A recent newspaper headline read Sudafed brings meth charge. If a picture had accompanied it, I may have concluded guilt or innocence based on that alone, despite the fact that my own driver’s license reveals a woman capable of killing her own mother for a pack of gum (when in actual fact, I’m simply guilty of being caught off-guard by a disgruntled government employee with a heinous sense of humor).
While it’s true that believing in the whole innocent-until-proven-guilty scenario isn’t one of my strengths, I can sometimes keep an open mind. Yet, I was reasonably certain when I started reading the article that the accused was guilty . . . until it became clear that the poor woman was victimized by a sting operation gone amok. Convicted of second-degree intent to make methamphetamine, she’ll serve a year in jail unless she wins an appeal.
The buying of Sudafed has become so suspect that one can no longer pick it up off a shelf. Based on her doctor’s advice, the accused simply purchased Sudafed to avoid an ear infection on a scuba trip. Never mind that she crossed state lines to do it. She had run out of time, and the trip was looming. Unfortunately, her son bought Sudafed at the same time in a different store. Even that didn’t convince me of her guilt.
But her confession did.
She apparently told police that she intended to make crystal meth with both boxes. She claimed that by “confessing,” she could get permission for her son to drive home with the three children who had accompanied him to the drugstore.
“But I didn’t really do it, Judge.”
If you buy that, I have this piece of property in Florida. . . .