Marijuana seized from Walter Stanley's home

Paul Wellman

Marijuana seized from Walter Stanley's home

Man Arrested for Reportedly Growing Weed for L.A. Dispensaries

Narcotics Detectives Seized 80 Plants from Walter Stanley’s Home

Thursday, July 26, 2012
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Share Article

Santa Barbara narcotics detectives arrested 31-year-old Walter Stanley on Tuesday for allegedly cultivating marijuana to supply storefront dispensaries in the Los Angeles area.

They served a search warrant on Stanley’s house at 315 Stanley Drive and arrested him shortly after at a nearby traffic stop, said SBPD spokesperson Sgt. Riley Harwood. Detectives seized from Stanley’s home 80 marijuana plants, approximately five pounds of processed marijuana, approximately $2,000 in cash, and 25 shotgun shells.

Walter Seth Stanley
Click to enlarge photo


Walter Seth Stanley

“The plants, when fully mature, would have produced approximately $120,000 worth of marijuana,” said Harwood in a prepared statement. “The processed marijuana is worth approximately $1,500. These are estimates of the wholesale value that would have been paid by dispensary operators; the actual street value is much higher.”

Stanley was booked into County Jail for possession for sale of marijuana and cultivation of marijuana. Both are felonies. He was also charged with being a felon in possession of ammunition, and his bail amount is $30,000.


Independent Discussion Guidelines

Lemme see, the war on marijuana has recently been increased, but not the war on unemployment or poverty. Glad to see that tax money is being so well spent, just to put one more person in jail and in the system.

AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
July 26, 2012 at 5:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Each new marijuana arrest is cash for the DA and the whole legal industrial complex. Whereas chasing down the thieves targetting local construction workers, painters ect takes some effort and isn't as lucrative. This guy is another political prisoner of the SB DA.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 26, 2012 at 7:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Apparently Police Chief Camerino already has prevented all the gang crime and recovered the $700K+ that was embezzled, so now has nothing else to do.

Every bust like this leads to another Mexican smuggler boat with increased demand and bravado hitting the local beaches.

John_Adams (anonymous profile)
July 26, 2012 at 7:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This guy is a previously convicted felon, per the article.... yeah real saint he is....

deniseL (anonymous profile)
July 27, 2012 at 12:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Previously convicted for what, I wonder? Another non-violent drug offense perhaps?

No, the truth is that this man is probably not a "saint", nor are you, Denise. The truth is also that this man is a good man. He's a family man. He brings his kids into my store and, as a parent of young children myself, I know a kind and loving father when I see one. I don't pretend to know all the details of his case, but I do know that he took numerous steps to follow the law.

There is an assault on patients and providers going on at the hands of local law enforcement. Don't let them fool you by shifting the blame to "the feds". The feds almost never come without a red carpet. The county amd city use your tax dollars to pay cops to violate the law that you enacted. First they claimed they were thinning out dispensaries because "prop 215 was intended for smaller collectives." Then they allow their officers to assist the DEA in raiding three places that all just happen to have pending zoning or criminal cases. Nice little way to clean all the mess off of the DA's shoes after the outcomes of their previous dispensary prosecutions. Now that there are no dispensaries left and men & women like this are operating those "small collectives", which Steve Wiley and Jouce Dudley's office claimed were what the law intended, and they arrested for their efforts.

Will Santa Barbara truly not rest until all of our patients are buying their questionable-quality meds from shady characters in back alleys, who don't check IDs or pay taxes?

And to the liberals who think they are supporting this cause and hate to see these headlines I'd like to point something out: under Bush & a more conservative local DA, patients had safe access. It wasn't until Obama promised to quit using federal funds to target state-legal operations, and Joyce Dudley took office as DA of SB, that collectives were assaulted. Please think at the polls and vote on issues, not party lines.

3domfighter (anonymous profile)
July 27, 2012 at 5:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

My best to you and your family, Seth. I know things are hectic so contact me at nothing more at least I can get dinner sent over a couple of nights.

3domfighter (anonymous profile)
July 27, 2012 at 5:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

In my 33 years of general trial law practice in Riverside County, I challenged the constitutionality of the drug prohibition laws in every dope defense case I handled.
First I contended that there was a constitutional lack of equal protection between users of dope and users of liquor. This seemed to get the attention of Justice Kaufman of the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division II, but there was no reversal and no hearing granted by the California Supreme Court and not long after that the system drastically increased penalties for drunk driving.
After Roe v. Wade I started contending that if the constitutional right of privacy had been enlarged to the extent that a citizen had a privacy right to abort a fetus that this privacy right would logically also apply to a citizen ingesting dope and later on when Lawrence v Texas came down with its beautiful definition of "liberty" I would contend that if the constitutional right to liberty had been expanded so much that sodomy was deemed to be a protected activity that this right of liberty must also protect from criminal prosecution the ingestion of dope by the citizen. The trial and appeals courts gave short shrift to these defenses and at least one time held that liberty and privacy defenses were not applicable as I was comparing apples to oranges..
Finally, I submitted an additional contention that substantive due process made dope prohibition laws unconstitutional because drug use is a medical, not a criminal condition and because the prohibition laws, for example, increased the cost of heroin so much from the cost of the sleeping poppy at the farmgate to the cost to the heroin user on the street (about an 800% increase) that the unfortunate addict, who may have quickly become addicted to heroin by chasing the dragon (smoking it) no longer could choose to not use the forbidden sh#t would invariable end injecting the sh#t so that the sh#t would last longer in his or her system greatly increasing the potential of harm to the addict, all to no avail.
The word is that the systems have now been weighed in the divine balance and that the systems have been found to be inadequate and that the systems are being brought to an end just as in the days of Daniel. Word further is that this time the systems will be replaced not by the Kingdom of the Persians but by das Königreich Gottes, the Kingdom of God, le Royaume de Dieu.
In my opinion, this adverse finding against the systems relates substantially to the incorrigibility of the systems in perpetuating these drug prohibition laws especially where this incorrigibility is resulting from financial bias on the part of the lawmaking systems. The systems have become hopelessly addicted to the vast amounts of unmarked money which is generated by the black markets always created by these cruel laws.
Too bad for them.

Peter Amschel, CSB # 56448
UCSB 1963 - 1966

pamschel (anonymous profile)
July 27, 2012 at 11:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

DeniseL, have you ever received a traffic ticket? Speeding perhaps? Did you know you were endangering people's lives with such negligient behavior? And this guy harmed who? Pharmaceutical corporations? Based on your own standards, you my dear are no angel.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 27, 2012 at 1:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Nope, never a ticket. I have very little use for cars where I prefer my bicycle. It is a lot easier to park, cheaper, and is the best excerise. I don't like the carbon footprint of a car. My how cynical you are Ken. Seems like when you assume... Well you know the saying sweety. Looks like you have pie on your face!

And isn't it ironic that people feel the need to personally attack me for a simple comment that contained 15 words, none of them being a curse word? How hateful are you people? I wonder how much you set back your causes by acting so childish.

deniseL (anonymous profile)
July 27, 2012 at 3:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Apologize to this model citizen Ken, she has all the right to judge others.

AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
July 27, 2012 at 4:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Cry me a river Denise.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 27, 2012 at 4:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Denise, how do you feel about the carbon footprint of the trucks, ships, trains that deliver your goods, or are you 100% self sufficient.

Do you fly overseas or do you pedal? Trying my best not to assume here.

lawdy (anonymous profile)
July 27, 2012 at 4:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

An environmentally safe river.

AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
July 27, 2012 at 7:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Funny how in Santa Barbara a traffic stop turns into them kicking your door in...SB Police are the most corrupt group of bastards in the US!

miked442 (anonymous profile)
July 28, 2012 at 10:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

No, they have to compete with other departments for that honor or shame, you have the LAPD, NYPD, and of course New Orleans who have been into some pretty heavy stuff, kind of like the mafia.

AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
July 28, 2012 at 1:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thank DOG for Marijuana...

Byrd (anonymous profile)
July 28, 2012 at 2:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hi there Denise,

Haven't seen you around the posts much, so I'll give you a primer that might help you understand why:

"(isn't it ironic that people) feel the need to personally attack me for a simple comment that contained 15 words, none of them being a curse word? How hateful are you people? I wonder how much you set back your causes by acting so childish."

Ok, here is your "15 words" for those just joining us:

"This guy is a previously convicted felon, per the article.... yeah real saint he is...."

Though your comment wasn't, strictly speaking, ad hominem it was essentially the same thing. Besides that, you packed a hefty load of unfounded and unjustified conclusions and personal judgement against the defendant into those "15 words" that were delivered in a snarky and sarcastic tone. The "ironic thing" is that you later defend yourself by calling others childish and defending your own personal attack by accusing others of personally attacking you. So, in a nutshell, that's why you have been generally treated as a fool. You can apply this lesson to basically any internet forum.

Oh, also, this:

"Nope, never a ticket. I have very little use for cars where I prefer my bicycle. It is a lot easier to park, cheaper, and is the best excerise. I don't like the carbon footprint of a car. My how cynical you are Ken. Seems like when you assume... Well you know the saying sweety. Looks like you have pie on your face!" just smug. Have a big whiff of yourself and enjoy!

3domfighter (anonymous profile)
July 28, 2012 at 3:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)


I know you. I have spoken to you before, several times. You are as big of a douche in person as you are on this forum. Your smirky attitude is annoying, both in real life and on these blogs here. So I don't take you personally, I know you can't help yourself.

I know you want to make money on pot. Just call it like you see it hon and don't be such a jerk about it.

Personally I like seeing people like you smacked down by the cops. It is called karma babe.

deniseL (anonymous profile)
July 28, 2012 at 9:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

OK, again, from the top....

Re-legalize pot. It was legal before 1937, and the world wasn't going to hell in a handbasket then.

billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2012 at 2:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2012 at 2:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I totally agree with you Bill, I think marijuana should be legalized. But people like Walter Stanley and Josh Braun, both convicted felons, do us more harm than good in our arguments to legalize it. These guys are out to make a quick buck, they don't care about ill people that need marijuana for medicine. So they cut corners in sacrifice for money. They steal electricity and carry guns. They harm the movement, they don't help it. They then jump on these blogs and alienate people with their angry demeanor and crappy attitudes.... It is quite shameful.

deniseL (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2012 at 9:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Anyone who paid partial attention knows the stolen electricity had nothing to do with me or Hortipharm, and Mr. Stanley didn't have guns--he had shells. Completely useless without a gun. Try to keep up. Please read articles thoroughly before posting.

3domfighter (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2012 at 10:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hortipharm was nonprofit and proud of it. I think you've been grossly misled Ms. L., this isn't Breaking Bad. And I'll try to ignore your demeanor and attitude which I find offensive and alienating.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2012 at 11:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Of course Josh people buy and have ammo all the time when they don't have guns, kind of like buying a kid's car seat without a kid. And we all know about you and your "protection" tools. Try and get your head out of the sand. You might be a little bit more respected on these boards if your logic was in order. None the less, a felon like Walter, or like you might I add, can not have ammo even. It is a BIG no no. I hope you don't get caught too.

And Ken, I'll try and ignore you, as your comments are generally worthless. A "nonprofit"? Really? Have you read anything about Josh's operation? He made more money than he knew what to do with!

deniseL (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2012 at 12:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Now she's imagining who's behind the pseudonyms, darewesay paranoid? Someone needs to get a life and stop fantasizing about the lives of others.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2012 at 1:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

What I find especially disgusting is the fact that the article does not mention the former dispensary Hortipharm or it's owners. But for whatever axe she has to grind, "Ms.L" drags them into this case, for which they are not even mentioned in this article or as having any connection whatsoever.
Instead she turns this poor guy's situation into her own personal vendetta against people real and imagined. Pathetic. Shameful. People get their accounts deleted for lesser infractions.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2012 at 1:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I think he's been pretty upfront about his identity with that particular pseudonym.

I too am in favor of legalization, but didn't much care for the whole "collective/compassion" BS and new-agey spiritual mumbo jumbo that was often found locally with some some dispensaries.
Let's find some way to sell,regulate and tax it.

Have no knowledge of Hortipharm (my weed-using days are long over) so can't comment on its practices in this regard, but I am a big fan of Pizza Guru so this guy is okay in my book.

We need to get a televised round-table going w Denise L, Daryl G and 3domfighter. I'll sell the tickets. Ken, you can be moderator.

zappa (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2012 at 2:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I had to create an account just to say something to the beloved Denise. Clearly you have too much time on your hands to continue your harassment of others. People do wrong things everyday. If you want to open your mouth about it, maybe you should join your local law enforcement to keep this people off the street instead of just barking like the dog behind a fence. :-) no one said this man was a hero and he deserves to be locked up for committing felonies while on probation. He should know better but you should know that you are not a nice person cause you haven't had a ticket. I bet people like that man much better than you. I would love to see if anyone stands up for you when problems arise. I'll pray for you Denise. A cold heart never sees the warmth of love. Good luck to all in here and please relax its just one ladies opinion.

denisesucks (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2012 at 4:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Lady's sry-:-)

denisesucks (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2012 at 4:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Someone needs to get a life..." says the guy who posts 16 minutes after me, in response to me, and again 42 minutes later. A guy having an argument with an unknown person online who checks the comment board every 15 minutes for a response.

You joined 9-16-11, so about a little less than 10 and half months ago. In that time your have posted 1709 comments.

You see any irony there? In case you don't get it you post about 6 comments a day, everyday. AND YOU THINK I NEED TO GET A LIFE? Laughable are either too funny or are really a.... Well here you go....

And Josh interjected himself here by attacking someone that knows all about him and his operation. He just isn't smart enough to know who tho.

People like you and Josh are ruining it for the rest of us with your negative energy!

deniseL (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2012 at 7:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

1709 comments? I should get a stipend.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2012 at 10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

@ Denise. I don't know you and cannot to attack your character nor do I enjoy getting into petty online quarrels with people I do not know. But I can question your facts and your comments in your attacks against others here. I believe Josh Braun did make compensation on a salary basis. This is neither unethical nor illegal. The guidelines that Kamala Harris office is currently drafting specifically mentions compensation as allowable for collective employees. Even the CEOs of large local non profits make compensation in the many hundreds of thousands. And if you have any sort of specific figure on "more money than he knew what to do with" I ask that you state it instead of ambiguous insinuations. Any accountant will tell you that there is a difference between a good salary and profits earned from dividends. This is a distinction the DA's office is refusing to acknowledge in order to shore up their cases. Everyone must earn a living, even if that living is helping to provide a safe environment for people with doctor's recommendations to obtain medical marijuana.Though the laws are often argued to be ambiguous they are not so ambiguous as to render dispensaries and compensation illegal. You may not like the collective/medical model or you may have anger towards those you worked in the field for whatever reason, but I will tell you that you are flat out wrong in the insinuation that making a living working in a dispensary is abuse of the system. It is what most of us do in this life. Work. But some may have the added bonus of really helping others through that work. And if you hate the models dispensaries use, don't blame the dispensaries. Theses models have been created and dictated by law enforcement and politicians. Dispensaries are constantly challenged to adapt to ever changing political and legal climates and all too often miss a step or face new political blood that does not like the status quo. You can smear the cynicism around all you want and presume to know everyone's motives or intent, but it doesn't change the facts or the truth. Please don't drink the kool aid; it may be spiked with pharmaceuticals and vodka (the real known killers).

CitizenX (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2012 at 10:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow. I too had to create an account just to comment. This denise person really is the epitome of self righteous people that never do anything wrong and even if they do, it's not their fault. The worst kind of people in my eyes. Who are you, lady, to judge others? Please don't bother to get a life, just try to open your mind and climb down off your high horse and realize that different people have different beliefs and you are not always right. The botom line here is that the reason Mr. Stanley was doing what he was doing isn't important. What's important is that what he was doing was voted for by californians. I appreciate all the support that so many people have shown for Mr. Stanley and his family as i also know them quite well and know that they are in no way trying to cause harm to anyone.

inmyopinion (anonymous profile)
July 30, 2012 at 6:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Let me spell it out for you

-I think marijuana should be legal. I want to get faded as much as you do.

- I think people should be able to make as much money as they can, the more the merrier.

- I think these people who use the guise of selling marijuana as medicine are doing us more harm than good in legalizing it. They tick off people who see their scheming and they make it more costly for me to buy my pot. I had to pay $250 for my doctor's recommendation for my marijuana. Why? So the other people can get a cut. The almighty dollar makes people scheme to get a part of it.

- The law is specific when we as a state passed it. Marijuana collectives are for "non-profit" compassionate care users. Your point that Josh Braun should be able to make money is in contrast to the law, you don't know what you are talking about. And you do know he pled guilty to money laundering right? He was making boat loads of money. It is not the measly amount that you try and paint. If he said he was in it for the money I could respect that. But to try and hide behind another reason is making it harder for us to legalize it, he is upsetting the people that we need to convince to vote yes. He is a drug dealer, pure and simple. People don't like to feel like they are tricked. It is like a porn star professing that they are an artist. People tend to declare BS on that.

- Law enforcement did not create these rules, we did, the voters. Mr Stanley and Josh Braun operated outside these rules and are both convicted felons. They are screwing it up for the rest of us who want marijuana legalized.

- And give the "kook aid" analogies a rest. You and I both know that the only people that follow that saying are the retarded lemmings.

Peace out and try and let a little love in haters!

deniseL (anonymous profile)
July 30, 2012 at 7:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

No. I actually I don't know or consider people who "follow", what in this case is a metaphor not an analogy, to be arctic rodents or "retards" as you so "lovingly" describe. But I will tell you I know this. The law verbatim, primary caregivers who receive “compensation for actual expenses, including reasonable compensation incurred for services provided to enable [a patient] to use marijuana,” or “payment for out-of-pocket expenses incurred in providing those services,” are not on that sole basis subject to criminal liability for marijuana distribution or sales. (Health and Safety Code § 11362.765(c).) I also know that a salaries are indeed compensation. i.e. the ability to make money is absolutely not in contrast with the law as is clearly shown above. Also, I work in accounting and know quite well that Profit is not the same thing as salary or compensation. The key word here is reasonable and I can hear to yelling in the background already. Now do me a favor and look up the median pay scale for EDs of Non-Profits in the Santa Barbara area. Also, know that the desire to attain wealth isn't necessarily in-congruent with the desire to do good. I don't think anyone would argue with you that Josh, like anyone else in the world, didn't desire to make good and "reasonable" compensation. Nor do I ever remember hearing that he had the intent to achieve anything to the contrary. I also understand your point of view, but think you might have some misdirected anger here. Lastly, couldn't one say that you yourself might also be part of the problem if you go out and pay for your recommendation? You are participating in the very system that you paint as a "guise" in order to get what it is that you want are you not? I am not asking out of malice and don't claim that I have 100% correct point of view, but am willing to have a good debate.

CitizenX (anonymous profile)
July 30, 2012 at 11:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I think the police were saying that because he was charged with two felonies that the ammunition was possessed by a felon. not that he had previously been convicted of one. that was my take. I he HAD been convicted of a previous felony the author of this article would have surely provided further details as to where and when this conviction took place. that type of info is easy for a journalist to obtain and is public record.
DeniseHell makes one want to vomit. I am ashamed to be of the same species as her.

GluteousMaximus (anonymous profile)
December 8, 2012 at 7:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: