CBD Oil Lawsuit by Arrested Grandmother

Joined
Oct 23, 2015
split hairs between The Happiest Place on Earth vs The Most Magical Place on Earth? :laughing:
For pete's sake it was a joke. That wasn't splitting hairs in that case. I think we need to really come up with some way to discern things on the internet sometimes.

I found it funny that the person representing her someone who also represented someone in the State of Florida who lives in Florida incorrectly identified theme parks by their tag line. It's a bit funny no? Oh ok guess not :confused3

People can use discretion. I was pulled over recently but I didn't get a ticket. The officer used discretion when he talked to me and looked me up. I assume they saw she was someone not normally involved in drug or other illicit activity. Since it was daytime, they also could've easily called her doctor's office. (Judge Judy does it all the time!)
I have no idea why this is pertinent to my comment honestly regarding continously calling her a grandmother. If your idea of discretion is that they should look at her and her age, her status of great-grandmother and wave her on by but look at me and my age, my status of only being with my husband and opt to do something about it well then I suppose that answers my question.
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2015
I would feel this way for *anyone* using the product for pain with a doctor’s note or recommendation, but also understand that the law is the law...

However, the fact that a little drop of CBD oil (derived from the leaf) is a felony, but you can have up to 19.9 grams of leaf-marijuana and it be a first-degree misdemeanor is messed up.

^ That right there proves that laws need to change.
I've tried to stay out of the moral/ethnical discussion regarding its usage. All I can say is things can take time.
 

Pea-n-Me

DIS Veteran
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Police report is publicly available. It indicates that the oil was removed from her bag by security and she asked “is there a problem?” When the security agent asked if the oil contained THC, she refused to answer. The security agent then enlisted the help of an off-duty deputy working in a private capacity at Disney that day. That deputy then enlisted the help of the Orange County Sheriff’s Deputy who was already on scene. That Deputy (on-duty, already on scene) then informed the woman that the oil would be tested for THC.

The report says nothing about her indicating a doctors permission or prescription, or anything about indicating it was for her arthritis. She had the doctor fax that the day after her arrest. Her attorney said as much.

She was arrested at 11:30 AM. The bail bondsman’s receipt is stamped 4:51 PM on the same day she was arrested, so something isn’t adding up there. Bond was set by at least 4:51 (earlier, as they had to actually find and go to a bail bondsman but that’s not the sheriff’s fault). If you have to post bond to get out, then how long you are detained from the point bail is set is determined by how long it takes for someone to bail you out. If they had bond at 4:51 PM that’s not a 12 hour detainment, and I’m not quite sure why it took until 2:30 AM for someone to get her belongings.
Maybe she just didn't know anything about THC!! "Refused to answer" could've just been that she was flummoxed! (And overwhelmed, embarrassed, scared, etc.)
 
  • Pea-n-Me

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Jul 18, 2004
    For pete's sake it was a joke. That wasn't splitting hairs in that case. I think we need to really come up with some way to discern things on the internet sometimes.

    I found it funny that the person representing her someone who also represented someone in the State of Florida who lives in Florida incorrectly identified theme parks by their tag line. It's a bit funny no? Oh ok guess not :confused3

    I have no idea why this is pertinent to my comment honestly regarding continously calling her a grandmother. If your idea of discretion is that they should look at her and her age, her status of great-grandmother and wave her on by but look at me and my age, my status of only being with my husband and opt to do something about it well then I suppose that answers my question.
    Where did I talk about your age, or my age? I am talking about discretion, which involves judgement and critical thinking. You know about that, right?

    Yeah, I didn't get the humor there. Maybe he's not a Disney person. If my life depended on it, I wouldn't have been able to tell you the difference, either, honestly.
     

    Pea-n-Me

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Jul 18, 2004
    Grandmothers are often, not always, not really up on things as today's younger people are. That is why I referred to her as a grandma. Sorry, I thought that was obvious.
     

    luvsJack

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Apr 3, 2007
    They can be named because anyone can sue anyone, that's how it works. I didn't say they couldn't be named in a lawsuit because they aren't the police.

    You have the right to sue anyone you want to- a judge has the right to toss it out of court for lack of merit. I stand by my original comment- Disney is named in the suit because they have deep pockets and the woman expects more of a payout from them than from local law enforcement. Disney didn't do anything they aren't legally allowed to do.
    Well, you can bet that if it happened at Sea World, chances are she wouldn't be suing Disney.
     
  • luvsJack

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Apr 3, 2007
    I understand that law enforcement looks the other way, that doesn't mean Disney is required to and unfortunately it doesn't even mean that law enforcement is required to either. It was law enforcement's decision to arrest and detain her, not Disney's. I have had to get the police involved in things where I used to work, and the police never asked us (the business owner/ managers) what we wanted done about it. Once we called, it was law enforcement's "show" from there. Disney decided to trespass her from the property. That is also their right. I'm uncertain as to why she was left by her family at a McDonald's at 2:30 AM while her husband picked up her things. If there was genuinely no other way for her things to be collected, and no other place (such as a car/ hotel room) for her to wait then arrangements could have been made for Disney security to return them to her. I am unsure as to why her family would not have taken them when the woman was arrested. I wasn't there.

    No one has to like a law. No one has to like a policy. But in the case of Disney it is VERY easy to forget that they are privately owned and have the right to refuse service or entry for any reason. It says so in the policy available online to all of us. We also don't know what transpired when the woman was stopped. She may have been calm and polite or she may have been hostile and combative. I've encountered both in more than one area of Disney in just the last 24 hours.

    Don't confuse my criticism of this lawsuit as a lack of being affected by a lawsuit.



    Disney has the right to not allow anything into the park that they choose not to allow. Selfie sticks are legal, but they are not allowed. Firearms are legal with the appropriate documentation as required, but they are not allowed into the parks. Loose ice is legal, but it is not allowed into the parks at the security checkpoints. So in that respect, this one is not on Disney. Law enforcement, perhaps, but not Disney.
    Do they now call the law and have you banned for life if they find a selfie stick in your bag? Do they do that with ice?
     

    EdnaMarieMode

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Jul 16, 2018
    Because it was prescribed by her doctor??

    Many, many people take things they know nothing about.
    How does Disney or local law enforcement know what her doctor prescribed? As indicated, her doctor didn't fax anything over until the following day. I'm sorry but it's also not anyone's job to call the doctor either. Her family could have just as easily called the doctor as well. Nowhere in the police report does it indicate that she said this was prescribed- law enforcement and Disney security aren't mind readers. That tidbit came a day later, when the news picked up on the story. Unless a person is licensed, possession of CBD oil (regardless of prescription or THC content) is currently a third degree felony in FL.

    Not knowing is no excuse. Many things are not allowed into the park and when she was asked a question she chose not to answer. I'm not buying embarrassment/ shock/ confusion as excuses. If every person who was confused at Disney could do as they pleased as a result, imagine what that would look like.
     
  • Lehuaann

    aloha nui loa
    Joined
    Mar 13, 2008
    Police report is publicly available. It indicates that the oil was removed from her bag by security and she asked “is there a problem?” When the security agent asked if the oil contained THC, she refused to answer. The security agent then enlisted the help of an off-duty deputy working in a private capacity at Disney that day. That deputy then enlisted the help of the Orange County Sheriff’s Deputy who was already on scene. That Deputy (on-duty, already on scene) then informed the woman that the oil would be tested for THC.

    The report says nothing about her indicating a doctors permission or prescription, or anything about indicating it was for her arthritis. She had the doctor fax that the day after her arrest. Her attorney said as much.

    She was arrested at 11:30 AM. The bail bondsman’s receipt is stamped 4:51 PM on the same day she was arrested, so something isn’t adding up there. Bond was set by at least 4:51 (earlier, as they had to actually find and go to a bail bondsman but that’s not the sheriff’s fault). If you have to post bond to get out, then how long you are detained from the point bail is set is determined by how long it takes for someone to bail you out. If they had bond at 4:51 PM that’s not a 12 hour detainment, and I’m not quite sure why it took until 2:30 AM for someone to get her belongings.
    From what I understand, if the charges require a 12 hour mandatory detainment, then she had to stay in jail 12 hours.

    I’m not sure if this was the case.
     
    Joined
    Oct 23, 2015
    Where did I talk about your age, or my age? I am talking about discretion, which involves judgement and critical thinking. You know about that, right?
    That was because I asked this question:

    So are you saying if this individual was not a grandmother, or was not up there in age you would have a different opinion? If the answer is no you would not feel differently then I just don't see the point in continuously referring to her a grandma or her age. It makes it sound like we should be treating her differently than someone else.
    You've clarified subsequently that you merely mean she may not be in with the times because of her being a great-grandmother.



    Yeah, I didn't get the humor there. Maybe he's not a Disney person.
    He was enough of one to identify one of the theme parks tagline just not another :D (for reals joking here let's make that plainly clear).

    I'm just saying if you're going to place heavy blame and shame on Disney you'd think you'd want to get that part right or you'd want to leave that out. It may not make you look very good if your hope is people should be taking you seriously.



    Grandmothers are often, not always, not really up on things as today's younger people are. That is why I referred to her as a grandma. Sorry, I thought that was obvious.
    That shows bias which was sorta my point.

    'younger people are' doesn't really apply here IMO. We're not quite talking about computer technology or texting nor are we talking about staying up and up on what's in these days for fashion or phrases, etc.

    We're talking about a substance she is taking to ease her arthritis if I remember correctly. I would have the same response if an 18 year old, a 30 year old, a 40 year old, a 50 year old and so on was taking CBD. Taking CBD doesn't require you to be up and up on things that today's younger people are.

    Now I will say if she is not of sound mind (which nothing shows that's the case) then it would be the responsibility of her caretaker to know.
     

    Pea-n-Me

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Jul 18, 2004
    How does Disney or local law enforcement know what her doctor prescribed? As indicated, her doctor didn't fax anything over until the following day. I'm sorry but it's also not anyone's job to call the doctor either. Her family could have just as easily called the doctor as well. Nowhere in the police report does it indicate that she said this was prescribed- law enforcement and Disney security aren't mind readers. That tidbit came a day later, when the news picked up on the story. Unless a person is licensed, possession of CBD oil (regardless of prescription or THC content) is currently a third degree felony in FL.

    Not knowing is no excuse. Many things are not allowed into the park and when she was asked a question she chose not to answer. I'm not buying embarrassment/ shock/ confusion as excuses. If every person who was confused at Disney could do as they pleased as a result, imagine what that would look like.
    Some reports have said she told them it was prescribed for her arthritis.

    They don't have to be mind readers, but they can have a conversation about it, and make some calls to verify if there are questions that can be fairly easily answered, it's not that hard and they do it all the time.

    We will have to disagree here.
     

    luvsJack

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Apr 3, 2007
    Are those items illegal? Is possession of those items a third degree felony in FL?
    You were going on about selfie sticks and ice, not me. You seemed to be comparing Disney's right to do as they want in regards to this woman to their ban of those things. So I just wondered. Disney's choice of the lifetime ban for something that she wasn't even charged with is a bit extreme.

    As for the timing, there can be quite a bit of time between the bond being paid and the actual release. Sometimes its right then, sometimes its a short wait and sometimes it can be hours. No clue what the case was here.
     

    Pea-n-Me

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Jul 18, 2004
    That was because I asked this question:



    You've clarified subsequently that you merely mean she may not be in with the times because of her being a great-grandmother.



    He was enough of one to identify one of the theme parks tagline just not another :D (for reals joking here let's make that plainly clear).

    I'm just saying if you're going to place heavy blame and shame on Disney you'd think you'd want to get that part right or you'd want to leave that out. It may not make you look very good if your hope is people should be taking you seriously.



    That shows bias which was sorta my point.

    'younger people are' doesn't really apply here IMO. We're not quite talking about computer technology or texting nor are we talking about staying up and up on what's in these days for fashion or phrases, etc.

    We're talking about a substance she is taking to ease her arthritis if I remember correctly. I would have the same response if an 18 year old, a 30 year old, a 40 year old, a 50 year old and so on was taking CBD. Taking CBD doesn't require you to be up and up on things that today's younger people are.

    Now I will say if she is not of sound mind (which nothing shows that's the case) then it would be the responsibility of her caretaker to know.
    Ok
     

    EdnaMarieMode

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Jul 16, 2018
    From what I understand, if the charges require a 12 hour detainment, then she had to stay there 12 hours.
    That's possible, but it looks like she waived arraignment and bail was set at $2000, and she was released on that bond. No other requirements are mentioned.

    Some reports have said she told them it was prescribed for her arthritis.

    They don't have to be mind readers, but they can have a conversation about it, and make some calls to verify if there are questions that can be fairly easily answered, it's not that hard and they do it all the time.

    We will have to disagree here.
    They CAN, but they are not required to. Do you realize that if the police pull you over, they are not even required to tell you why you were stopped? I'm not saying I agree, I am saying that is the law. "Reports have said" a lot of things, and according to what is in the actual police report, it's not all adding up. Also, I can tell Disney my doctor prescribed anything in question but that doesn't mean he did, and Disney is not required to verify that especially when possession of the substance regardless of prescription is a third degree felony. In other words, it doesn't matter if it was prescribed or not, so why would they spend time to investigate this? It isn't Judge Judy or Law & Order.

    You were going on about selfie sticks and ice, not me. You seemed to be comparing Disney's right to do as they want in regards to this woman to their ban of those things. So I just wondered. Disney's choice of the lifetime ban for something that she wasn't even charged with is a bit extreme.

    As for the timing, there can be quite a bit of time between the bond being paid and the actual release. Sometimes its right then, sometimes its a short wait and sometimes it can be hours. No clue what the case was here.
    "Going on." Okay. What I am saying is that Disney is privately owned and that's the price we all pay for admission. If they choose to have a lifetime ban for someone who brings ice or a selfie stick, then they can do that. It doesn't matter if I agree with it or not, that wasn't the question at hand. It is their right. Any private property can tell you you're no longer welcome there.

    My (limited) experience with bond (not from having to post it, but from having to enter it into record) is that the jail really doesn't want you there longer than they have to have you there. Based on a 4:51 bond time, I'm just not seeing a 2:30 AM release as a likely possibility but it's not impossible. Her family could have retrieved her things at any point during this process (from approximately 12:15 PM when she was arrested to 2:30 AM when she reports sitting in a McDonald's). If she was traveling with family, and she was in such a state then why were they leaving her alone at a Mc Donald's? No one else could sit with her? My point with that is that now that there's money to be made, the embellishments are flying.
     

    Pea-n-Me

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Jul 18, 2004
    A
    They CAN, but they are not required to. Do you realize that if the police pull you over, they are not even required to tell you why you were stopped? I'm not saying I agree, I am saying that is the law. "Reports have said" a lot of things, and according to what is in the actual police report, it's not all adding up. Also, I can tell Disney my doctor prescribed anything in question but that doesn't mean he did, and Disney is not required to verify that especially when possession of the substance regardless of prescription is a third degree felony. In other words, it doesn't matter if it was prescribed or not, so why would they spend time to investigate this? It isn't Judge Judy or Law & Order.
    Yeah, that was supposed to be funny. Sounds like you live in a police state. I am used to having conversations with people to clarify things which aren't clear. Maybe that doesn't happen elsewhere, idk. We'll see what is said in the lawsuit, if there is one.
     

    EdnaMarieMode

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Jul 16, 2018
    A

    Yeah, that was supposed to be funny. Sounds like you live in a police state. I am used to having conversations with people to clarify things which aren't clear. Maybe that doesn't happen elsewhere, idk. We'll see what is said in the lawsuit, if there is one.
    You are the one who pointed out that Judge Judy does this all of the time. Judge Judy has that kind of time, she is on a recorded TV show and they can break for her to make those phone calls (assuming that is what actually happens). When you are pulled over, the officer informs you why they did so as a courtesy and not as a requirement. This woman was told why she was pulled aside, and what would happen (the oil would be tested) and that is after she was given the opportunity to explain herself. At least twice.

    I hardly live in a police state. I know plenty about law enforcement and those are the laws whether we like them or not. I live in a world where we should accept some personal responsibility for breaking the law, and respect those who have the tough job of enforcing it when so many people think the rules shouldn't apply to them. I do not always agree with the law, but that doesn't mean I don't have to follow it or pay the consequences.

    Disney is private property, and they can do as they please with enforcing their rules. They can enlist the help of law enforcement as they see fit. It's just like you or I being allowed to choose who we let into our homes. I don't have to agree with your reasons for not allowing someone and you don't have to agree with mine, but we are each allowed to have and enforce those rules. Someone was banned years ago for showing a political sign on Splash Mountain, so it is not like Disney doesn't ban people over less than this.

    If law enforcement had asked for and obtained the prescription, what would that have changed? Even with the prescription, possession is against the law. Security DID attempt to have a conversation. She did not answer the question.
     



    Connect

    Disney News and Updates

    Get Daily Email Updates


    Top