Left Column

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

If there can be a scientifically determined causal relationship and/or connection between "pot smoking" and the alleged events then I would say the "pot smoking" is relevant .... the presence of any other chemicals would have to be equally related before it would be admissible ...

in other words ... if someone has medical/scientific evidence that "pot smoking" causes aggression and/or a loss of self-control to the point of being unable to restrain one from taking aggressive or violent actions ... then I can see it being admitted.

My understanding is that such evidence does not exist in the medical/scientific disciplines .. and any such "evidence" if it currently exists would have to be based on statistics as opposed to some anatomically identifiable function of the body affected by chemicals that would "cause" such a reaction in Martin.

That is essentially the basis for polygraphs NOT being admitted.

It does show a proclivity to violate established laws.