Deputies bust 6 for drug house activities in F'ville

An early Wednesday morning drug raid on Bates Avenue in Fayetteville netted six arrests, according to Investigator Brent Rowan of the Fayette County Sheriff’s Department.

“The Fayette County Sheriff’s Office Tactical Narcotics Team (TNT) with the assistance of the city of Fayetteville Police Department, the Fayette County SWAT Team, and the Fayette County K-9 section” served the search warrant April 20 at the house, Rowan said.

“During the course of this investigation Fayette County TNT investigators received information from a confidential source about possible drug activity being conducted at a residence on Bates Avenue,” Rowan said.

“Acting off of the tip TNT investigators continued their investigation which led them to obtain a search warrant for the Bates Avenue home, Rowan said.

Arrested were Sherman Rashad Brown, 21, of Riverdale, Christina Lee McGlory, 17, Jayne Laura McGlory, 47, Misty Lynn Morris, 20, and Mathew James McGlory, 20, all of Fayetteville. Each was charged with felony possession of marijuana.

Both Mathew James McGlory and Misty Lynn Morris were additionally charged with possession of a Schedule II narcotic, Rowan said.

Jayne Laura McGlory was additionally charged with maintaining a disorderly house. TNT investigators also arrested Jerome Jimmy Clairsaint, 19, of Fayetteville and charged him with possession of marijuana with the intent to distribute, Rowan said.

Officers seized approximately 44.4 grams of marijuana during the search warrant of the Bates Avenue home. Each of the suspects were arrested at the scene and taken to the Fayette County Jail.

The Fayette County Sheriff’s Office encourages citizens to report any suspected drug activity occurring in Fayette County. To report suspected drug activity contact the Fayette County Tactical Narcotic Team at 770-460-5839.

rabe76
rabe76's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/22/2011
Their crime was stupidity

I know some people who live on Bates (not the "informants," who were in all likelihood buyers, these people I know are very live-and-let-live), and these people weren't very subtle at all. They had people driving loud cars into and out of their driveway all day. The whole neighborhood knew what they were doing. And for the neighbors, you can't tell if they're selling weed, or meth. It was only a matter of time. Yeah sure, they're just kids and it's a shame in a sense, but c'mon, man, you gotta be smarter than that.

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
MY GOD! 44.4 GRAMS OF POT?!?

I looked on Google and 44.4 grams of pot is almost 1.6 OUNCES of marijuana!

I then Googled "how much does an ounce of weed cost?" and was shocked to learn that, depending on the quality of the stuff, it had a street value of somewhere between 55 dollars (for low quality pot) all the way up to 197 dollars for primo quality cannibas!

The six people arrested were obviously major drug dealers.

Thank you FCSO for keepin' us SAFE!

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
Wrong conversion Crispy

It's not 1.6 ounces, it's forty-four million, four hundred thousand micrograms. That's way more.

roundabout
roundabout's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/01/2011
Jeff

Reminds me of a foreman once trying to teach a non-mathematical worker how to read a micrometer to determine the thickness of a plank and machine it to three thousands of an inch, consistently.

The man took a look at the mic and stated: "there must be a million of those things on that gadget, I could never sort that out!"

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
JeffC

When you put it thay way I am concerned.

Jelly Bean
Jelly Bean's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/21/2007
Yes... thank you FCSO and Chris Bacon

Yes...thank you FCSO, you are actually appreciated ... and Yes...thank you Bacon - you have yet again shown what an idiot you are. Thank you for showing us the way ... gotta love stupidity. The only saving grace is natural selection will eventually weed you out of the gene pool.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
I imagine if the police started selectively

enforcing the laws as they see fit these same fine folk would be screaming at that.

Don't like the law? Change the law. The Police are simply doing their job. To disparage them for doing it is ludicris.

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
You have to start somewhere..

And by complaining here about this, I am at least awakening the public awareness to it. For better or worse. Hopefully others will see the foolishness of the money wasted on this.

Our legislators won't touch this issue with a 10 foot pole, UNTIL folks here start getting killed like they are on the Mexican border towns. Hopefully, it doesn't have to come to that.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
I know spy, mostly just responding to Bacon

Folks that disparage the Police for doing a job they were hired to do sticks under my craw a bit.

I have never met a Officer that was getting rich, most have more than one job. To put on a Gun and rush to where others are running from takes a special kind of person that I for one think should be heralded as a leader not derided for doing the job.

Personally I agree with Nuk on the issue, however if that were to change then NO taxpayer funded drug treatments and/or medical treatments for your personal decision to use drugs. Live by the sword yada, yada, yada.

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
Treatment

has been proven far cheaper of a way to reduce drug use than locking up users. But now we are arguing something totally different. Not all drug users need treatment....just like not all that take a drink need AA meetings.

What do I care if my neighbor smokes pot? I certainly don't want him infringing on my right to enjoy a nice glass of wine or sip of a fine bourbon neat.

As far as knocking the police, that was not my intention. I will say that I believe common sense was taking off the beat years ago.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Bacon - it's the law

It's the law Bacon, everyone should obey the law. Now if we are really really upset with this, we should work to change the law.

You're a critic of the right, but I haven't seen the Democrats rush to change the drug laws.....what's up with this?

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Rushin' to change drug laws

There's a simple answer and a more detailed answer in response to your flip question about repealin' Draconian drug laws.

The simple answer: there's other things that need fixin' that have higher priority in my mind.

The more detailed answer: There's decades of drug propaganda to overcome. Take this newspaper article, for example. Let's assume that the pot in question was "Super Pot" and commanded a premium price of $125 per ounce. Is a bust of less than $200 worth of weed worth news coverage? Hell no. We have burglaries and car thefts and lots of other crimes where the total economic cost is far, far greater than $200, but a so-called "victimless crime" gets all the ink. Part of the reason is the lingerin' lurid appeal of "drugs are dangerous!" (Pot leads to HEROIN, right? right?). We've got the Sheriff's office pushin' that meme at every opportunity, and the Citizen is an enabler here.

Changes ARE being made, albeit slowly and generally at the state level. A number of states have essentially decriminalized small quantities of pot (No HAWK-1s for THEIR Sheriffs!) and just recently the law was equalized so that black folks possessing crack (the Negro drug of choice) was sentenced at the same level as white folks possessing powdered cocaine (the Aryan drug of choice). The disparity used to be about 5x more jail time, if I recall (my fact-checkers will be here shortly to scrutinize everything I say).

And to forestall the usual "but...but...what about Meth?" hoo-ha that generally pops up when I talk about legalizin' pot, I still firmly believe that Meth laws should remain in place. Meth kills. Unlike Pot.

EDITED TO ADD: As recently as 1995, Gallup reported 73% opposed to legalizin' pot and 25% in favor. In 2010 (last year available), 50% were in favor of legalizin' pot and 46% opposed. We're getting there, and as the "Least Greatest Generation" (aka the Tea Party Core Constituency...50+ white folks) die off, I suspect we'll see a greater momentum towards legalization/decriminalization. Until then, it's basically a conservative wedge issue in the near-term.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
So Bacon

"I still firmly believe that Meth laws should remain in place. Meth kills."

So Bacon, you are for freedom but only to a certain point. Correct?

Do you think decrimializing meth would increase the number of people taking meth?

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Freedom to meth
PTC Observer wrote:

"I still firmly believe that Meth laws should remain in place. Meth kills."

So Bacon, you are for freedom but only to a certain point. Correct?

Do you think decrimializing meth would increase the number of people taking meth?

"Freedom but only to a certain point"? Yeesh, and you accuse *ME* of over-the-top rhetoric!

I support the legalization/decriminalization of marijuana because there is no evidence to my knowledge that pot is addictive or harmful.

On the other hand, there is a vast body of knowledge detailing how methamphetamine is both addictive and harmful to people.

As such, it's a moot point as to whether or not legalizing meth will or will not increase the number of meth users. Meth has a destructive influence on society and as such should be prohibited. "Freedom" has nothing to do with meth.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Bacon - OK

Just checking.....but isn't there a vast body of knowledge that alcohol is addictive and harmful?

So, like I said you want to pick and choose the degree of freedom.

Freedom has everything to do with choices, doesn't it?

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Abuse potential

There is a potential for addiction to alcohol, no doubt. But as evidenced by the vast number of quote social unquote drinkers versus the number of hardcore alcoholics, the potential for addiction is relatively low.

Contrast that to the very high percentage of meth addicts, my understanding is you can get addicted after trying it once.

In the long term, alcohol abuse can be considered "harmful". Meth addicts show much more harmful effects in a much shorter period of time.

In the aggregate, society has made a value judgement that alcohol is a socially permissible vice (see also: prohibition) and conversely methamphetamine is not socially permissible and therefore illegal. If you want to frame that as a "loss of freedom", be my guest.

"Freedom to self-destruct" strikes me as a rather specious concept, though.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Bacon - I

I will remind you that everyone has the freedom to self-destruct.

Why is it again that we should rely on the government to make sure we don't? Oh yes, selective freedom.

As Spy said it is far cheaper to treat addicts than to enforce unworkable laws. Not that I agree the state should treat them.

Ninja Guy
Ninja Guy's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/26/2010
PTCO, I Will Remind

you that you are living in a fantasy world! Get out and watch the Hawks play, live. Spend some of that vast fortune of yours on entertainment other than blog flogging!

I went to the World of Coke just yesterday. It was great!

I think Ninja Guy said it best when he said,

'Veblen was right in his theory of creative destruction, but he failed to account for management bent on destructive destruction just to get their yearly bonuses up!'

Go Pemberton, Candler, and Woodruff!

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Ninja - You

You wouldn't believe what I do or where I go in my world. You wouldn’t believe where I post some of the posts you see here. To say that I am happy would be an understatement. I am the luckiest person on the face of the earth. I am surrounded by people who understand sacrifice, honor and capital.

Part of my happiness is bantering about with you.

We live in a great country and community despite the corruption of the populist philosophy not because of it. We can only hope that we can return to what has made us a great nation….. individual freedom.

Now go watch your Braves game or something or better yet read and attempt to understand Human Action. I will then give you another book on the reading list. Concentrate Ninja, concentrate.

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
I would be very much in favor

of making "drugs" that occur naturally in our world to be legalized. To my knowledge, that would rule out meth. But I'm no expert on that for sure. I've never been near the stuff and have no plans to be.

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
Too much money to be made.

.by all involved. Folks that run police departments to the folks that run prisons. It's a crock basically.

Small time pot bust. Not newspaper worthy, IYAM.

I totally see your point about Bacon and his continued rants against anything but the Dems in charge in Washington. It makes no sense to me either.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2007
Spyglass - You're

correct, the law has turned drug busts into a kind of funding method for local police, they rely on the funds that they get from the feds for this purpose. The whole notion is cooruption of our society.

However, what bugs me about all this is no one is willing to step up and do something about the unworkable drug laws in this country. My position is that the law is the law and we should enforce it until people get so sick of the it there will be a movement to change it.

What would happen to the drug lords if they couldn't make a living selling drugs? They would be unemployed, that's where.

Jelly Bean
Jelly Bean's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/21/2007
Just a question Spy...

This is by no means an attack. No beef with you at all, unlike Bacon. I do understand your opinion on the size of the bust... but would you elaborate on how there is "too much money to be made by all involved."... especially when you are talking about PDs and Prisons. Are you referring to the narcotic's teams that seize $$s?

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
Drug War Economics

I'm not Spy, but here's my take on the War on Humans and the industry it has created:

Extra police officers needed from regular patrol to specialized anti-narcotics teams, from the smallest local level on up to federal and even the international level. This includes the military that wastes resources in drug interdiction programs in foreign countries and seas.
Extra judges, court clerks, courthouses and personnel to process drug offenders
Big business for probation services(either public or private) in collecting fees from all the drug violators
Big business for substance abuse treatment centers who end up "treating" a lot of people who don't have substance abuse problems but instead were underage and caught with a tiny amount of some substance
HUGE underground economy for drug dealers of non-taxed "profits". Anyone think there are drug dealers or big drug cartels that want to see drugs legalized? HELL NO!

Then there is the hard-to-quantify costs of having a lot of people running around with a mark on their criminal records who are seeking employment, insurance, housing, etc. While one can say "tough...that's their fault," we all know who will eventually have to support them regardless.

Drug laws in the US have failed miserably over and over and it's time to stop the insanity. Even if enforcement "worked," there is still the basic issues of free will and liberty when it comes to what you decide to consume or not consume. From my libertarian perspective, the govt has no right whatsoever to tell me what I can put in my own body or not.

IN this case, law enforcement is doing what they are hired and paid to do: enforce the law. As others have said, when the laws don't reflect the will of some, it's time to fight to change the laws, not go after the people we already told to enforce the laws we made in the first place.

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
That's it in a nutshell.

They have created their own industry....

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
Agreed, Bacon...what's the point?

No doubt, we can all sleep better. What a bust.

Recent Comments