Rantz: WA judges side with accused drug dealer over ridiculous racism allegation


Three judges from the Washington Court of Appeals come reversed a conviction against an accused drug dealer using woke standards for the term “Mexican Ounce”, which they misinterpret.

Jesus Ibarra-Erives was arrested at the apartment he lived in after officers found a backpack containing seven one-ounce ‘bindings’ of methamphetamine and five doses of heroin with a street value of 8,000 dollars. Police also found a digital scale and a box of plastic sandwich bags.

The amount of heroin was slightly less than an ounce – the typical amount of drugs transported with intent to deliver. To help establish this intent, a detective testified that a “Mexican ounce” is considered 25 grams on the street. In his closing remarks, prosecutor Adam Sturdivant used the term “Mexican ounce” twice in the context of establishing intent to deliver.

Although there were no objections at the time of the case. Yet the use of the term “Mexican ounce” was enough to overturn the conviction. This is how the left is dismantling the criminal justice system. The state is therefore less secure.

Damage claims


During the call, Washington Appellate Project attorney Nancy Collins barely mentioned the alleged prejudicial use of the term “Mexican ounce.” Although this was part of the appeal, it mainly focused on the claim that there was insufficient evidence to suggest that the drugs belonged to Ibarra-Erives.

When the judges questioned the state, all they wanted to focus on was “the Mexican ounce.”

“Could an objective observer who was aware of the history of the use of race to appeal to prejudice conclude that the term was used to suggest that one-ounce packaged heroin is more likely Mexican was done by someone who is apparently Latinx and speaks Spanish?” Judge Bill Bowman, a Jay Inslee named personasked on appeal.

It seems to have been a rhetorical question.

Waking up alongside a suspected drug dealer

In an 11-page opinion, Bowman, along with judges Janet Chung and Stephen Dwyer, concluded there was enough evidence for the jury to find Ibarra-Erives was in possession of drugs. But they reversed his conviction on the use of the term “Mexican ounce”.

“Testimony that the heroin is packaged in quantities commonly sold on the street is evidence of an intent to sell the drug. But the street term attributing this practice to a particular racial or ethnic group is not,” the judges wrote, “And where the defendant appears to belong to that same racial or ethnic group, such comments erroneously suggest that he is more likely to have packaged or possessed the drugs.”

The judges say the use of “Mexican ounce” was “a suggestion that Ibarra Erives was more likely to have possessed drugs packaged in a ‘Mexican ounce’ because he speaks Spanish and appears to be Latinx. “

But he had drugs packaged at a “Mexican ounce”, according to police.

The ‘Latinx’ tells

The judges’ use of the political label “Latinx” indicates that they were looking for a reason to overturn the conviction. When you’re looking for reasons to prove your belief that the criminal justice system is biased against racial minorities – you can and will bend over backwards to make your point. This is called confirmation bias.

“Such a suggestion improperly undermines the presumption of innocence by urging the jury to rely on racially based suggestions rather than evidence to link Ibarra-Erives to the drugs in the backpack,” they claimed. the judges, even though the prosecutor made no such suggestion. .

If you’re trying to establish the intent to sell, it makes sense to use street slang that makes the point. It’s a “Mexican ounce” even if a white, black, or Asian drug dealer sells the product.

It’s all politics

The decision is ridiculously insufficient. But the justices are forced into politics because of a Washington State Supreme Court ruling by its far-left justices.

The state Supreme Court ruled in State against Zamora who judges, in allegations of misconduct based on race, to have to determine whether an objective observer who is “aware of the history of racial and ethnic discrimination in the United States and aware of implicit, institutional, and unconscious biases, in addition to deliberate discrimination” could view prosecutor’s comments to appeal jury biases, prejudices, or stereotypes.

This decision makes it very easy to claim race-based misconduct whenever a prosecutor mentions race. And it allows politically motivated legal groups like the Washington Appellate Project to take advantage of it.

Listen to the Jason Rantz Show weekday afternoons from 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast. Follow @JasonRantz on Twitter, instagramand Facebook. Check back frequently for more news and analysis.

Previous iPaydayLoans Review: Best Loan Service for Your Financial Emergencies
Next Native American civil rights activist dies at 75