Cops crack down, but not always on pot
A Butler County incident in which local police detained a couple before getting to the bottom of an apparent hibiscus-growing operation is the latest case of law enforcement cracking down on people growing plants that resemble marijuana.
Police in Georgia raided a man’s property in 2014 after agents in a state drug helicopter mistook okra plants in his garden for marijuana.
“We’ve not been able to identify it as of yet. But it did have quite a number of characteristics that were similar to a cannabis plant,” WSB-TV in Atlanta quoted Georgia State Patrol Capt. Kermit Stokes as saying.
Authorities apologized to homeowner Dwayne Perry.
“Here I am, at home and retired and you know I do the right thing,” Perry said. “Then they come to my house strapped with weapons for no reason. It ain’t right.”
Police descended upon a Brooklyn rooftop in 2013 after a building manager discovered what she suspected was a clandestine, rooftop marijuana garden.
Investigators eventually identified the scofflaw plants as tomato seedlings, the New York Daily Post reported.
In 2012, police wielding assault rifles, a battering ram and a warrant busted into a home outside Kansas City, Kan., belonging to a former CIA employee. The hydroponic garden they were certain was cultivating marijuana contained only tea leaves and a scraggly tomato plant, the Washington Post reported.
Members of a Narcotics Task Force in 2010 swarmed a New Mexico Montessori school from a helicopter and ground vehicles. The marijuana thought to be growing inside a greenhouse once again turned out to be tomato plants.
Corpus Christi police in 2010 eradicated a city park of hundreds of what were believed to be pot plants. It turned out to be a weed of another kind: horsemint , KRIS-TV reported.
According to The Survival Gardener, here are five plants that look like marijuana but aren’t:
Rose Mallow/Scarlet Hibiscus
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.