Lex, thanks for the kind welcome.
The newspapers have been basing their reports on court documents and testimony and are almost correct in their reports, I didn't want to make anyone think that they are being duped. It's just a sentence here or there that are misleading.
For example, there was an article in the daily news May 10, 2011 that said:
"The charging document also lists the dates that members of the conspiracy sold drugs to other people, including Shinners selling to undercover law enforcement officers."
That is incorrect. The charging documents DO NOT list any incident where Shinners sold drugs to anyone or sold to an undercover law enforcement officer.
There are a lot of little statements here and there, too many to list, that don't change the gist of the big story but are completely incorrect when it comes to Shinners and probably irreversible by now.
XOXO, good question,
hugo's answer is correct, I couldn't have worded it better. His charges are possession of cocaine nine times over the space of almost a year and using a communication device (telephone) to purchase. Not a good situation at all, but in no way was he part of a drug ring or a conspirator and has not been charged as such.
As for the bigger story, it's extraordinary how much was being purchased in the fake fbi drop. Holy moly.
For those that need a link, here's one...
(again, the only beef I have with the article is in the first paragraph when it says 'the six men and one woman, who face a total of 47 counts of conspiracy and drug trafficking' It's just a small thing, but its misleading as Shinners faces no counts of conspiracy or drug trafficking. (I'm starting to sound like a broken record)
article:
http://world247.net/tag/fbi%E2%80%99s/
As most of you know, Bob was released last week on bail. On Wednesday the parties that are being charged in the drug conspiracy attended a hearing that lasted six hours. The hearing was regarding pre-trial release terms. The presumption is that the 5 are a flight risk and danger to community, and the hearing was for the defendants to make a case otherwise. As far as I know, Judge Miller has not ruled yet. I can't imagine they will be released pre-trial,
but you never know, we shall stay tuned.