with another fact check here my subject matter expert says in the opener I say that the DUI statute the current DUI statute is impossible to comply with if you are a n a chronic pot smoker they say I think that is true when you’re talking about the distorted UIC interpretation of the DUI statute we’ll get into what they mean by that in this episode uh but the normal Common Sense interpretation of the DUI statute is that Delta 9thc means Delta 9 C and does not include non- psychoactive metabolites of Delta 9 THC once again we’ll get into that in this episode and what that means under the normal interpretation of the DUI statute my subject matter matter expert says you will not drive over the limit of Delta 9 THC which is 5 nanograms for blood unless you drive within hours of consuming cannabis the key here is blood I would say more on that later that was my last fact check enjoy the rest of the episode and I thought that the best way to maybe do this is to share the presentation that was shared with me but before I do that a little bit of background in case you’re wondering what a per se limit even is let’s talk about how it became a part of Illinois Law so in ill in 2016 Illinois decriminalized small amounts of cannabis under the 2016 law those caught up with up to 10 grams of marijuana faced fines of $100 to $200 individual municipalities could add to the fines or Implement other penalties such as requiring offenders to attend drug treatment I think some of those Provisions still exist today citations were reportedly set to be automatically expunged twice a year on January 1st and July 1st individual municipalities could add to the fines or Implement other penalties such as requiring offenders to attend drug treatment once again I believe we’ve seen that continue I didn’t mean to mention that twice but it is important to mention that I believe uh the requirement to attend drug treatment is still required if you would like to see at least one story I’m aware of where something like that was required you can go to the memo.com isit legal David’s story uh he got in trouble and was required to go to a sort of drug treatment I can’t remember exactly what it was it sounded like this the law ALS the 2016 law that we were just talking about also changed the state’s Zero Tolerance policy for driving under the influence in doing so Illinois created a per se limit a per se limit is the concept that allows the state to assume your guilty of driving under the influence even if the state is unable to uh prove impairment in the past Illinois Representative Bob Morgan has indicated that the threshold the Illinois threshold is arbitrary saying quote we literally made it up let’s watch that clip before we go any further I am about to share my screen for folks that are watching this version of the podcast this episode of the podcast rather there’s still an element and it continues to be major problem of uh intoxication driving well intoxicated with cannabis because we don’t have a 08 nor do we have technology to even enforce that if we did have any kind of standardization so there’s no there’s no per se limit illo actually has a per se limit but we literally made it up we made up the per limit it’s not based on 50 60 years of driving while intoxicated with alcohol that we know 0.08 is the average and yet we all know somebody who’s 90 or 100 pounds who drinks one beer and can’t drive and we also know people who drink 12 packs and are just fine because the body absorbs alcohol differently same with can some people that are regular users are not necessarily impaired even if they’re using quite a bit so I mean Illinois representative Morgan said it himself some people could be you know thought to be impaired even though uh they they’re not uh I’ve come under the understanding that these arbitrary thresholds have created complications for cannabis users in Illinois that’s why I started off the show saying if you use cannabis at all you should be mindful of this uh particularly during traffic stops is when you need to be mindful of this when you are operating the motor vehicle many individuals find themselves being charged with intoxication despite not being impaired from what I’ve been able to gather beyond the low threshold levels the real concern is the methodology that’s practiced by one of the only labs in the state of Illinois that I’ve come to understand is certified to perform this type of testing in resp response to the change in the DUI Statute in 2016 so let’s pull up the presentation that I saw now I’d like to reiterate I saw this presentation I didn’t make this presentation and so as a result I’m going to be going through my notes and doing my best to share this presentation as it was taught to me or as it was presented to me because I think there’s a really interesting case in here um I just wanted to say that because you’ll notice I think on slide number two there’s a direct an endorsement of I think one or two laws or both um and I guess I just wanted to be clear that it’s not me necessarily that’s endorsing um either law uh but I think it is interesting to see what the laws or either I said either law I meant to say bill either bill um it is interesting though to see what these Bill bills do uh but before we talk about that let’s lay out why uh the Illinois DUI cannabis law is basically well it is impossible to comply with so first of all driving Under the Influence here are the relevant statutes I’m displaying them right now um it looks like driving under the influence of drugs is 625 ilcs 51 d501 A7 and the other relevant statute is chemical and other tests 625 I cs51 d501 do2 A6 and these bills reference they’re treated as one but they really reference each other from what I understand so again these are the current per se DUI cannabis statutes and here are some bills that you can research yourselves 3409 and 4890 which seek to change how this works so just to put it down in a bottle since 2016 a person is automatically guilty of DUI cannabis if they have more than five or 10 nanograms per milliliter of blood or other bodily fluid of Delta 9 THC within 2 hours of driving so this is really important to fixate on the fact that Delta 9 THC is listed in this statute as it currently stands the state does not have to prove impairment to find somebody guilty of driving Under the Influence as long as you exceed either one of these thresholds so once again I said Delta 9 THC is a really important part of this conversation and you know if you’ve been watching this show over the past I don’t know a couple of years or so we’ve really been diving deep into the difference between Delta 9 THC and other canabo so if you don’t know let’s do a little bit of a breakdown on the background uh behind the science if you’ve not been watching over the years this is a little bit of a more of a formal education that I’d be happy to share so Delta 9 THC is the main psychoactive constituent in the cannabis plant toxic psychologists in particular refer to this as free THC or parent THC again I want to say that this is primarily by toxicologists laymen and scientists outside of Toxicology do not use these terms remember these terms free THC and parent THC as the presentation says these are not used in common parlaments but by toxicologists Delta 9 this is what we’ve talked about a lot on the show is not naturally occurring within the plant instead the plant produces thca when heated thca converts to Delta 9 THC and Delta 9 THC is what is typically associated with getting people high the important fact to know about Delta 9 THC is that it’s found in your blood and saliva but as you can see du this last point that I’m displaying here it’s not not found in your urine I have been told that if you have certain types of organ failure like kidney issues perhaps you might end up with it in your urine but typically there are only metabolites for Delta 9 THC that end up in your urine so Delta 9 THC is not water soluble and this is important to understand it’s not water soluble so your body turns THC into other molecules called metabolites that are water Sol soluble ultimately so that you can excrete them which I think is a disgusting word but in other words so that you can pass them in other words urinate you know um ultimately uh whatever is created cannot be destroyed right so you’ve ingested these things they’ve turned into water salt they’ve turned into metabolites so that you can metabolize them and ultimately one of the main metabolites that’s found within cannabis users is called conjugated THC otherwise known as THC glucon gluc glucoronide I’m probably saying that wrong glucuronide it’s formed in the liver by chemically bonding THC to glucuronic acid which is from what I’m told basically just a sugar molecule and conjugated THC or THC glucuronide can be found in cannabis users in some studies up to 24 days after they’ve used cannabis it’s not known to have any psychoactive effects or to correspond with any level of impairment as I mentioned earlier it’s formed in the liver by chemically bonding THC to glucuronic acid which is basically just a sugar molecule and this is important to understand it can be turned back into THC into within the lab so at this point you might be wondering what do you mean right so you’ve got Delta 9 THC and it converts to 11 hydroxy Delta 9 tetrahydro canaban often times and that will convert into 11 nor n carboxy Delta 9 THC I’m I’m speaking a little bit out of term here so I am going to play a video in a moment just to back up what I’m showing But ultimately as I said this all ends up being um conjugated THC which is present in the urine but not the blood so here’s a comparison between conjugated THC and THC Delta 9 THC and here’s what I really want you to notice if you look at THC on the left here this is the chemical structure of THC I used to have a shirt like this I even had like jars that would have this I used to think the chemical structure of THC was really cool I don’t know why um but over here you can actually still see the chemical structure of THC I’m circling it here now this part is the glucuronic acid that is binded to the Delta 9 THC thus creating an entirely new molecule called conjugated THC or THC lucar onid um so you might be wondering what’s happening right what’s what’s the issue people are being charged and found guilty under the 501 A7 statute with being over the legal limit of Delta 9 THC in their urine even though none of them have that much Delta 9 THC in their urine right they didn’t have that much Delta 9 THC in their urine because once again delta9 THC is not found in your urine so how right how is the question we’re going to get to that as I promised I wanted to play a video that kind of backs up the science that I just laid out let’s watch this video uh just a reminder I’ll have this video Linked In the podcast description if you’d like to watch it at your own pace it’s a very short video let’s take a look the pathway of marijuana in our body can be split into three phases consumption metabolism excretion tetrah hydroc canaban acid or thca is a canabo found in raw cannabis it’s not psychoactive and doesn’t cause a high effect thca becomes THC when we smoke then THC goes into the lungs and next to the blood about 70% of the THC is taken up by tissues primarily by body fat and 30% is metabolized from the body fat THC is slowly released back into the blood so THC is continuously moving from fat into the blood and back again with the blood it gets into the liver where it is metabolized in two phases in the first phase enzymes convert THC to 11 hydroxy THC then enzymes convert 11 hydroxy THC to 11 nor 9 carboxy THC during the second phase THC metabolites are prepared for excretion ugt enzymes add a glucuronide molecule to metabolites these metabolites are soluble in water they dissolve in the bile and water and are excreted into the urine and the intestines glucuronide I guess that’s how you pronounce it um before we move on and get back to what the issue is I just wanted to insert a little bit of Comedy if you recognize the reference to another canabo I’m just going to play a short clip all right once again this is a short clip that I’m going to play I’ve played it on the show in the past but it’s just a little bit of Comedy that adds to this conversation in case once again you recognized one of the canabo we were just talking about let’s play the clip see the thing about Edibles one of the problems with it being illegal is that a lot of us don’t have a lot of information that we could use like there’s a difference between smoking it and eating it when you smoke it you get THC but when you eat it it’s processed by your liver and it produces something called 11 hydroxy metabolite that’s five times more psychoactive than THC and it lets you talk to dolphins all right just a little bit of Comedy before we get into the issue let’s talk about the issue shall we so once again from what I’ve been ble to gather beyond the low threshold levels that are seemingly arbitrary uh according to Illinois Representative Bob Morgan the real concern is the methodology that’s practiced by from what I’ve been led to believe one of the only labs in the state of Illinois that’s certified to perform this type of testing in response to the change in the DUI Statute in 2016 I thought I was done with fact checks I think this is my last one I want to be clear from what I understand UIC is not the only lab certified in the state to do this testing they’re just the only lab that’s certified in the state that chooses to do the testing in this way let’s return to our PowerPoint presentation that I was sharing so it’s this concept of hydrolysis the University of Illinois at Chicago the analytic forensic testing laboratory has adopted a three-step process of testing urine samples in DUI cannabis cases who at least according to the testimony of an expert that I will share later who is actually against cannabis this is an anti-cannabis uh subject matter expert they seem to indicate that the University of Illinois is one of the only Labs that they are aware of in the world that employ this methodology in their testing unless I’m misunderstanding them that’s what they seem to imply again I’ll share that testimony in a moment let’s talk about the three-step process of testing urine samples in DUI cannabis cases as I was told it goes first apparently they test the sample for Delta 9 THC which always comes back either completely negative or well below the 10 nanogram per milliliter threshold because once again Delta 9 THC it’s not water soluble you’re you’re never really going to find Delta 9 THC in your in your urine unless I’ve been told you’re having some like issues with your organs two the samples are then Hydra hydrolized hydrolysis um which is a chemical reaction Breaking the Bond between the glucuronic acid and THC thus turning conjugated THC back into Delta 9 THC otherwise known as remember free THC that’s what uh we all want no I’m joking that’s what toxicologists refer to um as Delta 9 THC they also call it parent THC as a reminder finally after hydrolysis the lab then retests the sample which often shows a Delta 9 THC concentration that is quote over the limit of THC now this is this is problematic from from what I’ve been told um and from what I’ve read you know it’s it’s causing people to uh be arrested frankly um when when they aren’t provably intoxicated which is really one of the number one issues with cannabis use in and of itself there’s no real way uh to prove current levels of intoxication I have been told that if you know you take a blood sample you can at least see because Delta 9 THC is can be found in your blood you can at least see within the last I I would say I think I was told four or five hours if somebody is consumed cannabis you still can’t gauge a level of impairment but you can at least see well they have Delta 9 THC in their blood which I’ve been told strongly indicates that they have consumed cannabis within the LA you know last few hours so um this is a problem right so here’s the uh process as it occurs so you’ve got your Delta 9 THC your free THC your parent THC which is consumed by the pot smoker but is not present while urine is in the bladder it gets metabolized in your body turns into conjugated THC it’s present in your urine when the pot smoker pees into a cup the lab it goes to the lab they conduct hydrolysis and all of a sudden after it’s tested after the hydrolysis the uh conversion method they they employ your total nine your total Delta 9 THC is now over the legal limit so it seems like the big argument comes down to whether or not this is a new molecule I will just say that and that’s what we’ll get into in some of the testimony it seems like the main scientific debate is whether or not you’re creating a new molecule um from a Layman perspective it’s seems like you are because you’re literally performing a conversion on it just like your body converted it from Delta 9 to conjugated THC you are then converting it back and you are affecting that molecule that’s just from a Layman’s perspective but how do those results get reported to law enforcement so UI sorry UIC uh then apparently reports post hydrolysis results to prosecutors as an amount of total Delta 9 THC including both free and conjugated cannabinoids which is a problem because if the number is reported higher than 10 nanograms most prosecutors and defense lawyers interpret that to mean the defendant was driving over the limit of Delta 9 THC even though once again at the time the urine arrived at the lab there was Zero Delta 9 THC in it so how are people found guilty of this I’m told that reason number one is confused attorneys most attorneys of course do not have a scientific background combined with the way that it’s reported and represented you know it leads lawyers to believe that their clients are driving over the limit you know they’re being presented with the this data from the state it seems clear they don’t have a scientific background to understand that that’s not how it arrived at the lab and so you know the majority of defendants who are charged with DUI under the A7 statute based on the results of the urine tests plead guilty because their lawyers tell them they should I’m told that reason number two is fear you know the fear of taking a a case like this to trial with the risks they they feel they’re too high and even if they understand the issue if you get an offer that looks favorable and you don’t have a subject matter expert waiting in the wings you might just plea out because you’re afraid of being found guilty and getting a worse sentence this is the thing like from what I understand you have to at this point you have to get a subject matter expert to try to argue this I’m not one I you know I’ve just learned it I guess uh you know I’ve gotten the secondhand smoke of this understanding for lack of better words um I am definitely not one but if you want to beat this in trial you need to get one somebody that actually knows their science um because I’m told reason number three is that people have given uh false assertions in the past um you know I spoke to one person that described a case where uh an individual named dwan Thompson was found guilty at trial under the A7 statue even though they had no Delta 9 THC in their urine when they drove because they weren’t experiencing like an organ failure of any sort so it’s just impossible for it to be to be found apparently the laboratory technician claimed at Mr Thompson’s trial that conjugated THC is not a different molecule than Delta 9 THC because no carbon Bond was added or taken away the appet Court held based largely on this false assertion that a rational finder of fact could find Mr Thompson guilty you can actually see Mr Thompson’s case here they’ve got it cited and um I I was told that not only did the appell Court uphold this ruling they also didn’t make a clear ruling about what the word means the word uh Delta 9 they refused to rule as a matter of law what the word Delta 9 THC means which means they left it up to each individual trial court to decide the meaning of that word my legal subject matter expert on this tells me well that’s bizarre to me when you go through law school one of the things you learn is that one of the r rules of the appell at court is to clarify the meaning of the statutes if a statute can be read multiple ways it is the job of the Appellate Court to clarify the actual meaning of that and they refused to do that as a result of this you’re guaranteed to get different results for the exact same conduct in quote in other words two people who have the exact same number of THC glucuronide in their urine are going to have radically different outcomes based on several factors who has the better lawyer a lawyer that actually understands this issue if you can afford to like I say hire a expert witness and you’re going to need it like I said given um testimony that has recently been given are you in front of a judge that views the statute more narrowly or more broadly and what assertions are made by UIC analysts at trial I’ve been told that another UIC analyst has given testimony that’s different than um the one that’s being cited here where they admitted THC glucuronide is different from Delta 9 THC and the legal um so so there seems to be even within UI or I keep saying uiu that is a different College what I mean to say within UIC the University of Illinois in Chicago there seems to be differing opinions but it seems like there is one lead expert but it all depends on which analyst you get so I’ve been told that the whole field of forensic toxicology toxicology is trying to move law enforcement and legislators away from using urine uh because no urine test can be correlated uh to impairment in any context and that’s for any drugs fortunately cannabis is different in that people can legally consume cannabis and without exaggeration days or month months later uh be pulled over and you will be quote over the limit based on a distorted interpretation of the law so as I was just mentioning you know forensic toxicologists uh are really trying to make the point that urine testing is not correlated to impairment you cannot determine if anyone is under the influence of any drug or mind altering substance uh by testing somebody’s urine so uh you know as a result of all this innocent people are being found guilty by both legalizing cannabis and allowing the this issue to persist the Illinois general assembly is allowing sober people who could have smoked pot days earlier to be found guilty of being over the legal limit of THC so it’s all under this A7 statue and so you know the question becomes what should we do and uh the answer I was presented with is change the statute exclude urine as an appropriate bodily fluid to test in DUI cannabis CL cases uh we should also clarify that Delta 9 THC means parent also known as free Delta 9thc those two terms we started off the episode with and I’ve been told that we should prevent Labs from turning metabolites back into Delta 9 THC in order to charge defendants with DUI we should just not allow any sort of chemical processes on people’s uh biological excretions um at all because that is manipulating I would say yeah the substance anyways I have been told that house bill 489 would specifically exclude urine testing in cannabis cases which would prevent THC glucoronide from being used to justify the A7 charges um house spill 4890 does add breath as a possible source of testing I’ve been told by experts that using breath will not work as a reliable indicator of impairment I don’t even know if there’s a device like that yet and again if there is one who knows if it’s reliable um and you know I’ve heard in different states that they’re trying to like beta test these and if you ever get off you know if you ever are asked to do that often times it is not mandatory I must just say or at least I’ve heard again I’m not a legal professional so I can’t give that legal advice um house spill 4890 from what I understand would Define delta 9 THC as I said earlier to include parent or uh free Delta 9 THC from what I UND from what I’ve been told saying Delta 9 THC includes parent Delta 9 THC or free THC does not necessarily eliminate misunderstandings because most people in the scientific Community already know that Delta 9 THC only includes parent Delta 9 THC experts tell me that a better definition would say that Delta 9 THC means parent Delta 9 THC or Brie delta9 THC uh the person I spoke with told me that um I’m just looking at this presentation to see if I missed anything in spite of its limitations by excluding urine as an appropriate source of testing in DUI cannabis cases HB 4890 would solve the current source of confusion we were facing um this person that gave me the presentation said they you know support HB 4890 over our current law but ultimately they prefer Senate Bill 34 9 let’s talk about Senate Bill 349 the subject matter expert that I spoke with told me that they thought the Senate bill was a little bit of a better Bill even though it seems to remain silent on whether urine would be allowed however Senate Bill 3409 specifically prevents analysts from changing THC metabolites back into parent Delta 9 THC just to charge defendants with being over the limit my subject matter expert told me that they prefer the Senate bill over the house bill as they said because they feel the definition is more clear but they stressed to me that both bills would prevent THC glucuronide in urine from being used so while the Senate Bill does not specify whether or not urine is used it does very clearly say that Delta 9 THC means free THC meaning unchanged parent Delta 9 THC I was told the key word here is unchanged um which would prevent Labs from manipulating evidence so in the case of dwan Thompson that I mentioned earlier dwan was found guilty of DUI cannabis but was not found guilty of driving while impaired I just want to say that one more time dwan was found guilty of DUI cannabis but was not found guilty of driving while impaired it’s a mind melter if you’re at all like me and you’re having trouble understanding how this is possible I want to remind you that a per se limit is the concept that allows the state to assume your guilty of driving under the influence even if the state is unable to prove impairment so that if you’re wondering is how Dewan Thompson was found guilty of DUI cannabis based solely on non psychoactive metabolites in his urine in other words he was not found guilty of driving while impaired but he was found guilty of driving over the limit based on the metabolites that were in his urine been told that there are seven different ways to charge somebody with DUI um I’m not sure if there is a slide on this doesn’t look like there is um A7 is the per se limit that we mentioned earlier so this A7 Clause I can try to display it here in a bit it was like one of the first slides um and I’ve been told that like I said I think I mentioned this earlier actual THC even even in your blood does not directly correspond to impairment the one Saving Grace though with blood testing over urine whether you’re testing for actual THC is at the very least you know they’ve recently consumed cannabis this still does not prove impairment but at least you can see if somebody has recently consumed cannabis within the past few hours by contrast based on your analysis a user can be found to be over the limit by days or even months after they consumed cannabis Dr Marilyn hustus who I’ve been told is against cannabis legalization served as an expert testifying that interpret the interpretation of the statute is wrong and has no uh connection to impairment so if you’re wondering who Dr Marilyn hustus is I will display her right now on my screen you see this huge picture of Dr Marilyn H hustus I don’t know why the picture is so big but if you can’t see it now you can um you can notice that this is on Smart approaches to marijuana’s website which I always like to say smart approaches to marijuana is not exactly what it sounds like I’ve had smart approaches to marijuana on my show several times if you’d like to see the most recent episode it’s episode 74 I’ll try to remember to put it in the podcast description I’m displaying it now um I’ve had them on our show quite a few times they do not believe cannabis should be legal um so again this is somebody who doesn’t even believe cannabis should be legal they served as an expert testifying that the interpretation of the statute is wrong and that it has no connection to impairment I got my hands on that testimony let’s take a look at it so in this episode I will be referencing a transcript I’ve been told that you know I’m not able to display this transcript but I will share the case numbers and dates and you can buy the transcript from the dup Page County court reporter so like I said you can buy the transcript from the dup Page County court reporter if you’d like to do that you’re going to need to present the case number and date the case number is 21 d as in dog t as in trumpet 230 and the date on the case is the is April 17 2023 so if you’d like to read this testimony for yourself that’s how you do it I apologize for not being able to display it I’m just trying to share this in accordance with I guess the rules as a result I have redacted all visuals where I display the transcript I wanted to give you a heads up cuz you might notice that most of the screen is black a court report of proceeding and it was signed by Mar Marsha MSA official court reporter uh from DuPage County and um I’m not exactly sure from where this is from again I’m not a legal professional but this has the uh testimony and examination uh cross-examination of Marilyn hustus who I just mentioned earlier and from what I understand they brought Dr Houston to they were seeking to block a UIC analyst’s testimony and the specific UIC analyst I believe is Jennifer Bash more on Jennifer Bash here in a minute um I’ll try to see what I’ve heard about Jennifer Bash but so I ended up forgetting to return to the subject of Jennifer Bash specifically and what I’ve heard about them I will just say that Jennifer Bash is a name that I actually happened to be familiar with when I read this transcript I was like wait a minute is that the name oh my gosh that’s the name so I I don’t know you know how many you know pies Jennifer Bash is cooking but this is the second pie I’ve come across for lack of better words the first time I had heard of Jennifer is in episode 81 of the Cole memo I’m displaying that right now uh there was a press conference for hemp and it seemed like they were referencing a study um although it was unclear and when we found the study that it seemed like they were referencing it is from none other than Jennifer Bash at the University of Illinois in Chicago at the analytical forensic testing laboratory now if you do a Google search for Jennifer bash’s name she actually is listed on Cresco yelt tr.com I’ll explain what Cresco yra is in a moment she is listed on The Advisory Board as the laboratory science advisor and as you can see it does seem to be the same Jennifer Bash Jennifer they have listed is currently a senior analytical forensic toxicology specialist with the an analytical forensic testing laboratory at the University of Illinois Chicago of Pharmacy so what the hell is Cresco yra you might be asking that’s what I was asking I’ve never heard of Cresco yra I’ve heard of Cresco before well there’s this old article from MJ Biz daily and I don’t know if this is exactly accurate but this is what I could find it’s a headline from 200 and 18 it looks like it was updated in 2023 the headline is front-end work local partners and previous experience allowed Cresco to launch before Pennsylvania competitors and here it says Illinois based Cresco operating in Pennsylvania is Cresco yra started as the only licensed medical marijuana business with an operational grow rival dispensaries once they opened were forced to stock Cresco supplies to get up and running in Pennsylvania Cresco relied on the experience gained establishing medical marijuana operations in Illinois so Charlie baell is quoted in this and it does seem that Cresco yra and Cresco are one in the same and uh that’s my little bit of a tangent on Jennifer Bash if you’d like to see the episode that I referenced ear earlier uh I believe that is episode 81 of the Cole memo which references the study that Jennifer Bash made but this is almost completely unrelated other than the fact that this is it does seem to be the same Jennifer Bash let’s get back to the show and talk about this messed up issue on page 19 and 20 I’ve got noted that um so how did we end up here I’m going to read some of this transcript well Jennifer Bash did testing I believe this is from the lawyer let me see who’s saying this yeah so the lawyer uh who I believe represented dwan Thompson Uh Kevin McMahon um I’m skipping down a bit so how do we end up here well Jennifer Bash did testing exactly the same type of testing on another individual going on six years ago that individual is named dwan Thompson so when she did the test she did the same things came back with similar results and she testified under oath that conjugated THC also known is glucuronidate gluc THC glucuronide I’m gonna say is not a different molecule than Delta 9 THC and folks I want to put it in a bottle here this is the main debate this is like past this it seems like this is the the main debate about this is whether or not Delta 9 THC is the same thing as conjugated THC otherwise known as THC glucoronide and I mean clearly it is right we just watched that video clearly it is this a different molecule and I’m not even um you know uh credentialed at all as a scientist or or anything else so um I’ll continue reading she testified under oath that in order to change one molecule into another you have to change a carbon Bond she testified that the physical properties were not changed that it’s similar to just two people holding hands and if you break those if they stop holding hands they’re the same people it doesn’t make a difference so she said all these things under oath the trial C Court found Mr Thompson guilty largely based on that testimony the appell court affirmed that finding of guilt largely based on that testimony there was no fry hearing conducted uh so what we’re trying to do here is prevent Miss Bash I’m repeating those claims that conjugated THC is not a different molecule and that conjugated THC does not have physical properties does not have different physical properties than Delta 9 THC okay so that’s the goal I want to repeat that that’s the goal apparently of having Dr hustus testify is to prevent uh this UIC analyst Jennifer Bash from repeating claims uh that conjugated THC is not a different molecule and that conjugated THC does not have different physical properties from Delta and hind THC so this is a a good old-fashioned nerdy debate except for the fact that the outcome of this is really serious um and and that’s why they’re trying to prevent her uh from testifying because if I could put it plainly from my perspective it’s that they believe Jennifer bash’s uh perspective on this is flawed and or in other words Incorrect and that it is causing people to be locked up when they’re not in fact intoxicated and and I from what I understand Jennifer Bash disagrees with this idea based on her testimony she’s not in this what we’re about to read I believe if you read through this you’ll find that she was not able to make it that day because she had covid so let’s scroll down to page 28 which is when Dr Marilyn hustus gets introduced so this is on I believe page 28 yep where Marilyn hustus gets called as a witness on behalf of the defendants having been first duly sworn um they testified as follows so they spelled their name are you employed they say yes I wear a lot of hats I’m president of hustus and Smith toxicology I’m a senior policy advisor to Penny Associates I’m the director of canabo and Science and master’s program co-director of Tom at Tom Jefferson University and I have three other Adjunct professor positions we’re going to get into your resume a little bit uh I’d like to seek okay they they present her CV which from what I understand is like their resume uh they’re going to start talking about their background um H you know it’s over a 100 Pages their CV um it’s a it’s a very big you know CV because they have such an extensive background they have a bachelor’s degree in Biochemistry from Mount Holio College one of the Seven Sisters schools and Masters in clinical chemistry from the University of New Mexico a doctorate in toxicology from the University of Maryland an honorary doctoral degree in medicine and surgery from the faculty of medicine hel Helsinki Finland um they’ve been in the lab they’re primarily in toxicology um they are the past president and the first woman president of the International Association of forensic toxicologists the past president of the Society of forensic toxicologists uh you know you get it um this is a this is the interesting one that I wanted to mention uh the defense lawyer I believe Mr McMahon asks are there any others that you care to mention uh any other roles that you’re currently serving in are you by chance involved in an organization called smart approaches to marijuana yes Dr houa says so I’m on the scientific advisory committee of smart approaches to marijuana or Sam and we are advising on the science to promote the medical use of cannabinoids but prevent the legalization of cannabis by the way this is such an inter in description of Sam you know a lot of people say things about Sam I’ve never seen them I feel like I’ve never seen them describ this way they are advising on the science to promote the medical use of cannabinoids but prevent the legalization of cannabis they always just seem like they’re opposed to it all together so then actually this is what he asks so you’re actually opposed to legalizing cannabis is that correct yes I think that there’s much less disease and death caused by cannabis than let’s say alcohol or nicotine but the reason I feel strong ly is because of drug impaired driving and because of the effects of cannabis on the developing brain because it has tremendous effects in utero if the mother is pregnant and using you know obviously when adult adolescents start using breastfeeding those kind of I’ve done a lot of research on in utero drug exposure and I’m very concerned about the developing brain so they go through some of their accomplishments you can see they’ve gotten a lot of wards at the International cannabinoid research Society um I thought it was also notable to mention that they have 555 papers uh that are peer-reviewed I believe and um drugs and driving analysis of drugs and metabolites and biological specimens therapeutic drugs monitoring of drugs drug abuse and addiction Inu drug exposure novel psychoactive substances General toxicology all that stuff she’s um these are the topics she’s published in so about 40% of her Publications are related to cannabis use so she works 23 years as a senior tenard investigator at the National Institute uh on drug abuse which I thought was very interesting she talks about being given permission I believe on page 37 uh yeah so you can see the federal government signed off on you giving the schedule one drugs to individuals yes it’s with great oversight by the FDA the DEA ethical committies you know a lot of oversight and only to drug users we never give drugs to naive individuals and also you had to have very good risk benefit ratio so that we never wanted to do harm but these are volunteers I’d like to volunteer for that and then we could study and learn a great deal about the effects of these drugs so it helps us in developing therapy utic medications in understanding addiction and creating both behavioral therapies and pH phaco therapies to create addictions she was the principal investigator on these um did any of those studies relate to cannabis use specifically yes probably most I did studies on heroin and methamphetamine and Coke ecstasy lots of other drugs but my main area and subject of my dissertation my doctoral dissertation was on on canabo on page 38 the defense lawyer asks I’m going to ask you have you ever done any research yourself at the National Institute of Health on a molecule called THC glucuronide they say yes Dr hustus says yes the uh the defense lawyer asks is that also known by another name called conjugated THC Dr Hues says yes and can you describe for the judge just very briefly any of your studies related to THC glucoronide so she lists a few and she asks the defense lawyer asks have you ever done any studies related to the length of time that THC glucoronide stays in the body yes can you just briefly describe that to the judge so we’ve measured it and found no THC in the urine of occasional users we have done it in chronic frequently daily cannabis users and and have found no free THC you remember that term that’s Delta 9 THC no free THC in the urine of The Chronic frequent cannabis users and we were published in multiple papers what about THC glucuronide did you find and she says so THC glucoronide is a minor metabolite the primary metabolites are these I’m not going to try to pronounce them in chronic frequent cannabis users we were able to measure THC glucuronide in their urine up to 24 days after last use in individuals that resided on our closed Research Unit with no access to drugs and no visitors so it can be present in the urine of chronic frequent users for a long period of time um so let’s continue on page 42 she talks about the role of the cannaboid system how it’s there for critical survival functions it’s involved with memory it’s with temperature body control all that stuff she mentions THC is a very lipophilic compound it likes fats it’s not water soluble right it’s lipophilic that’s why uh cannabis can stay in your system so long and oftentimes bonds to your fats uh in your body I should say from what I’ve heard here’s where we get to some interesting questions from Mr McMahon the defense lawyer does the term Delta 9t8 HC refer to more than one molecule answer from Dr hustus No so it is is it your opinion that it refers only to one molecule correct so I’m going to turn our attention to that other molecule we were just talking about THC glucuronide and they described to the judge that THC glucuronide is a metabolite of THC the body produces in order to improve its ability to excrete it it has different Mo uh it has a different molecular weight it has a different polarity it has no activity has been shown for the THC glucuronide molecule at all um and they cut her off there and they ask her when you say it has no activity does that mean or no known activity does that mean it is not known to get people high correct and they said sorry I didn’t mean to cut you off you previously mentioned that Delta 9 THC is not very water soluble so what is your opinion on THC glucuronide it’s more water soluble um so they go through chro chromat you know gas chromatography and talk about how the molecular weight is different um and you know how they work in Mass spectrometry um and they’re really just seems like underscoring the point that these are different molecules so uh I wanted to scroll down a little bit here so to my point that I mentioned earlier the defense ask so you said the molecular weight of THC is that different or the same as THC glucuronide very different the polarity very different and the retention time also different does this in part form your opinion that they are two different molecules absolutely and is this a fair and accurate descript dep of the study that you and your colleagues published yes and we have others after it multiple others after it so I thought it was interesting on page 53 that it mentions you know that multiple drugs are liphophilic in other words they’re fat liking the body does a similar thing to metabolize th drug those drugs by also adding glucoronide to it to make it more polar and more easily excretable and those would include something like morphine to morphine glucuronide benzoid diazines to their glucon glucuronides and um the questions asked are there any glucuronide metabolites that are the same molecule as their parent compound no are there any glucoronide metabolites that the toxicology Community treats as being the same molecule as the parent compound the answer by Dr hustus No after some objections the court uh ultimately allowed Mr man McMahon to continue with his questioning and ask in asking Dr hustus on page 56 Dr just starting very broadly what was Miss bash describing so M this is the answer from Dr hustus so miss miss bash used liquid chromatography mass spectrometry lc-ms slms for analyzing urine specimens and she analyzed them not hydrolyzed and Hydra and hydrolized uh I meant to say analyzing them not hydrolized and hydrolized so she was looking for only THC and it’s quite interesting because you don’t need to hydro hydroly the lcms could measure the THC alone and the THC glucuronide alone and I’m going to stop you right there you say it’s unusual do you mean it’s unusual to do hydrolysis or do you mean it’s unusual to do hydrolysis alongside lcms and she said well we had to Hydra we had to Hydra with gas chromatography spe mass spectr mass spectrography I am not saying these well I’m sorry folks because THC glucuronide is a compound that is not volatile and won’t get into the gas phase so we could measure it in gcms um you can measure the THC and the THC glucoronide without hydrolysis so hydrolysis takes time it takes money and once you do it you can’t separate what produced the THC now when Jennifer Bash did the hydrolysis she did it without hydrolysis and showed no free THC in it reports I saw one report where THC all the others had none somebody objected Court says what’s the objection I don’t know what report she’s speaking of I can clarify judge sure doctor have you just reviewed literally the face lab reports from UIC that were published and given to the defense regarding the 10 individuals although now nine individuals who are the subject to this motion yes did you review any of the lab notes in relation to those no and no chromatograms so it is fair to say you’ve reviewed transcripts as well as just the face sheet of the yes okay so she analyzed them without hydrolysis um let’s pause this for just a moment on page 60 is where Dr hustus describes I think why this is problematic so she’s saying you know she references the Illinois statute and she’s saying that there is no THC in urine no free Delta 9 THC can be found in urine we’ve run multiple studies showing that there’s no free THC in urine also the group from Colombia found no free free THC also a group in Germany found no free THC so by doing hydrolysis she turns THC glucuronide which is an active metabolite that is present in the urine for a very long uh can be present in the urine for a very long period of time into free THC and then uses that as a means to say that the individual had greater than or equal to 10 nanograms per milliliter and the defense asks so is it your testimony that she’s actually turning THC glucuronide into Delta 9 THC in the lab Dr hustus says correct so this is another interesting part of the uh transcript doctor in your opinion would you how the claim that conjugated THC or THC glucuronide is not a different molecule than Delta 9 THC is that an accurate claim objection overruled judge may I stay so you have some uh things here uh the um not the defense but the state says their objection is relevance there’s nowhere any in this transcript that Jennifer Bash says that in other words the claim that conjugated THC is not a different or is a different molecule than Delta 9 THC and the defense responds that they would submit that she does in so many words say that um and so uh Mr McMahon asks Dr huus once again is it generally accepted in the scientific community that free Delta 9 THC is in Delta 9 THC is a different molecule than THC glucoronide the answer is yes and if I can expand that on that I believe that she does say in that deposition that they are the same um so I believe she actually reads from the deposition what she’s referring to in a moment but first they ask how many years have they been working in the field of Toxicology hustus answers more than 50 years how many toxicologists have you worked with and interact with she says hundreds how many have you worked with and interacted with on THC related issues she says hundreds have you ever recalled hearing a toxicologist say that Delta 9 THC is not a different molecule than Delta than THC glucoronide no and Doctor have you ever heard of a toxicologist say or imply that THC and THC glucoronide do not have different physical or chemical properties no have you ever recalled hearing a toxicologist claim that any M altering substance is not a different molecule than its glucuronide metabolite no and they stopped with no more questions this is where cross examination comes into play this is I think a very interesting moment in Cross examination on page 69 um they the state asks the uh the witness which is Dr hustus that the state asks in that 33 page or so can you point me to the page and line where Jennifer Bash is either asked a question or gives an answer and says that Delta 9 THC glucuronide is the same molecule as Delta 9 THC and Houston says okay give me a minute to find it okay please take as much time as you need okay so I’m starting on page 68 line 21 and well line 16 says from the tests you performed were you able to form an opinion to the precence of any drugs in in the defendants urine yes I was what what is your opinion I found THC at concentration of 27.3 plus or minus 3.3 nanog per milliliter you indicated in your results also that you did not detect any free tetrahydro canaban that’s correct can you explain what that means when the body is metabolizing certain compounds it will add a complex molecule called glucoronide that is simply to be able that is simply to be able to allow the body to pass that compound into urine what we do when we quantify and test for the precence of THC is look for the level for the levels is we have some samples that go through a hydrolysis process that removes that glucoronide and then we have a sample that does not go through that process and we look for if there’s anything that doesn’t have the glucuronide attached to it and then you’re saying glucoronide and she spells it what’s the purpose of removing that it allows us to then pull the drug compound out of the urine and into an organic solvent otherwise the drug compound will simply stay within what we call the aqu the aquous phase or the water proportion if you can just clarify when you remove the glucuronide is that free THC the free THC compound would be the compound where the body never attached that glucuronide once you get the hydrolysis step then it’s all the same molecule whether it was glucon glucuronidated glucuronidated from the body or not it’s all the exact same compound all Delta 9 tetrah hydroc canabidol and there are other portions also in the document that I can recall I would look through it if you want me to and then the states says okay but in that testimony she says that THC glucuronide or the glucon glucuronidated THC when you move the glucoronide what does it become THC okay she says it’s all the same molecule whether it was glucuronidated from the body or not it’s all the exact same molecule all Delta 9 THC after after the glucuronide is removed Dr hustus kind of it looks like cuts her off she says it’s all the same molecule and then the state says well that’s your interpretation of you breaking down what she said and Dr hustus saysi think that is very clear what it says and then the state says well she says after she takes the glucuronide off it’s the same molecule is that Dr hustus cuts off cuts the state off and says it’s all the same molecule whether it was glucarate glucuronated or not I can’t say that word I’m so sorry but she’s quoting Jennifer Bash the state after she talks about removing Dr Hugh cuts her off no she says it’s all the same molecule whether it was glucuronidated by the body or not and she specifically references going through the hydrolysis step the state asks she says she answers yes so very interesting back and forth here so this part of the testimony is what I was referring to earlier uh Dr houas says when we started studying chronic frequent cannabis users because carboxy THC which is the primary analyte in the urine is there for weeks to months I’ve measured it for months in individuals it tells you nothing about the recency of use so we were looking for different markers that might possibly be able to identify recency of use once again that’s on page 74 of this fry motion hearing featuring Dr hustus page 91 has an interesting uh interaction between the state and Dr hustus the state says well in her testimony she references that her lab is certified correct Dr hustus says certified but it doesn’t say the procedures certified the state responds a andab certified correct Dr hustus responds yes it doesn’t say the procedure is certified so I thought that was uh just an interesting point there earlier in the episode when I said that you know UIC seems to be one of the only Labs uh I’ve been told that from several uh from you know my source but also you know I’m gathering that from this testimony here um where Dr hustus says I do want to say that that this is the only time I’ve ever seen urine tested like this for a duid case around the world I’ve never seen people take the THC glucuronide and turn it into THC and use that as the basis for meeting your statutes requirements thought that was a very interesting moment in this uh testimony there’s more to this and I recommend that you go through and read the rest of the testimony like um they end up having somebody from organic chemistry and you know they ask is Delta 9 glucuronide and Delta 9 THC treated as the same compound and molecule and organic chemistry believe the answer is no um and you know I might actually have one more uh that I’d like to show you from this testimony uh from this organic chemist let’s pull it up on the uh transcript so this part is like I said a different person this is no longer Dr hustus um I can try to find the name of the individual in a moment the individual that I’m about to read testimony from is Dr Christopher Czech um but the point I wanted to make is this is a different individual and the question from I believe the defense asks about testimony that um uh Jennifer Bash gave so they say that she says the complexations are actually considered different than if you are changing an entire molecule what is your opinion based on that statement she testified to the answer was no minor changes change the molecule completely and you’ve been studying and working in the field of organic chemistry for approximately 20 years yes yes and at some point you learned about molecules and probably the beginning of your education yes and what is the definition of a molecule that you’ve learned so molecules is a group of bonded atoms that can be identified uh as a distinct entity so the defense asks okay and then in the second portion of the testimony where bash says to actually change one of the molecules into another you need to actually form some sort of carbon bond to remove some sort of a carbon Bond what is your opinion regarding the truth of that statement answer well you are forming a carbon bond in the case of this reaction so that’s confusing and then that’s not the definition of how you change a molecule or what a chemical reaction is now based on your education and training in organic chemistry how can you if you change any bond and so any bond it doesn’t have to be a carbon Bond it can correct be any bond okay showing you what’s been marked these are two structures so they’re showing the structures that I showed earlier um and they’re basically asking are they different structures and and these expert Witnesses seem to be saying yes so I thought this was a very interesting back and forth between the state and the one of the expert Witnesses the question from the state in your studies have you come to learn that in order for Delta 9 to be eliminated by the body it has to be conjugated to get into the urinary tract and eliminated yes that’s part of the metabolic process the subject matter an expert answers the state asks okay so part of the metabolic process is the attachment of the glucuronide the expert says yeah it’s a functional handle the state asks I’m sorry what did you say the expert answers it’s a functional handle the state asks a functional handle is that a term that you use in organic chemistry yes what’s a functional handle the expert says so you could describe it as something like if you want to take something out of an oven you put a glove on it so that you can then grab it and take it out of the oven so that’s like a functional handle you’re changing like a pot by putting a glove on or around it so that you can transfer it State as so you’re not really changing the chemical structure of the pot by using a the expert says you are unless right that’s just an analogy so you would change and the state says let me slow you down there for a minute so you would agree that an analogy is just a way to kind of explain something in Lay terms for somebody who’s got who’s not an organic chemist chemist correct the expert says yes o and the state says okay I have no further questions so I think their point in that is to say that maybe Jennifer Bash was was not saying what she apparently said but instead she was making some sort of analogy and you can find that in other parts of this document I’m going to do a quick control F I think you can find the word revealed uh they try to say you know well she you’re not creating a document it reveals itself um so when you’re saying it’s an aggregate of the free and the conjugate it’s really just the conjugate exposed or revealed right so there’s questions about uh that and it sounds like the state is trying to say it sounds like again just from a lay person’s point of view it sounds like the state is trying to say that the testimony given is factual even though as we’ve gone through the science it doesn’t seem to be factual um and I think what they’re then saying is okay yeah you’re right that is not factual but what we meant is this and that’s what and I think they’re even taking it a step further not only did we mean that that is the definition this sum of these two samples um you know you’ve got your conjugated THC but then you have the one that you hydrolize and you get the free THC and they’re saying that what what you had in your system is what they’re finding and then they stand by those results and I just have to say that if everything I’ve been told is true and I’m understanding it correctly this is [ __ ] crazy I’ve always said that I doubt I could pass one of these tests but now I feel very confident that I would not be able to pass one of these tests and it’s one of the reasons I wanted to record today’s episode because it’s almost like a red flag that I wanted to put out for all of you again I started this episode by asking if you’ve used cannabis in the last month or so um you might need to think a little bit about you know operating a motor vehicle at least within the state of Illinois so folks what do you think about this let me know you can go to the memo.com cont to send your feedback and I hope that you found value in this episode of the coal memo I will see you on the next one be sure to check out the show notes for uh you know links to the documents and so much more take care everybody bye
The Cole Memo 
Leave a comment