|
|
|
|
|
by rory
1746 days ago
|
|
Thanks for pointing that out, it's a relief. For the lazy, the footnote basically says that the discontinuity at 280g is not caused by an increase in seizures at this amount (which would indicate police fraud), but by prosecutors choosing to charge defendants at slightly above the 280g threshold when the amount seized was actually significantly larger than the threshold. |
|