Brandon Smith

[speedster]

What shocks me is drug dealers text blokes about buying and selling what you would assume would be large amount of coke,. Surely Smith would call old mate and say he I have a mate that wants to buy x amount of talc powder off you, can I give him your number. His name is y.

Probably did but the cops want to get the dealer so they're shaking a few trees.

 

[speedster]

Wouldn’t that same logic apply to Smith facilitating said possession?

zactly. Charged, denied charges, not guilty.

 

[Maximus]

The contents of the messages that they are charging Smith with have identified Rads as the buyer.

So? How can you charge someone with possession of a substance if you didn't catch them in possession of the drug?

What evidence would there be that he possessed it? The drug dealer? You aren't giving leniency to a dealer to arrest a user.

 

[Munky]

I'm surprised.

I always imagined this is what Radley does in his time off.

 

[gordsy]

So? How can you charge someone with possession of a substance if you didn't catch them in possession of the drug?

What evidence would there be that he possessed it? The drug dealer? You aren't giving leniency to a dealer to arrest a user.

I have no idea how a police investigation works but maybe the headlines of the arrest would be good leverage over other high profile people. Also this task force might need a headline gotcha and someone like Smith fits the profile. It's like the finch case, a lot of headlines for not much result (not saying Smith is in anyway doing shit against kids)

 

[speedster]

So? How can you charge someone with possession of a substance if you didn't catch them in possession of the drug?

What evidence would there be that he possessed it? The drug dealer? You aren't giving leniency to a dealer to arrest a user.

They can charge him if they want on that flimsy evidence (that he is named as wanting to buy) and like Smith, he'll beat the charge. Or they could not bother. You're arguing about beating the charge if it were made but I'm saying Radley deserves to be charged twice as much as Smith given what has been identified.

 

[Vee]

What would he be charged with? Bit hard to prove possession when you no longer have it in your possession.

Attempt to possess is the same as Posess under the DMA.

 

[Vee]

Wouldn’t that same logic apply to Smith facilitating said possession?

Read the Act.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

B uy
Y our own
D rugs

 

[Manurewa_Marlins]

A few good men ?

Training Day

 

[Murishido]

Only mistake he made in retrospect was not punting him after his coke party with Munster at the end of 2021...but that would have meant also sacking Munny.

He tried to re-sign him.

He just got beaten out

 

[Valheru]

Attempt to possess is the same as Posess under the DMA.

What evidence is there that he attempted to possess it?

I could contact a drug dealer and tell them it is for the King of England. It means f**k all unless they have evidence of said 3rd party asking for it.

 

[Captain Apollo]

They can charge him if they want on that flimsy evidence (that he is named as wanting to buy) and like Smith, he'll beat the charge. Or they could not bother. You're arguing about beating the charge if it were made but I'm saying Radley deserves to be charged twice as much as Smith given what has been identified.

Ok, you'd charge a guy on hearsay that he asked for cocaine, whilst the guy who tried to procure it is let off? Sorry but in the anals of crime fighting that is a ridiculous idea. Supplying a prohibited drug is a considered by legislatures world wide as a far more serious crime than using.

 

[Bazal]

They can charge him if they want on that flimsy evidence (that he is named as wanting to buy) and like Smith, he'll beat the charge. Or they could not bother. You're arguing about beating the charge if it were made but I'm saying Radley deserves to be charged twice as much as Smith given what has been identified.

I mean that's a wild take, you get that right?

Smith contacted a drug dealer (according to the reports) asking for drugs to supposedly supply to others.

Plodley was (according to reports) named in the text(s) Smith sent.

Both things might be completely untrue but on the info reported, I think you have the names backwards in your last sentence

 

[snickers007]

Kinda feel like these two charges are just be the beginning. They've obviously got enough evidence to charge him, but once disclosure occurs, who knows how much new evidence will come out. We may see Smith and others cop some more (serious) charges.

 

[Nealo 12]

How dare he tarnish the great Souff Sidney with drug allegations they haven't had this issue before..... oh um my bad soz

 

[Captain Apollo]

How dare he tarnish the great Souff Sidney with drug allegations they haven't had this issue before..... oh um my bad soz

The old Scott Wilson chant of "stay away from the white lines Scott" whenever he was on the field might get recycled now?

 

[yobbo84]

Kinda feel like these two charges are just be the beginning. They've obviously got enough evidence to charge him, but once disclosure occurs, who knows how much new evidence will come out. We may see Smith and others cop some more (serious) charges.

I would love that.

Get rid of them all.

F**k drugs.

 

[YoungPanther]

Looking forward to Radley's reception to Cheese next week.

Pretty certain he will be grateful Cheese had his name all over the messages and keen to thank him.

 

[speedster]

Ok, you'd charge a guy on hearsay that he asked for cocaine, whilst the guy who tried to procure it is let off? Sorry but in the anals of crime fighting that is a ridiculous idea. Supplying a prohibited drug is a considered by legislatures world wide as a far more serious crime than using.

No. If Smith can be charged based purely on phone and text records, then so can the guy mentioned that it was allegedly meant for. Both can defend that in court. The charge of supply is entirely exaggerated. At worst, it was an introduction. You can't supply something if you weren't even in the state.