Sciencemadness Discussion Board

Misuse of laboratory materials

IrC - 14-7-2011 at 13:30

Authorities were called to aid a heart attack victim and saw her husband’s small home laboratory, which they deemed suspicious.

The “lab” was found to be a harmless art display. Unimpressed, the FBI, Joint Terrorism Task Force, and Homeland Security arrested the artist—as he was entering the funeral home to make his wife’s final arrangements. When they couldn’t make terrorism charges stick, they changed their theory of the “crime” and indicted the artist for his alleged misuse of laboratory materials to create the display.

Does anyone know of this case or any details about it? Seems there is just no room for the amateur anymore if they can come up with "misuse of laboratory materials" as a viable charge under homeland security today. What are they calling misuse and how would one find out? Near as I can guess, the artist may have had lab glassware hooked up in some kind of science looking work of art since it was an artists display. There were no chemicals or reactions going on. Don't know about the rest of you but this and other stories I have been reading lately are starting to worry me. The story above is from a recent book about the insane increase in new laws titled "One Nation Under Arrest" by Ed Meese.





Rogeryermaw - 14-7-2011 at 13:42

i am getting pretty sick of all this bullshit. if there were really any legal issue against home chemistry then the govt. needs to come the fuck on and just outlaw it. period. if every experimenter is going to be scrutinized then the federales should just pull the plug and be upfront about it: "we are scared to death of people who think for themselves and we want you to stop it. do your nine to five, go home, and sit in front of the television drooling on yourself while images of reality t.v. dribble in through your eye holes. scientific pursuits are forbidden." at least that way there will be no questions or legal ambiguity. basically, shit or get off the pot.

sounds to me like they pulled a bogus charge out of their asses to avoid looking like douche bags when they couldn't make the first one stick.

Polverone - 14-7-2011 at 13:51

I think this is the story of Steve Kurtz. Justice finally prevailed! You too can have your name cleared after only 4 years of legal wrangling with vengeful idiots. Well, you can have your name cleared so easily if you are a professor with professional contacts and support. A hobbyist with no institutional affiliation would probably have to plea-bargain or be financially destroyed fighting the charges.

Rogeryermaw - 14-7-2011 at 14:27

thank you for the link polverone. it is nice for him to have such a support group but for those actually pursuing chemistry, it still is a troublesome issue. the banner at the bottom states that the government should cease prosecution against artists and makes no mention that amateur chemistry is a valid pursuit. that this man had lab equipment used for an artistic purpose gained him the support of the art community, but, as you say, those of us who actually use our glassware, would likely be up shit creek with no motor, paddle or even a prayer.

of course, his biological experiments would also be viewed under a very harsh light so it is quite fortunate that he had the support system he did, but i doubt he had some of the questionable chemicals many members here possess. that detail alone would land many of us in far worse trouble.

[Edited on 14-7-2011 by Rogeryermaw]

Mailinmypocket - 14-7-2011 at 14:51

Quote: Originally posted by Rogeryermaw  
i am getting pretty sick of all this bullshit. if there were really any legal issue against home chemistry then the govt. needs to come the fuck on and just outlaw it. period. if every experimenter is going to be scrutinized then the federales should just pull the plug and be upfront about it: "we are scared to death of people who think for themselves and we want you to stop it. do your nine to five, go home, and sit in front of the television drooling on yourself while images of reality t.v. dribble in through your eye holes. scientific pursuits are forbidden." at least that way there will be no questions or legal ambiguity. basically, shit or get off the pot.

sounds to me like they pulled a bogus charge out of their asses to avoid looking like douche bags when they couldn't make the first one stick.


Well said, It seems like in the USA (maybe other countries, Im in Canada so I wouldnt really know) that as long as they can fit handcuffs around your wrists, then they surely can come up with some obscure excuse to throw you into their privitized prison systems and ruin your life. Ridiculous.

Fleaker - 15-7-2011 at 18:34

This is horrifying. Where is the intent to harm anyone or inflict any sort of terror? The man was trying to educate people and he gets the attention of someone entirely over-zealous. I hope the prosecutor and those involved are held to account for misuse of the taxpayers' dollars.

I guess membership here is grounds for a case?

vulture - 16-7-2011 at 02:36

One more reason to take the solid advice dispensed here earlier: never talk to law enforcement. And if you do, the only words you should utter are "I want a lawyer".

AndersHoveland - 16-7-2011 at 14:48

Society fears what it has trouble understanding. I fear home chemists will need to organize something similar to the Nation Rifle Association in the USA to protect their rights from excessive government encroachment.

And I find it disgusting that law enforcement officers want to convict people, whether or not the "suspects" are obviously innocent.

[Edited on 16-7-2011 by AndersHoveland]

not_important - 16-7-2011 at 15:24

Part of continued effort to press this case may have been due to the purpose of the display - warning of the spreading use of GMOs. Opposing that leads to anxiety and anger on the part of the big players in the GMO field, meaning a number of large corporations of which many are based in the USA.

As those large corporations are major contributors to political campaigns, and now can legally run ads promoting candidates and proposed legislation, they have much influence with lawmakers and bureaucrats (LEAs and the military count as bureaucracies). The result is that it's usually better to bring in as many cases as you can, especially those you can pump up to look much more important, than to exercise judgment and reasonable doubt. Judges have been the counter to this, but that may be changing with the political shifts in the USA and some other countries, with newer judges being of a more conservative/corporatist inclination.
Quote: Originally posted by AndersHoveland  
...
And I find it disgusting that law enforcement officers want to convict people, whether or not the "suspects" are obviously innocent..]


This has long been true, effectiveness of LEAs being evaluated on the number of convictions resulting from their actions. It became worse during the War On Some Drugs after LEAs were allowed to confiscate and sell property (in the broad legal sense) that could be construed to have been used in the creation or distribution of illegal substance, or purchased with monies from the sale of same.