Australian Punishment For Picking Psilocybin Shrooms

[SaBReT00tH]

Just wondering what the punishment is for picking psilocybin shrooms and getting busted by cops? Anyone have any experiences they'd like to share? Fine? Jail time? Can't travel to the US?

[Ace]

They are actually Psilocybe mushrooms (psilocybin is one of the active goodies within them)

Sorry mate, not sure about the consequences are relating to picking or even cultivation, but I'd be guessing a harsh fine or some time behind bars. No doubt it would depend on quantities picked/grown and a few other factors, but I cant see there being too much leniency if you just have a bag chockers with MMs. No doubt cultivation would be a slightly heavier penalty, but then again, I'm sure it would be dependant on quantities.

Torsten would know the details I think - he knows everything!

[paradox]

have a look at this fim. it's anti mushroom propaganda where 2 guys get busted picking subs.

the dude actually deals with it pretty well. ready to get into a good debate about psychedelics when the cop tries telling him that they're bad. it's pretty funny. i think they got a $400 fine & a warning or something:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBKTHY8X220

[platypii]

In trouble for picking mushrooms is the STUPIDEST thing I've heard in the last five minutes, and I'mm watching Neighbours.

[Hagakure]

its especially stupid because picking mushrooms is one of the most wholesome activities.

walking through nature, learning about proper identification, gaining respect for nature, obtaining mind opening chemicals for free taht have been shown to do little to no physcal damage to the brain. great stuff.

how much do you hear the older generation whinging about how the younger generation dont get outside enough etc.

meanwhile its socially acceptable for youth to partake in mass ethanol consupmtion, get agressive, treat women badly and cause much damage to their brains such that they wake up the next day feeling very sick.

so much so that alcohol is becoming ever more available and binge drinking is ever on the rise.

stupid stupid society.

[Torsten]

Picking shrooms falls under drug law, which is the domain of the states. ie, each state will have different laws and different penalties. At their choice they may use the whole weight of shrooms or they might analyse the psilocybin content and charge only for that.

As always, if you get busted you invoke your right to silence and don't say a thing until after you have spoken to a solicitor. If you do this politely there will normally be no consequences. The vast majority of drug cases only make it to prosecution because the offender opens his mouth.

[Anodyne]

They are actually Psilocybe mushrooms (psilocybin is one of the active goodies within them)

I assume Sabretooth phrased it that way to cover the non-Psilocybe psilocybin-containing mushroom genuses, like Panaeolus, but I may be wrong...

Edited June 1, 2007 by Anodyne

[SaBReT00tH]

yep!! covers more of them!

I assume the state laws are similar from one state in Oz to the other. What's the average penalty for different amounts of psilocybin or mushroom weight? (measured from confiscated shrooms)

Have many people here had any recent experiences with stakeouts done by coppers in popular picking spots throughout Australia during winter?

Edited June 1, 2007 by SaBReT00tH

[occidentalis]

I assume the state laws are similar from one state in Oz to the other. What's the average penalty for different amounts of psilocybin or mushroom weight? (measured from confiscated shrooms)

It all depends on whether the mushroom itself or just the drug is the scheduled substance. In WA, it's just the drug. This means the police have to get the mushrooms analysed to determine the content of psilox. I haven't heard of them ever doing this, and I assume they would only do it if the defendant gave them reason to (ie, admitted intent to sell or supply). Generally they just charge people with possession of psiloX without specifying an amount. The penalty depends on the magistrate but is usually a fine of <$500 .

[Torsten]

It all depends on whether the mushroom itself or just the drug is the scheduled substance. In WA, it's just the drug. This means the police have to get the mushrooms analysed to determine the content of psilox.

I doubt this. In most legal acts there is no requirement to ascertain the drug content percentage of a 'preparation'. If the drug is scheduled then the shrooms would be regarded as a preparation. All they would need is a qualitative test [ie prove the presence of 'some' psilox], not a quantitative test. If only the drug is scheduled, but not the plant or herb, then no prosecution can be done without proof that this plant/herb contained the illegal drug in that instance.

[occidentalis]

I doubt this. In most legal acts there is no requirement to ascertain the drug content percentage of a 'preparation'. If the drug is scheduled then the shrooms would be regarded as a preparation. All they would need is a qualitative test [ie prove the presence of 'some' psilox], not a quantitative test.

I wasn't suggesting there is a per se requirement to quantify the levels of the drug - it's only if they want to prosecute for sell and supply. The original question was about penalties, and I was responding to that. The penalties are obviously different for sell and supply. Sorry, just read back over my post and I didn't make that very clear.

I know that you are of the opinion that preparations containing a drug are treated as the drug, but in my experience this did not occur.

If only the drug is scheduled, but not the plant or herb, then no prosecution can be done without proof that this plant/herb contained the illegal drug in that instance.

Unless the defendant has incriminated themselves by saying they intended to consume them for the purpose of ingesting the drug . Also, I recently heard from a reliable source that the police take samples of mushrooms they seize to a mycologist for identification - why would they do this? obviously the identification of the species is enough to stand up in court.

Edited June 1, 2007 by creach

[AndyAmine.]

I was wondering when you were going to chime in Creech ;)

[teonanacatl]

So in other words carry a solution of 18M sulphuric acid with you and if the cops come drop the shrooms in and byby evidence :D Or some conc peroxide would do it too. They wouldnt even have to be all gone by the time the cops came because by the time the got them somewhere to test it would all be destroyed.

Edited June 1, 2007 by teonanacatl

[shruman]

^^ Yeah if u dont mind wearing a tampering with evidence or obstruction of justice charge.

[Anodyne]

^^^

And don't spill it if you like having skin!

[Torsten]

The penalties are obviously different for sell and supply.

I wasn't referring to sell or supply.

To be prosecuted for something there needs to be evidence or a confession that a law was broken. In your case the confession would have been enough. But in cases where no confession is provided the prosecution needs to prove the breach of law. Now, if the law only specifies psilox as the scheduled substance [as it definitely does in WA via the SUSDP] then a qualitative analysis MUST be done for prosecution to proceed.

If the law also includes Psilcybe species in the schedule then a mycologist would be used to ID the species and this would then be the required evidence.

It would seem really poor rules of evidence to be able to use a species ID to infer a psilox content. If anyone in the future ever found a strain of that species devoid of psilox this would instantly bring into question all prosecutions and convictions and would even leave the prosecution open to ummm, prosecution. I highly doubt this is what is happening.

I know that you are of the opinion that preparations containing a drug are treated as the drug, but in my experience this did not occur.

It's not an opinion, but the law. It is also applied frequently in case law. However, it is a relic law from a time when there were no reliable testing methods and it seems that prosecution avoids it more and more these days to avoid appeals and potential damages litigation.

So yes, in most cases it will be the real drug content that is used for prosecution, but in soem instances this will not be done and the law states that you ahve no right to choose.

[Torsten]

Ok, have just read the whole WA drug act and poisons act [again] and there is no mention of psilocybe. Could you please clarify what section of which act you were being charged under?

[occidentalis]

The penalties are obviously different for sell and supply.

I wasn't referring to sell or supply.

To be prosecuted for something there needs to be evidence or a confession that a law was broken.

Unless one is carrying over the amount where intent to sell and supply is assumed, which would happen with a single mushroom if the mushroom was treated as pure psilox. So sell or supply is an important thing to discuss when talking about amounts and penalties.

It would seem really poor rules of evidence to be able to use a species ID to infer a psilox content. If anyone in the future ever found a strain of that species devoid of psilox this would instantly bring into question all prosecutions and convictions and would even leave the prosecution open to ummm, prosecution. I highly doubt this is what is happening.

A friend of mine has met the mycologist and discussed this issue, so I'm quite sure about that part of the story. I don't know if the ID was the only evidence presented - perhaps the prosecution also had a chemical analysis. Actually, what probably happens is the mycologist is a first stop, who gives a yes or no, after which the police go to chem analysis if they get a yes. Then they avoid the costly chemical analysis for non-active species where they won't have a leg to stand on anyway.

Something that I considered during my experience was whether or not there would be any psilocin (what I was charged with) in the mushrooms anyway, since it is present in small amounts anyway, is fragile, and the cops may not have stored them well. It could have been months before they went for analysis and it may have degraded by that time.

[occidentalis]

Ok, have just read the whole WA drug act and poisons act [again] and there is no mention of psilocybe. Could you please clarify what section of which act you were being charged under?

I was charged with possession of psilocin, which is a prohbited substance somewhere in the drugs act.

From the Austlii 1994 version of the Act:

The only mention I can find is Section 42 Schedule III - amounts of prohibited drugs determining court of trial

Edited June 1, 2007 by creach

[Torsten]

i guess with a guilty plea you don't get to hear all the evidence they collected. pity.

in WA you can be charged under the poisons act or the drug act it seems. both contain psilox.

[Guest Øskorei]

They are actually Psilocybe mushrooms (psilocybin is one of the active goodies within them)

Can we create a forum for anal-retentiveness ?

[Torsten]

When dealing with legislation is pays to be anally retentive. that's how you find the loopholes and that's how you keep out of trouble.

I think that it is important to make the differentiation that was made between the organism and the constituent and it was certainly appropriate to do so in a legals or mycology section.

[SunChaser]

I would be furious if a copper tried to bust me like that film.

Has anyone ever heard of somebody being done while there out picking mushrooms, out side of WA?

[paradox]

that film is pretty funny, & now that i see it again, i totally agree GCF. they deal with it very farking terribly.

why didn't thet just run quickly straight into the forest? & yeah they just came straight out with it and admitted what they were doing on camera. at least they were honest i guess

[chilli]

Yeah I would have liked to have seen that fat poonce try and catch those young hooligans...

No need for them to lie, they just needed to keep their big bogan traps shut... It would have been especially easy with the cameras there, as the dogs couldn't have started bashing them.