Medical marijuana lawsuit: Why AIDS patient Damien LaGoy signed on

damien lagoy.jpg
Damien LaGoy.
Earlier today, we told you about a just-filed lawsuit against Colorado's medical marijuana laws, which officially went into effect today. Plaintiffs in the suit include Kathleen Chippi, the activist behind it, plus the Patient Caregiver Rights Litigation Project, the Colorado Patients' Alliance, the Rocky Mountain Caregivers Cooperative, Greenfaith Ministry and one other person: Damien LaGoy, who suffers from AIDS. Why did LaGoy sign on?

"They've really gone against the constitution with this whole system of laws," he says. "And one thing that really worries me is the idea of videotaping all transactions. My dispensary is in a very public place, and my face is out there. I weight 100 pounds and I stand five-eight -- and I've been mugged before. It's not pleasant: My jaw was broken and took eight or nine weeks to heal, and I don't need to lose any more weight. And with this whole system basically putting me on display, well, the entire scenario is very upsetting."

As a result of his condition, LaGoy suffers from severe nausea and a lack of appetite. Medical marijuana provides more relief from these symptoms than any other substance -- and he stresses the word "medical" in the description.

"I can't always afford to go to my dispensary," he says, noting that his original caregiver's case of muscular dystrophy has advanced to the point where he can no longer bend over and care for plants. "So sometimes I have to go to old street sources -- and there's a real difference. Even my roommate noticed that when I smoke the street stuff, it helps the nausea, but it doesn't do anything for my appetite. But when I smoke the medical stuff, I attack the refrigerator.

"When you have an attack at four o'clock in the morning, and you start throwing up and can't stop, you feel so helpless and alone. You just want to close your eyes and go to sleep. And medical marijuana is the only thing that helps."

LaGoy doesn't consider himself to be particularly political. But he's proud that his name is on the MMJ lawsuit. In his words, "I don't like it when the government is so intrusive that they have to know every aspect of my health. And that's what's happening."

More from our News archive: "Ned Calonge on leaving as CO's chief medical officer & the "distraction" of medical marijuana."

My Voice Nation Help
57 comments
Rev. B Baker
Rev. B Baker

scott that doesnt work as we as personal cargivers/ who are patients are required to register just like the business, the simple solution is sue the state and make them stand by their own laws they shove on us. Sorry to say almost everyone of my patients cant grow their own and a few have passed on due to the lack of compassion in the gov and dispensaries. There is nothing more simple than an open shut legal case. THEY WILL NOT WIN AND WE WILL see Leary v US, 395 U.S. 6 (1969)]. PLAIN AND SIMPLE their whole regulation legislation is illegal, only personal private caregiving and off the state's books, sole proprietor or medical consulting/equipment/herb sales with appropriate taxation

Jake420
Jake420

You should fight for patients and caregivers! But why take down all the dispensaries at the same time?

Hickenlooper must go!!!!
Hickenlooper must go!!!!

I got nothing else to say to this clown when he hasn't been around for awhile to know the facts he is just reading off HB-1284 and worried about his biz when we have proved time after time again we are for everyone not just us patient's/caregivers

Hickenlooper must go!!!!
Hickenlooper must go!!!!

I got nothing else to say to this clown when he hasn't been around for awhile to know the facts he is just reading off HB-1284 and worried about his biz when we have proved time after time again we are for everyone not just us patient's/caregivers

Christopher Robbins
Christopher Robbins

 This is another example of the fear-mongering and exaggeration coming from the pro-DOR side. The lawsuit is not "taking down" dispensaries, but in their myopic vision and fear of having their government-sponsored oligopoly ended, they will resort to blaming the mmj activists for destroying the MMCs.

Remember,  this MMC system that you love so much is destroying itself by consistently ignoring the privacy rights of Colo. patients.  Patients still have one vote --> $$$ and they know how to use it.

Legal Eagle
Legal Eagle

"Dispensaries" are mmj distribution centers run by caregivers and protected by the Constitution. MMCs (Medical Marijuana Centers) are creatures of statute and regulation, subject to the whim of the General Assembly and the Dept. of Revenue.

The lawsuit seeks to clarify the legality of "dispensaries". It in no way "takes down" MMCs. Should the lawsuit prevail, caregivers will be free to re-open their dispensary businesses. MMCs will also be free to stay MMCs -- that is, if the DOR ever grants you a license and the General Assembly doesn't take the MMC program away. Remember, you have no constitutional rights as an MMC -- that is what this lawsuit is trying to fix.

Scott
Scott

Yes Growing your own herb is a task but it can be down with a little time and effort. And your right their whole regulation legislation is 100% BS and illegal. I doubt that 10% of the caregivers statewide will even register leaving them illegal and im afraid that the local police will be around shortly after. Damned if u Do and Damned if you Dont

Jake420
Jake420

Growing marijuana is 100% illegal according to the feds . . .

Scott
Scott

Simple Solution to all of this... Stay out of the centers and just GROW YOUR OWN HERB!!!

Rudedude
Rudedude

All this over a plant which is just a weed you folks are nuts,  ...SEEING AS YOU CAN GET YOUR CRIMINAL / FELONY RECORD SQUASHED  needles to say its all BS....when u all first started selling MMJ it was a gold rush now the can been caped your all whinnging and infighting  each other, You all look ridiculousness............United you stand , divided  you fall

Hickenlooper must go!!!!
Hickenlooper must go!!!!

Lmao you must be retarded and not have read shit it's about our rights and the damn Constitution do you or have you ever read it idiot ? plus if you live in Colorado you shouldn't have shit to say other then thank you to the mmj community for 9 million plus dollars making us the 4th biggest supporters even if it was stolen from our fund by Ritter I don't see you complaining about that as long as all the roads and all those funds pay the way for your live to continue you must be just another selfish act of human waste.

ColoradogetREAL
ColoradogetREAL

MMC owners are not telling patients about anything going on, if they do discuss any changes in law and rules is sweet coated. 

Montana just got an injunction against their rules which were about to be enacted - WOW - this should have been us......see what all this fighting is doing to us in Colorado.

ALL PATIENTS BOYCOTT ALL MMC - they are voilating your rights and privacy.

Poor dude...
Poor dude...

Eating your feedbag, I see!

Patient4574
Patient4574

So I'm supposed to go into a still unlicensed by the state MMC, buy a federally illegal substance, with a record of that transaction and video going into a database accessable by the DEA?Is this a really bad idea or what am I missing?

Jake420
Jake420

How do you know the DEA will be able to access it?

Poor dude...
Poor dude...

There are 120,000 other patients in the state of Colorado, more in California. What makes you so special that they're going to prosecute you?

If you're worried about the Feds coming after you, and not the THOUSANDS of employees that are involved in distribution, you're paranoid (switch to a different bud) or you're likely breaking the law.

Again, why YOU? Federal trials take tons of time. 

Name me ONE patient who was prosecuted that wasn't involved in distribution and I'll give you a hundred collectives that were.

Jake420
Jake420

This lawsuit could shut down the entire medical marijuana industry in Colorado because it attacks 1284. 1284 licenses Medical Marijuana Centers. If 1284 goes, so does the Centers it licenses. Amendment 20 doesn't protect Centers, it only protects caregivers. Does any one know if the constitution defines caregivers as people or businesses?

Rev. B Baker
Rev. B Baker

as i say again and again you are wrong very wrong jakeThese new rules hurt and self incriminate everyone involved with MMJ (dispensaries, patients, caregivers, friends, family, businesses and etc) except the state's budget and revenue [which is majorly illegal see Leary v US, 395 U.S. 6 (1969)].PLEASE WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

Jake420
Jake420

Why doesn't the lawsuit address self-incrimination then?

David
David

Most of the MMCs were open long BEFORE 1284.  1284 in no way empowered people to start opening businesses.  In fact, the MMCs would do just fine without 1284.  From what I've seen - I visit about 200 of these - most people involved just want to run their business and follow standard business practices.  There's a few bad apples in every industry - like used cars - but most businesses would operate on a normal business model.  Then, as in EVERY OTHER BUSINESS - like restaurants or shoe stores, their customers would decide if they stay open.  The Patients should decide who stays in business and who doesn't.  That should be the only thing that matters.  David     

Hickenlooper must go!!!!
Hickenlooper must go!!!!

And David your point is even in Amendment 20 where it's the choices of the patient no one else who they choice to help them wow Jake420 read the damn law 

Jake420
Jake420

MMC were not open before 1284. 1284 created MMCs. Before 1284 was just caregivers operating in a legal grey area.

Hickenlooper must go!!!!
Hickenlooper must go!!!!

You damn rookie you have no clue when in the hell did you start in the mmj community? when HB-1284 started your all for HB-1284 cause you think it saves your ass but in fact it doesn't did you even read what the feds threats where against they targeted big producers and MMC's moron as big production not caregivers/patients because we unlike dispensaries didn't revoke our rights now again get your facts right.

PR420
PR420

the lawsuit doesn't attack 1284 it only addresses the parts of 1284 where it infringes upon constitutional rights. In fact it help centers by addressing bans. The constitution says"

(d)Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, no person, including apatientor primary care-giver, shall be entitled to the protection of thissectionforhis or her acquisition, possession, manufacture, production, use,sale,distribution,dispensing, or transportation of marijuana for any use other thanmedicaluse.So the lawsuit would allow patients and caregivers to supply medical marijuana as amendment 20 had intended.

Jake420
Jake420

Read the last couple pages of the lawsuit. It attacks 1284 in its entirety. I don't understand how that section says that caregivers can be businesses.

Hickenlooper must go!!!!
Hickenlooper must go!!!!

Screw Hb-1284 the people whom even wrote it stated it was unconstitutional after they read the damn thing again your a damn moron get your facts right 

Hickenlooper must go!!!!
Hickenlooper must go!!!!

Lmao and you need to read the law period and stop trying to act like you been at the front of the line helping pass A-20 but instead you look like a rookie who's own plan is to save his own biz and ass unlike the patients/caregivers  we aim to help everyone even your sorry greedy asses

Hickenlooper must go!!!!
Hickenlooper must go!!!!

Ok answer me this if dispensaries couldn't operate then why did the state have to have them revoke there rights and turn to MMC's after 9 yr's dumb ass 9yrs not yr after yr with new unjust laws god your a moron

Jake420
Jake420

Did you read your lawsuit? It goes after 1284 in its entirety.

PR420
PR420

I am a plaintiff, so don't tell me what my lawsuit says. the right to sell and distribute means you can sell for a profit and if you do that in colorado you need a retail sales tax license. You don't understand legal language, the parts of 1284 the are unconstitutional will be addressed and those alone.

Jake420
Jake420

PR420 it looks like you need to reread the lawsuit you support.

Jake420
Jake420

V.      CLAIM FORDECLARATORY JUDGMENT

AS TO ALL DEFENDANTS

 

79.     Plaintiffsincorporate by reference each and every allegation above.

80.     Plaintiffsseek the following disputed issues be resolved by the Court by ruling as amatter of law, and for the reasons set forth above, House Bill 10-1284 is inits entirety unconstitutional

Poor dude...
Poor dude...

People, which is why center owners used to put their names on cards as opposed to their business names.

Kathleen Chippi
Kathleen Chippi

The constitution only allows for a persons name (not any business) not the red card. The constitution does not allow for large grows at all, only mom and pop.  get your facts straight.

Hickenlooper must go!!!!
Hickenlooper must go!!!!

Are you a fool r what first off when dispensaries first started there biggest supporters where the patients you moron before dispensaries got greedy and if they would of stuck with the patients like the patients backed the biz side then MMC's would of never been created get your shit together because it's stinking up the truth

Poor dude...
Poor dude...

For someone who claims to know so much about A20, you couldn't be more incorrect. 

Show me "mom and pop" or any part of the constitution that supports that.

Poor dude...
Poor dude...

Why is he scared of being videotaped? I don't see the correlation between that and being robbed. If anything, security cameras empirically help decrease incidents of violence.

Additionally, there are LOTS of centers that are located in office and medical buildings. If you're worried about being attacked, I think that "street sources" would be the last place you'd go.

The old adage of not being able to pay dispensary prices simply doesn't ring true, either. Prices at most centers are astonishingly low, one thing that almost EVERYONE can agree on.

Then he openly admits that the dispensaries are where he gets the cannabis that helps him medically. CTI/PCRLP are about as hostile to MMC's as you can be. They're the reason the 35 day rule exists: trying to get backlash against that model.

I'm all for patients like Damien LaGoy getting involved, but this seems more like a good guy getting taken advantage of by CTI/PCRLP. 

Hope they have the decency to give an AIDS patient his money back when this fails miserably. 

Hickenlooper must go!!!!
Hickenlooper must go!!!!

 Poor Dude check your other post and you will find your self eating dirt wth are you doing to to protect patients nothing so shove your words up your you know what clown.

Scooby
Scooby

I can buy an ounce of street marijuana for 50. Centers cannot possibly come close to that astonishingly low cost price. If so tell me where to shop. Scooby

PR420
PR420

He gave no money. The latest memo industrial scale MMj production is cited as a prime target.

Poor dude...
Poor dude...

So no money was required to be named a plaintiff? Why are you telling people they could have had a piece in it if they contributed, then?

To put your janky lawsuit on the back of an AIDS patient and then use him to get a little more press.

You people are sick.

Forestgump
Forestgump

no one's listening to your BS.  what's he scared of being video tapped?  your one of those centers in denial who says nothing to patients to inform them of the compromise of their privacy or that it goes to the cops.......what doesn't frighten you about that?  why aren't centers being honest with patients if it's no big deal. 

and the "they are responsible for the 35 day rule".  CTI?  PCRLP?  yeah, you should look into that, buddy,  'i'm pretty sure that came from the general assembly passing statute.....yea,...check it out....before you spew. 

i know CTI and PCRLP believe in following the constitution.  and under the constitution your affirmative defense begins when you are diagnosed with a qualifying mmj ailment and they don't believe it takes 35 days to 'qualify'.......and they never have.......

 

David
David

There is NOTHING in any statute about 35 days except that the Amendment says that, if the CDPHE doesn't get your card to you in 35 days you can assume approval.This is a gross misinterpretation of the meaning of the 35 days, if you can read English.I think it started with a memo from lawyer Joffre which prompted the question - then the CDPHE referred it to Suthers who had some underling issue an idiot opinion.  People like that start with the outcome they want, then fashion the opinion to fit.It is typical of the extreme interpretations being used by the govt that obstruct patient access.  Imagine if you had to wait 35 days after your doctor writes you a scrip for insulin or pain meds, for example.

And, frankly, I don't want to be videotaped making a federally illegal transaction - WTF could you be thinking - YOU don't mind.  OK, ... but I do.  Haven't you been paying attention ?  The DEA subpoenas patient records - check Michigan.  Imagine your trial where they show the video of you buying weed.  And yes, I think many MMCs have not made an effort to tell patients about these nasty invasions of privacy.  I visit about 200 delivering Mile Hi MMJ Patient magazine and I have been very disappointed at the lack of effort to educate patients.  I think an informed patient base is the best way to get the govts attention.  I go to the hearings.  The same 20 people are there - mostly in the biz, not patients.If we could get 1% of the 150k patients involved - hey, that's 1500 people at the hearing - much harder to ignore than the usual crowd.You should check out our forum for more info ...David

David
David

Crummy mag ?  Let's see yours.It's a very nice magazine and quite non-commercial.The feedback I've gotten is that patients love it because it really focused on them and not advertising.  Each to his own - you probably prefer pictures to articles.And some people just can't help but criticize others.  Too negative for me ;-)David

Poor dude...
Poor dude...

David, you're smarter than to think that patients will be prosecuted FEDERALLY for what amounts to a minor crime in their eyes.

But let's beg that question. When do they get to patients? After prosecuting the thousands of employees of the actual places doing the distributing? Wait, that's just in Colorado. The TENS of thousands of employees between all the medical states. What year is that? 2021? They aren't exactly the most efficient bunch. 

You're being intellectually dishonest right now. It's okay, keep plugging your crummy mag.

Poor dude...
Poor dude...

If your assertion is that patients are being lied to by centers, prove it. If you're arguing that patients are going to get in trouble with the Feds, read a memo sometime. This one came out two days ago:

"Accordingly, the Ogden Memo reiterated to you that prosecution of significant traffickers of illegal drugs, including marijuana, remains a core priority, but advised that it is likely not an efficient use of federal resources to focus enforcement efforts on individuals with cancer or other serious illnesses who use marijuana as part of a recommended treatment regimen consistent with applicable state law, or their caregivers."

You guys don't get it: the patients don't have anything to be scared of, CENTERS do. You eat CTI's propaganda because it's easy to keep being scared and they prey on your fear.

Laura Kriho is responsible for the 35 day rule being implemented. Do an open records request and find out for yourself. She inquired with the DoR so many times that Cook was forced to write a statement of position on what the 35 day rule meant. If she hadn't, it probably wouldn't have gone into effect until today, like most every other rule.

CTI/PCRLP believe in doing anything to get rid of the center model after Kathleen shut down. Even if it hurts patients.

Don't believe me? Do the research for yourself instead of eating your feedbag. 

Hickenlooper must go!!!!
Hickenlooper must go!!!!

 Your stupid Centers always lied to the patients in fact most centers which started didn't even read the laws you moron they would tell patients they couldn't sign to small caregivers only Centers and in there own terms that was legal I talked to loads of patients about this and educated them on A-20 and you talk about how our privacy wont get trampled on you must be a fool also that's why we have Constitutional laws so everyone can abide by them not for some to beleive they above the law like this State thinks it is.

David
David

Oh, yeah .... I trust the feds completely, they are so honest and compassionate.  I'm sure if an MMC I've been to has had their records seized (ever heard of the 10th Amendment ?) I could just ask the feds for the videos and other records about how much and what I purchased.  Of course, I just wasn't thinking straight.David

Poor dude...
Poor dude...

So your argument is that when the Feds seize the MMC's records, they're going to use those to prosecute patients, even when they have said CONSISTENTLY that they have no intent of doing so? That they could justify federal trials based on paperwork from MMC's? Over small purchases of marijuana?

You are delusional. Go figure, you're also a plaintiff in the case.

Also, Matt Cook does have to provide clarification on rules when he receives inquiries. That's where the statement of position came from. Laura harassed him into screwing thousands of patients. No one in the industry was asking him to do that. Laura was. If Kathleen wants to clarify her relationship with Laura Kriho, I'd love to hear it.

Do the research if you don't believe me.

PR420
PR420

Centers targeted by the feds will have their records seized. So it is a patient issue. All the other rules that violate patient and caregivers rights originated from where? Fact is CTI has no such authority and I am sure she wishes she did. 1284 came from a small group of self centered MMC owners. Matt Cook isn't able to do any thing because CTI requests it. He also did nothing to protect patient health with the recommendations Dr Shackleford made. Is that CTI to? If you do't like CTI thats fine but Laura isn't even a plaintiff on the lawsuit. Thats right READ it. She hasn't paid the attorney any money. She is reporting that it has been filed. So name any thing you have done to protect patients? Any thing at all? 

Mike
Mike

Gotta love the dispensary owner attitude here. I guess I would have such an attitude too since the feds said they are going after dispensaries and this lawsuit.

Now Trending

Denver Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...